National Park Service

U.S. Department of the Interior

National Mall and Memorial Parks • Washington D.C.

draft

national mall plan / national mall plan /

environmental impact statement environmental impact statement

Washington, D.C.

C SM

THE NATIONAL MALL

#
"
6 1

,$,.1( +

*.1$ -6 1

5$3$1 -2

,$,.1( +

".-23(343(.-

& 1#$-2

%1 -*+(-#$+ -.

1..2$5$+3

,$,.1( +

&$.1&$, 2.-

,$,.1( +

3'$

, ++

5($3- ,

5$3$1 -2

,$,.1( +

4+822$22
&1 -3

,$,.1( +

6 2'(-&3.-

,.-4,$-3

+(-".+-

,$,.1( +

3'., 2

)$%%$12.-

,$,.1( +

6.1+#6 1((

,$,.1( +

A T L A N T I C 

i

CONTENTS: DRAFT NATIONAL MALL PLAN / 

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 

This version of the Draft National Mall Plan / Environmental Impact 

Statement is the same as the printed copy. It has been broken into files 

for easier browsing. Each part name below is hyperlinked to that part of 

the main document. Each part is fully bookmarked and is also linked to 

 the next part as well as this main contents page. 

Summary 

Purpose of and Need for the Plan 

Alternatives 

The Affected Environment 

Environmental Consequences 

Consultation and Coordination 

Appendixes / Glossary / Selected Bibliography / Index 
 

ii 

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 

ACHP Advisory Council on Historic Preservation 

ADAAG Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines 

AIA American Institute of Architects 

AOC Architect of the Capitol 

ASLA American Society of Landscape Architects 

CEQ Council on Environmental Quality 

CFA U.S. Commission of Fine Arts 

CUE Center for Urban Ecology (NPS) 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

DBID Downtown Business Improvement District

DDOT D.C. Department of Transportation 

FHWA Federal Highway Administration 

GAO Governmental Accounting Office 

GSA General Services Administration 

LCS List of Classified Structures 

LEED Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design 

MWCOG Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments

NAMA National Mall and Memorial Parks 

NCPC National Capital Planning Commission 

NCR National Capital Region (NPS) 

NHPA National Historic Preservation Act 

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act 

NPS National Park Service 

PMIS project management information system (NPS) 

SCS Soil Conservation Service 

USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

USC United States Code 

USDI U.S. Department of the Interior 

US EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

USFS U.S. Forest Service 

USGS U.S. Geological Survey 

USPP United States Park Police 

WABA Washington Area Bicyclist Association 

WMATA Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 

WMATC Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commission 
National Park Service 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

National Mall and Memorial Parks 

Washington, D.C. 

Draft 

National Mall Plan / 

Environmental Impact Statement
SUMMARY

Thank You 

The National Park Service is deeply grateful for the level of interest in planning for the 

National Mall. Nearly 30,000 Americans and others have helped to this point by providing 

ideas, statements of concern, and helpful comments. We appreciate your comments and have 

considered them in the development of the alternatives presented in this document. 

Cooperating Agencies and Participants

The following governmental entities were cooperating agencies or otherwise participated in the 

planning process: 

Architect of the Capitol 

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation 

D.C. Department of Transportation 

D.C. Historic Preservation Office 

D.C. Office of Planning 

Federal Reserve 

General Services Administration 

Military District of Washington 

National Archives and Records Administration 

National Capital Planning Commission 

National Gallery of Art 

Smithsonian Institution 

United States Park Police 

U.S. Bureau of Engraving and Printing 

U.S. Commission of Fine Arts 

U.S. Department of Agriculture 

U.S. Department of Defense, Arlington National Cemetery 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

U. S Holocaust Memorial Museum 

U.S. Secret Service 

Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 
Draft 

National Mall Plan / Environmental Impact Statement 

The National Mall

Washington, D.C.

Abstract 

This Draft Management Plan / Environmental Impact Statement presents five alternatives for the management 

of the National Mall in Washington, D.C. The no-action alternative would continue current conditions, and 

the preferred alternative is the National Park Service’s proposed approach for meeting the plan’s purpose 

and need. Under all alternatives cultural resources would be preserved and protected, and citizens would 

continue to be able to express their First Amendment rights on the National Mall. The intent of the preferred 

alternative is to establish a sense of place and an overall identity for the National Mall, creating a coherent 

pedestrian environment that would complement and balance the natural environment, formal and informal 

features, and national commemorative works. Alternatives A, B, and C each focus on one primary aspect of 

the park’s purpose and significance — alternative A would focus on the historic landscape with its memorials 

and planned vistas; alternative B on creating a welcoming national civic space for public gatherings, events, 

and high-use levels; and alternative C on urban recreation and use plus a sustainable urban ecology. The 

preferred alternative combines ideas from all of the other alternatives considered. 

Impacts were analyzed for cultural resources (including impacts on memorials and cultural landscapes); 

natural resources (impacts on water resources, soils, vegetation, and fish and wildlife); demonstrations, 

special events, and national celebrations (impacts on participants and organizers); access and circulation 

(impacts on visitor access, the pedestrian environment, bicycle users, and motorists); visitor experience 

(impacts on a quality visitor experience; opportunities for information, education, enjoyment, recreation; 

visitor facilities and amenities; public health and safety; and user capacity); socioeconomic environment 

(impacts of increased visitation, impacts on commercial business and construction opportunities); and park 

operations (impacts on park conditions, safe and efficient operations, and sustainability). Continuing existing 

conditions under the no-action alternative would generally result in the greatest level of adverse impacts on 

cultural resources, natural resources, national celebrations and special events, access and circulation, the 

visitor experience, and park operations. Continued impacts on soils and vegetation could become unacceptable as a result of long-term, major, adverse impacts on the American elm trees on the Mall. Actions under 

the preferred alternative and alternatives A, B, and C would all address adverse impacts to varying degrees, 

with the most beneficial impacts under the preferred alternative and alternative B for all categories. Venues 

and amenities for participants in demonstrations would be improved under the preferred alternative and 

alternatives B and C. The preferred alternative is the environmentally preferred alternative in terms of 

satisfying the goals of the National Environmental Policy Act. 

This Draft Management Plan / Environmental Impact Statement will be on review for 90 days. Comments may 

be submitted through the Internet at www.nps.gov/nationalmallplan or by mail to 

National Mall and Memorial Parks 

ATTN: National Mall Plan 

900 Ohio Dr. SW 

Washington, DC 20024 

Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information in 

your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment — including your personal identifying information — may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold 

your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. 

National Park Service • U.S. Department of the Interior 
The National Mall in Washington, D.C. 

This Draft Environmental Impact Statement presents a vision about the kinds of resource conditions, visitor 

experiences, and facilities that would best fulfill the purposes of the National Mall. The National Mall 

stretches west from the U.S. Capitol to the Potomac River, and north from the Thomas Jefferson Memorial to 

Constitution Avenue. (The White House and President’s Park, which are north of Constitution Avenue, are 

managed by the National Park Service as a separate unit of the national park system.) While the National 

Mall is under the jurisdiction of the National Park Service, multiple governmental agencies and organizations 

have jurisdiction over lands and roads within and adjacent to the National Mall, including the Architect of the 

Capitol, the National Gallery of Art, the Smithsonian Institution, the Department of Agriculture, the General 

Services Administration, the District of Columbia, and the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. 

In addition, the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, the National Capital Planning Commission, the Advisory 

Council for Historic Preservation, and the D.C. Historic Preservation Office have consultation, planning, review, and in some cases approval authority for issues related to planning, historic preservation, commemorative works, and design. 

All of these agencies and organizations and others have cooperated with the National Park Service in the 

development of this plan for the National Mall. There has been an ongoing exchange of ideas, goals, best 

practices, advice, and concerns as alternatives were developed. Once a plan has been approved, future 

implementation plans will generally include standard procedures for site-specific design, commission reviews, 

public engagement, and historic preservation consultation. 

A Guide to this Document 

This Draft Environmental Impact Statement is organized in accordance with the Council on Environmental 

Quality’s “Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act” 

and NPS Director’s Order #12: Conservation Planning, Environmental Impact Analysis, and Decision-making.

Because of the complexity of the issues addressed and the number of alternatives considered, this statement 

is longer than what is recommended in the CEQ regulations. Below is an outline of the document: 

• The Summary, beginning on the next page, highlights the purpose of and need for a plan, the 

alternatives being considered, the environmental impacts of the alternatives, and the next steps in 

the planning process. 

• The Purpose of and Need for Action (beginning on page 3) describes the context for the plan, 

including the National Mall’s purpose and significance; opportunities, problems, and challenges 

addressed in the plan; environmental impact topics that are being considered, as well as those that 

have been dismissed; and interrelationships with other plans and projects. 

• The Alternatives section (page 49) describes the five alternatives that are being considered, as well 

as actions that were considered but dismissed. This section concludes with a discussion of the 

environmentally preferred alternative, a table showing how well each alternative meets plan 

objectives, a detailed table showing all actions considered in the alternatives, and a summary of 

environmental consequences. 

• The Affected Environment (page 249) describes existing conditions for all impact topics that are 

being analyzed. 

• The Environmental Consequences (page 355) analyze the effects that each alternative would 

have on cultural resources; natural resources; demonstrations, events, and national celebrations; 

access and circulation; visitor experiences; the socioeconomic environment; and park operations. 

• The Consultation and Coordination section (page 541) describes the process that has been used 

to involve the public, as well as agencies and organizations, throughout the planning process. 

Cultural resource consultation and stakeholder and informational briefings are also listed, along 

with agencies and organizations who will be reviewing the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. 

• The Appendixes, Glossary, Selected Bibliography, and Index (page 553) provide supporting 

information.
SUMMARY

The National Mall in Washington, D.C., 

stretches west from the U.S. Capitol to the Potomac River, and north from the Thomas Jefferson 

Memorial to Constitution Avenue. This highly 

recognizable space, which is managed by the 

National Park Service, is the home to the Washington Monument, the Lincoln and Thomas 

Jefferson memorials, and numerous other 

memorials that commemorate great Americans

and significant events in our nation’s history. 

Adjacent to the National Mall are national

museums and galleries that form the country’s 

cultural center. In 2003 Congress stated that the 

National Mall is a “substantially completed work

of civic art” and that no new or unapproved 

memorials or visitor centers would be added.

Congress also directed the National Park

Service, as the responsible federal agency, to

begin planning for the future of the National 

Mall to protect its character. 

PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE 

PLAN

Plan Purpose 

The purpose of this planning effort is to prepare 

a long-term plan that will restore the National

Mall so that it may continue to symbolize the 

ideals and greatness envisioned for the United 

States of America. The approved plan will be 

followed by site-specific implementation plans 

that will detail how to achieve the plan objectives. Additional compliance with the National 

Environmental Policy Act and the National 

Historic Preservation Act will be completed as 

needed for specific implementation plans. As a 

result, this will be a multiyear and multidisciplinary planning effort. Certain actions may require 

congressional authorization or revision of 

federal or park regulations.

Need for the Plan 

The National Mall covers approximately 684 

acres, but in 2008 it received approximately 22.3

million visits. This is more than twice the number of annual visits reported for large national

parks such as Yellowstone, Yosemite, and Grand

Canyon combined. Accommodating this level of 

use and balancing all types of activities within

this limited area present enormous challenges. 

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 network; as

the location of the nation’s primary memorials 

and museums; and as the stage for First Amendment demonstrations, national celebrations, and 

regional and local special events. The demands

on the National Mall are constant and wideranging. Each year the National Park Service receives over 6,000 applications for public gathering permits, resulting in around 3,000 events. 

The wear and tear of concentrated activity affects the landscape and visitor experiences. Facilities can be overwhelmed with use. Vegetation 

cannot easily recover, and lawns may be worn to 

the ground and soils heavily compacted, which 

THE MALL — JULY 2009 

The Mall looking east from the Washington Monument. 

iii
SUMMARY

in turn adversely affects the vigor of trees and 

other vegetation. Many walks are not wide 

enough for current levels of use, and adjacent 

areas may be damaged when use spills off walks 

or when people choose a more direct route. The 

combined effects generate heartfelt complaints 

by visitors about the deteriorated appearance of

the National Mall. 

The National Mall must be refurbished so that 

(1) its treasured memorials and historic landscapes can be preserved, (2) very high levels of 

use can be sustained, and (3) the needs of visitors can be met. The National Mall plan must 

determine how to 

• improve resource conditions; establish a

standard of quality that invites respect and 

generates stewardship; and raise the 

standard of care and maintenance 

• prepare for intensive levels of use for First 

Amendment demonstrations, national

celebrations, and special events 

• provide desired experiences, such as opportunities for education, contemplation,

rest, relaxation, recreation, entertainment, 

and social experiences

• address user capacity, which for this plan is

defined as the type and level of visitor use 

that can be accommodated while sustaining 

desired resource conditions and visitor

experiences on the National Mall 

• provide for the physical needs, enjoyment, 

and convenience of visitors and park users, 

including information, restrooms, food,

retail, drinking water, and access 

Foundation for the Plan 

Planning and management for the National Mall

are based on the legal purposes of the area, its

significance, its fundamental resources and 

values, and its primary interpretive themes. 

These elements establish a foundation for 

planning and management so that everyone has 

a shared understanding of what is most important about the National Mall, as well as the 

constraints of special mandates on planning and 

management. All alternatives must be consistent 

with and contribute to fulfilling the park’s purpose, significance, and mandates. The park purpose, as defined through historic plans, legislation, judicial cases, and NPS policy, is discussed 

on page 9 of the main document, and park significance on page 10. The plan objectives (see 

page 4 of the document) take into account the 

National Mall’s purpose and significance, as well 

as legislative requirements, NPS management 

policies, best management practices, and planning principles developed in cooperation with 

other federal and city agencies. 

Legal Considerations 

Laws, regulations, and authorities that govern 

the management of the National Mall include 

those that are applicable to all national park 

system areas and to the National Park Service as 

a federal agency. 

First Amendment Jurisprudence. Governmental regulation of demonstrations and related 

sales activities is subject to First Amendment jurisprudence. Demonstrations are legally consistent with the special nature and sanctity of the 

National Mall, and they will continue under all 

THE WASHINGTON MONUMENT AND THE T alternatives. IDAL BASIN

The Washington Monument is a focal point at night, as well as 

during the day. 

Regulating Public Use. The Code of Federal 

Regulations addresses public use limits, which

the park superintendent may establish based on 

a determination that limits are “necessary for the 

maintenance of public health and safety, protection of environmental and scenic values, protection of natural and cultural resources, . . . or 

implementation of management responsibilities, 

equitable allocation and use of facilities, or the 

avoidance of conflict among visitor use activities” (36 CFR 1.5). Regulations at 36 CFR 7.96

contain provisions specific to the greater 

iv 
Alternatives 

Washington, D.C., area and figure prominently 

in the administration of the National Mall. 

Demonstrations and Special Events. Public

gatherings or demonstrations on the National

Mall involving more than 25 people generally 

require a permit issued by the National Park 

Service. To preserve an atmosphere of calm, 

tranquility, and reverence, demonstrations or 

special events are not allowed in certain

memorial areas. These areas include specific 

portions of the Washington Monument, the 

Lincoln Memorial, the Thomas Jefferson

Memorial, and the Vietnam Veterans Memorial 

(36 CFR 7.96(g)(3)(ii)). Other regulations pertaining to demonstrations and special events, 

along with recreational activities, soliciting, and 

sales, are discussed in the Code of Federal 

Regulations (36 CFR 7.96). 

Planning and Development 

Unlike the planning and development of most 

areas of the national park system, other federal 

entities have review and in some cases approval 

authority for areas in Washington, D.C., including the National Mall. These entities are the 

National Capital Planning Commission and the 

U.S. Commission of Fine Arts. In addition to 

their authorities under the laws that established 

them, these commissions also have certain authorities under other laws, such as the Commemorative Works Act. Since 2003 this act has 

prohibited the addition of new memorials and 

visitor centers on the National Mall unless Congress had already approved them. Moreover, 

Congress has generally reserved to itself certain 

authorities for the placement of structures on 

the National Mall and other federal lands in the 

District of Columbia. 

A FIRST AMENDMENT DEMONSTRATION AT UNION SQUARE

Demonstrations are legally consistent with the special nature

and sanctity of the National Mall, and they will continue under

all alternatives.

ALTERNATIVES

Before work was begun to develop the alternatives presented in this Draft Environmental Impact Statement, best management practices used 

by other organizations at comparable sites were 

researched to help determine how maintenance 

and operations for the National Mall could be 

improved. The review of best practices has been 

an ongoing process as alternatives were developed, and the most applicable practices have 

been included in the action alternatives. 

Public Involvement 

During this planning process nearly 30,000 

Americans have shared their visions for the National Mall. They have said that America’s front 

yard is important for commemoration and celebration and as a gathering place for the expression of democratic rights. They have emphasized

the importance of the First Amendment of the 

U.S. Constitution; told us that the National Mall 

did not look good enough for what it means to 

our nation; reiterated its high significance and 

value to our country; proposed that the National 

Mall should be a role model for a green, sustainable, and high-quality public civic space; commented on what changes they would like to see 

and what should not be changed; told us what 

they liked and did not like about the alternatives; 

suggested a great many alternative ideas; offered 

their support and wanted to know how they 

could help; and reminded us that the National 

Mall belongs to us all. All of these comments 

helped guide the development of alternatives. 

The various areas of the National Mall are 

described from east to west and from north to 

south. The major divisions are 

• the Mall, which consists of Union Square 

(between 1st and 3rd streets) and the Mall 

(between 3rd and 14th streets) 

• the Washington Monument and its grounds 

• West Potomac Park

v
SUMMARY

Other Actions Common 

to All Alternatives 

Actions already authorized by Congress for the National 

Mall will continue, including construction of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Center, the Martin Luther King, 

Jr. Memorial, and the National Museum of African 

American History and Culture. In the future memorials 

will be accommodated outside the Reserve, an area set 

aside by Congress that includes the National Mall, 

where generally no new memorials or visitor centers will 

be sited. New memorials will instead by considered for 

sites identified in the 2001 Memorials and Museums 

Master Plan, which was produced by the National Capital Planning Commission working with the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts and the National Capital Memorial 

Commission, which includes the National Park Service. 

Five deferred maintenance projects have been funded 

through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 

of 2009. They include the Lincoln Reflecting Pool area 

(lower approachway, pool, and the north and south elm 

walks), the D.C. War Memorial, the Thomas Jefferson 

Memorial plaza seawall, Ohio Drive, and Madison Drive. 

Other projects are continuing. Construction documents 

for additions to the Potomac Park levee have been completed. Recommendations from the NPS 2006 Visitor 

Transportation Study will be implemented separately. 

Permanent security screening will be provided at the 

Washington Monument, and a security perimeter will 

be developed for the Thomas Jefferson Memorial. These 

projects are no longer considered in the alternatives; 

instead they are discussed as present or reasonably 

foreseeable projects under cumulative impacts. 

Because of its size, West Potomac is further divided into areas north and south of Independence Avenue. North of Independence Avenue 

are the World War II Memorial, Constitution 

Gardens, the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, the

Lincoln Memorial and grounds, the Korean War 

Veterans Memorial, the D.C. War Memorial, 

and Ash Woods. South of Independence Avenue 

are the Tidal Basin area, the Franklin Delano 

Roosevelt Memorial, the West Potomac Park 

riverfront, the George Mason Memorial, and the 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial and grounds.

Actions are not proposed for all of the individual

areas. 

Five alternatives for the management of the 

National Mall are considered. The no-action 

alternative would continue current conditions,

and the preferred alternative is the National 

Park Service’s proposed approach for meeting 

the plan’s purpose and need. Alternatives A, B, 

and C each focus on one primary aspect of the 

park’s purpose and significance — alternative A 

would focus on the historic landscape with its

memorials and planned vistas; alternative B on 

creating a welcoming national civic space for 

public gatherings, events, and high-use levels; 

and alternative C on urban recreation and use 

plus a sustainable urban ecology. The preferred 

alternative combines ideas from all of the other 

alternatives considered. 

Actions Common to All 

Alternatives 

Actions that would be taken under all alternatives include the following: 

• Cultural Resources — Historic properties

and memorials would be preserved and 

protected. The D.C. Historic Preservation 

Office, along with other interested agencies, 

organizations, and groups, would be consulted in the preservation, restoration, 

adaptive reuse, or rehabilitation of any 

cultural resources. Historic landscapes, 

such as those at the Lincoln Memorial and 

the Thomas Jefferson Memorial, would be

preserved and protected. 

• Natural Resources — Water quality problems in designed water features would

continue to be addressed, soil and vegetation health would be managed to improve 

appearance, and any threatened or endangered species would be protected. Cooperation with the Army Corps of Engineers 

would be continued to comprehensively 

examine and address permanent solutions 

to hydrology and flood control.

• First Amendment Demonstrations, National Celebrations, and Special Events —

The National Mall is the most prominent 

space in our country for the demonstration 

of First Amendment rights, and that is an 

essential purpose of the National Mall. 

Consistent with the First Amendment and 

federal regulations, demonstrations will

continue to be fully accommodated on a

first-come, first-served basis throughout 

the National Mall. Union Square, the Mall, 

the Washington Monument grounds, the

Lincoln Memorial, and the Thomas 

Jefferson Memorial would all continue to 

be popular areas for demonstrations and 

vi 
Alternatives 

special events. Permit procedures would be 

improved, and monitoring procedures 

would be enhanced to ensure that resources are better protected and to reduce 

impacts to soil, turf, and vegetation. 

• Access and Circulation — Pedestrian conditions would be improved, as well as links 

with public transit. Bicycle access and facilities would be improved in conjunction with 

the city’s Bicycle Master Plan and bike-sharing program; bicycle racks would continue 

to be added throughout the National Mall. 

Existing tour bus drop-off and pickup locations would be improved where possible. 

Tour bus parking would be addressed in

cooperation with the D.C. Department of 

Transportation and other city agencies. The 

National Park Service would work with the 

Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority to add National Mall to the name of 

the Smithsonian Metro station on the Mall. 

• Visitor Information, Orientation, and 

Enjoyment — Current visitor information 

and educational programs would be continued, including guided walking and bicycle 

tours. Brochures, maps, and the park website would be improved. Opportunities for 

entertainment and recreation would also be

continued. Hours at the Washington Monument would be extended to 10 p.m. to 

allow more people to visit. 

• Visitor Amenities — Visitor facilities, such 

as restrooms, food service, bookstores, 

seating, and lighting, would continue to be

provided. Park staff would continue to assess the need for and variety of appropriate 

commercial services, such as food service, 

retail, transportation, and recreation equipment rentals. 

• Health, Public Safety, and Security —

Park staff would continue to provide emergency medical services, as well as plan for 

the safety and security of visitors. The U.S.

Park Police would continue to provide law 

enforcement services. 

• Park Operations — Projects would be 

undertaken to reduce the deferred maintenance backlog. A visual quality team 

would continue to identify high-profile 

problems and concerns that would be 

promptly addressed by a quick response

team. In-park communication systems 

would be upgraded. A solid waste and 

recycling plan would be developed, incorporating best practices for collection, retrieval, storage, and hauling. Actions would 

be taken to help meet NPS energy goals, 

including energy-efficient light bulbs, sustainable forms of transportation (such as

electric cars), and retrofitting water features 

to be sustainable. Partnerships and agreements to facilitate park management would 

be continued. 

No-Action Alternative 

The no-action alternative describes existing 

conditions and the continuation of current 

management. It establishes the baseline to

compare all the other alternatives. 

The Mall 

Union Square (1st to 3rd Streets). The Ulysses

S. Grant Memorial would be maintained, along 

with the historic features of the landscape. No 

facilities (such as seating, restrooms, or food

service), infrastructure for demonstrations or

special events, or information would be 

provided. 

The Mall (3rd to 14th Streets). Compacted 

soils would remain, and half of the Mall would 

be rested every other winter for restoration. 

American elm trees would be protected as much

as possible and replaced as needed. Gravel walkways would remain. A temporary visitor contact 

station at the Smithsonian Metro station would

remain, as would four refreshments stands 

around the Mall. 

Washington Monument and Grounds

Food and retail services would be moved to a 

permanent location. The circular restroom near 

15th Street and Independence Avenue SW, the

newly renovated Monument Lodge (bookstore, 

ticketing, and restrooms), the Sylvan Theater, 

and Survey Lodge (visitor contact station) would 

all remain. 

vii
SUMMARY

West Potomac Park (North of 

Independence Avenue) 

No changes would be made at the World War II 

Memorial, Constitution Gardens, the Vietnam 

Veterans Memorial, or Ash Woods (restroom 

and U.S. Park Police facilities). 

Lincoln Memorial and Grounds. Visitor restrooms inside the Lincoln Memorial would be 

expanded within the building footprint. No 

additional restrooms would be provided. 

West Potomac Park (South of 

Independence Avenue) 

No changes would be made at the Franklin

Delano Roosevelt Memorial, the George Mason 

Memorial, or the Thomas Jefferson Memorial. 

Tidal Basin Area. The Tidal Basin area would 

continue to offer a pleasant strolling and viewing

experience, and historic features would be maintained. Engineering studies would be undertaken to improve Tidal Basin flushing and to 

ensure seawall stability. 

West Potomac Park Riverfront. The dry-laid 

stone river walls south of Memorial Bridge 

would be stabilized as needed with riprap. 

The Preferred Alternative 

Under the preferred alternative the National 

Mall, as the premier civic space for our nation, 

would be refurbished so that very high levels of 

use could be perpetuated and the needs of visitors met in an energy-efficient and sustainable 

manner. Its memorials and landscapes would be 

protected, with large areas of open space as defining features of the historic landscape. The 

designed historic landscape would evolve, and 

its value over time would change, reflecting significant national events. Contemporary uses 

would be accommodated while respecting the 

planned historic character and visions of the 

L’Enfant and McMillan plans. The intent would 

be to establish a sense of place and an overall 

identity for the National Mall, creating a rich, 

coherent pedestrian environment that would 

complement and balance the natural environment, the combination of formal and informal

features, and national commemorative works. 

The National Mall would be emphasized as a 

year-round destination where the beauty and 

variety of every season would enhance visitor 

experiences. 

Uses for First Amendment demonstrations, 

commemorations, and national ceremonies and 

celebrations would be emphasized. All visitors

would be made to feel welcome through helpful 

wayfinding signs, knowledgeable staff, and highquality and accessible facilities. Diverse opportunities would be offered for public enjoyment, 

including educational, cultural, and musical 

programs, as well as active and passive recreational activities. 

Professionals would be engaged to design highquality solutions to unify the National Mall and 

to articulate the visions for specific sites. 

The Mall 

Union Square. Some of the most important 

changes would be made at Union Square. A 

restored Ulysses S. Grant Memorial would be 

the focal point of a symmetrical and formally

laid out civic square based on historical precedents. It would be a popular, active, and dignified day and evening destination, and it could be 

easily transformed into a larger venue for First 

Amendment demonstrations and events. The 

historic east-west vista between the U.S. Capitol 

and the Washington Monument would be

improved and perpetuated. 

A Vision for the National Mall — Enriching Your American Experience 

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. This historic open space with its planned 

vistas provides an inspiring setting for national memorials, many of them symbols of our democracy. It also provides 

a visual connection between the branches of government, and a backdrop for government buildings and the great 

cultural institutions of our nation. 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 demonstrate our rights and celebrate our freedoms, 

our history and culture, our unity and diversity, and our way of life.

viii 
Alternatives 

Design development would determine the size 

and character of visitor facilities and amenities.

Infrastructure for events would be provided. A 

smaller reflecting pool could be considered to 

make the space more suited to various uses and 

reduce water use. Shade structures would provide for visitor comfort and create pleasant 

places for rest and relaxation. Facilities (located 

outside view corridors) could include a flexible, 

indoor / outdoor, multipurpose destination, 

where people could enjoy views of the Grant 

Memorial and the Capitol. Restrooms would be 

provided, along with drinking water and recreation equipment rentals. 

The Mall. Lawns and elm trees would be improved and protected. Compacted soils would

be removed and replaced with engineered soils 

capable of better withstanding intensive use. The

elm tree panels would no longer be available for 

temporary event facilities, such as tents, facilities, and vehicles. An area south of the National 

Gallery of Art Sculpture Garden and north of

the center grass panels, as well as the 12th Street 

axis, would be redesigned for high levels of use 

and to support event logistical, operational, and 

temporary facilities. 

A paved welcome plaza at 12th Street and 

Jefferson Drive SW would include a visitor 

contact station, high-capacity public restrooms, 

multiple orientation maps, and a large tactile 

model or pavement map of the National Mall, 

along with shaded and group seating. 

As part of a coordinated paving plan for the 

National Mall, gravel pathways would be paved

with a low-maintenance, sustainable, and universally accessible material to improve circulation, facilitate events, and maintain improved 

landscape conditions. Some north-south walks

would be modified to accommodate demonstrations and special events, visitor amenities, or 

recreation. Subtle grading would maintain the 

appearance of continuous turf. 

UNION SQUARE AND THE CAPITOL REFLECTING POOL

A smaller reflecting pool at Union Square would be considered 

under some alternatives to make the space more suited to 

various uses and to improve pedestrian circulation. 

Washington Monument and Grounds

A new multipurpose facility on the Washington

Monument grounds on the northwest corner of 

15th Street and Independence Avenue would 

offer food service, retail, information, education, 

integrated exhibits, restrooms, and performance

space. This pleasant location below the level of 

roads would allow a facility to be oriented to 

views of the monument and would help muffle 

traffic noise. 

Views of the Washington Monument and the 

north-south vista between the Thomas Jefferson 

Memorial and the White House would be 

protected and improved. 

Utility infrastructure would be provided on the 

grounds for demonstrations and special events. 

GRAVEL WALKS ON THE MALL

Gravel pathways would be paved under the preferred alternative with a low-maintenance, sustainable, and universally 

accessible material.

ix
SUMMARY

The areas north and south of Independence 

Avenue would be better connected through 

improved pedestrian circulation, including 

access to the southwest waterfront and East 

Potomac Park. A system of separate dedicated 

bike trails would be constructed. 

EAST PLAZA AT CONSTITUTION GARDENS 

A large paved area at the east end of Constitution Gardens 

could accommodate a multipurpose visitor service facility. 

Survey Lodge would be adaptively reused for 

services and parking for visitors with disabilities, 

information, exhibits about the building’s history, and possibly recreation equipment rentals 

(such as bicycles and kites). Monument Lodge 

would continue to provide visitor services and 

restrooms. 

West Potomac Park (North of 

Independence Avenue) 

Constitution Gardens. Constitution Gardens 

would be a restful, high-quality, multipurpose

visitor destination that would provide food

service and opportunities for entertainment and 

enjoyment, as well as a place to relax as visitors 

tour the National Mall. The lake would be rebuilt to be self-sustainable, with potentially a 

nonpotable, sustainable water source. Urban 

recreational activities, such as fishing or model

boating, would be offered. 

A multipurpose facility would be located in the 

paved asphalt area at the east end of the lake. 

Food service, restrooms, education, exhibits, 

information, a bookstore, retail, recreation 

equipment rentals (model boats, portable lawn 

chairs), and space for partner activities would be 

provided. A flexible performance space, stage, or 

gazebo would be located in or near the east end 

of the lake and would take advantage of the 

nearby rolling terrain to accommodate an 

audience of several thousand. The historic canal 

Lockkeeper’s House could be relocated away 

from the corner of 17th and Constitution 

Avenue NW and adaptively reused. 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial. Additional

seating would be provided in the vicinity of the 

memorial for contemplation and rest. 

Lincoln Memorial and Grounds. Restrooms 

within the Lincoln Memorial would be expanded within the building footprint. A ceremonial use would be developed for the Watergate steps. An architecturally compatible restroom would be added in the vicinity of the south 

refreshment stand. 

Korean War Veterans Memorial. On the west 

side of the memorial the walks would be widened to accommodate changing circulation 

patterns and group visitation. 

Ash Woods. The U.S. Park Police stables would 

be rebuilt and the area redesigned to be compatible with the historic character and quality of the 

National Mall. The paddocks would be made 

part of the visitor experience, with educational 

exhibits about the Park Police and horse patrols. 

The Ash Woods restrooms would be replaced by

a new restroom nearer the stables. Food service 

could be provided near the new restroom if

warranted by increased visitation. 

West Potomac Park (South of 

Independence Avenue) 

Tidal Basin Area. A sense of arrival at the Tidal 

Basin would be created by redesigning pedestrian circulation and parking. Around the Tidal

Basin high-quality recreational experiences 

would be provided for strolling, sightseeing,

bicycling, and boating. Pedestrian lighting would 

be installed in a manner that would not impact 

the evening lighting ambience of memorials. 

Based on engineering recommendations, the 

Tidal Basin seawalls would be rebuilt above tidewater. The historic appearance would be retained while accommodating wider walks and 

improving bicycling/vehicular circulation and 

safety. The Tidal Basin would be slightly smaller,

x 
Alternatives 

primarily in the southeast area, to improve 

pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular circulation. 

A system of separate bicycle lanes or trails would 

be developed. Walks for pedestrians and bicyclists would be widened and separated near 

Inlet, Outlet, and Kutz bridges. 

The recreation equipment rental facility and 

refreshment stand on the northeast side of the 

basin would be replaced. These functions, along 

with restrooms and seating, would be provided

in new structures in the same general location. 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial. New 

visitor use patterns would be assessed, particularly after the new Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial opens. A small food service and restroom

facility could be provided near Ohio Drive, if 

warranted by demand. 

West Potomac Park Riverfront. Where feasible, a sustainable, vegetated shoreline would be 

established along the Potomac River. In other 

areas stone-faced walls would provide space for 

seating, fishing, and enjoyment of the river or 

perhaps nodes for water taxi service or for 

launching small, hand-carried watercraft (such

as canoes or kayaks). Walks would be improved

and additional seating provided. Bicycle lanes or

trails would be developed along Ohio Drive. 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial and Grounds.

The adjacent seawalls would be restored or 

rehabilitated, as recommended by engineering 

studies. No special event stage, roof, or walls 

would be allowed to obstruct the view to the 

White House from the north plaza. The parking 

area south of the memorial would be redesigned

to accommodate demonstrations and special

events. Utilities would be provided. 

Bicycle lanes or trails would be provided for 

safer or improved access near the memorial and

to the I-395 bridges. Perimeter security and 

vehicular access would be completed. The refreshment stand would be rebuilt, and restrooms, seating, and tables would be provided. 

Alternative A — Focus on the 

Historic Landscape and Education 

Alternative A would restore and maintain the resources of the National Mall as a historic landscape. Under this concept the designed historic

landscape would evolve and its value over time 

would change, reflecting significant national

events. Contemporary uses would be accommodated while respecting the planned historic 

character and visions of the L’Enfant and

McMillan plans. 

The Mall 

Union Square. The Ulysses S. Grant Memorial 

would be restored and would be the focal point 

of a redesigned civic square that would incorporate rehabilitated historic landscape components. A redesigned reflecting pool would offer 

opportunities to interpret the former Washington City Canal and the history of the U.S. Botanic Garden site. Walks would be widened to facilitate public access and maintenance. Seating 

would be added. 

The Mall. The Mall would be rehabilitated to 

improve conditions, with soils being augmented 

or replaced for better turf and tree growing conditions. Gravel walks would be retained and 

refurbished. Edging or curbs would be installed

to limit gravel migration, along with post-andchain fencing to prevent social trails. 

AREA SOUTH OF THE THOMAS JEFFERSON MEMORIAL

The former parking area south of the Thomas Jefferson Memorial could be redesigned to accommodate a security perimeter, 

as well as demonstrations and special events. 

Infrastructure would be provided for demonstrations and events. No temporary event facilities, tents, stages, or vehicles would be allowed 

in the elm tree panels. Event organizers would 

be encouraged not to install temporary event 

facilities, such as tents, directly in the center of 

the major view corridor between the U.S. 

Capitol and the Washington Monument. Efforts

would be made to remove vehicle parking on the 

xi
SUMMARY

north-south cross streets within the east-west 

viewshed. 

A visitor contact station would continue to be 

provided near the Smithsonian Metro station.

To restore the historic scene, the carousel would 

be removed. Small restroom facilities would be 

constructed near existing refreshment stands 

and would have a similar architectural style. 

Washington Monument and Grounds

A high-quality indoor facility for visitor services 

would be provided on the monument grounds

between 14th and 15th streets. This facility 

would be partially underground and would have 

a grass roof so as to blend into the landscape. 

West Potomac Park (North of 

Independence Avenue) 

Constitution Gardens. The lake would be reconstructed to be self-sustaining for plants, but 

fish would be removed. Walks would be repaved, and the refreshment stand and restrooms 

would be replaced. The visibility and appearance 

of the Lockkeeper’s House, which would remain

in its current location, would be improved. 

ULYSSES S. GRANT MEMORIAL

The memorial would be restored under the preferred 

alternative and alternatives A, B, and C. 

Lincoln Memorial and Grounds. The restrooms inside the Lincoln Memorial would be 

expanded within the building footprint. To help 

restore a more historic scene, the south ramp 

cloverleaf from Memorial Bridge to Rock Creek 

Parkway would be removed, and traffic would 

be redirected to 23rd Street SW. 

Ash Woods. The Ash Woods restroom would 

be replaced, and the U.S. Park Police stables 

would be renovated. 

West Potomac Park (South of 

Independence Avenue) 

Tidal Basin Area. The Tidal Basin area would 

be upgraded with paved walks and facilities to 

enhance strolling and viewing experiences. The

basin walls would be rebuilt in their current 

location to be above tidewater. Soil conditions

would be improved, social trail development 

thwarted, and erosion and soil compaction 

under trees addressed. Traffic lanes on the 

historic Kutz Bridge would be reconfigured to 

widen pedestrian walks on the south side. 

Visitor facilities would be redesigned to reduce 

congestion and to blend with the historic character of the National Mall. New recreation 

equipment rental and refreshment facilities 

would be provided, and restrooms would be

added. 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial. Periodic comprehensive condition assessments 

would be completed. 

West Potomac Park Riverfront. The dry-laid 

stone river walls would be restored. 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial and Grounds. 

No additional actions would be undertaken. 

Alternative B — Focus on a Welcoming National Civic Space for 

Public Gatherings, Events, and 

High-Use Levels 

Alternative B would improve the National Mall 

as the premier civic space for our nation and 

would support very high use levels. The evolving 

xii 
Alternatives 

ceremonial, celebratory, cultural, and visitor 

uses at this national civic space would be emphasized. Diverse peoples would be welcomed

through multilingual educational opportunities, 

and the needs of large groups (including those 

arriving by tour bus), demonstrators, and event 

participants would be met.

Some areas would be redesigned to provide a 

more sustainable civic forum and stage for First 

Amendment demonstrations and other events. 

The Mall 

Union Square. A restored Ulysses S. Grant 

Memorial would be the focal point of a dignified, paved urban civic square that would be redesigned to highlight vistas, meet event needs, be 

a visitor destination, and offer comfort, convenience, and entertainment. The reflecting pool 

would be removed, and the square would be redesigned to increase space for demonstrations 

and special events, including utility infrastructure. A multipurpose visitor destination facility 

with food service, restrooms, retail, and performance space would be developed. 

The Mall. The Mall would be rehabilitated and 

redesigned as a highly visible, sustainable venue 

with more hard surfaces for very high levels of 

use (demonstrations, public gatherings, cultural 

programs, and other civic events). Its critical 

historic features would be maintained. 

A decorative and interactive water feature would

be added at the 8th Street cross axis, a site identified in the McMillan plan. Some temporary 

event facilities, such as tents, stages, and vehicles, could be located in the elm tree panels if 

turf/root zones and soils could be protected 

through an acceptable and authorized method. 

If determined feasible by engineering, security,

geotechnical, and economic studies, an underground facility for paid visitor parking would be 

constructed between 12th and 15th streets, 

which would be entered from 15th Street. 

Gravel walkways would be repaved with a universally accessible surface as part of a coordinated Mall paving plan. Surfaces would be provided in other areas to facilitate events and to 

maintain improved landscape conditions. Some

walks would be widened, and some turf areas 

would be paved to create event venues. 

A visitor contact station would continue to be 

provided near the Smithsonian Metro stop,

where a custom-designed, covered entry would 

be constructed. A large tactile model of the 

National Mall would be developed, and a restroom would also be provided. Interactive water 

features would be installed in some locations.

Small restroom facilities near existing refreshment stands would be constructed in a similar 

architectural style. 

Washington Monument and Grounds

A new multipurpose visitor services facility on 

the northwest corner of 15th Street and Independence Avenue would be capable of meeting 

the needs of early morning ticket queues, food 

and retail, educational programs, and entertainment (events, performances, and evening entertainment), as well as office space. This facility 

would replace the Sylvan Theater and the 

circular restroom. WASHINGTON MONUMENT SECURITY BUILDING

An ongoing project is the removal of the temporary security 

screening building on the east side of the Washington 

Monument. 

Utility connections and space for portable restrooms would be developed to support demonstrations, special events, and performances. 

If determined feasible by engineering, security,

geotechnical, and economic studies, an underground visitor parking facility would be built 

below the multipurpose recreation fields on the 

south grounds, with pedestrian access under 

Independence Avenue to the monument’s visitor 

service areas. A turfed surface would be provided over Maine Avenue to connect the

monument grounds with the Tidal Basin.

xiii
SUMMARY

Tickets would continue to be distributed at 

Monument Lodge. Survey Lodge would be 

rehabilitated to provide services for people with 

disabilities. 

West Potomac Park (North of 

Independence Avenue) 

Constitution Gardens. Constitution Gardens 

would be a restful, high-quality visitor destination, with food service and opportunities for 

entertainment and enjoyment. Soils and vegetation would be rejuvenated. The lake would be 

reconstructed as a very shallow pool that could 

be drained for demonstrations and special 

events. Walks would be repaved, and some 

walkways would be widened to create venues for 

smaller events (exhibits, tents, and performances). Utilities and communication systems 

would be provided. 

A multipurpose facility would be developed in 

the paved asphalt area at the east end of the lake. 

A flexible, multi-use outdoor stage would be

provided in the lake near this facility, with informal seating around the lake for several thousand

people. Performances of thematic entertainment 

could be offered (e.g., World War II era music,

Latin American music). The existing restrooms 

would be replaced. 

The Lockkeeper’s House would be preserved in

an adjacent location, slightly away from the 

intersection for safety reasons. The interior 

would be rehabilitated, and the building would

be staffed for visitor information. 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial. Additional seating would be provided near the memorial for 

contemplation. 

Lincoln Memorial and Grounds. Restrooms 

inside the Lincoln Memorial would be expanded

within the building footprint. Additional restrooms would be provided in the vicinity. A ceremonial use would be developed for the Watergate steps. Also, pedestrian crossings and access

to Memorial Bridge would be improved. 

Korean War Veterans Memorial. East-side 

entry walks would be provided to accommodate 

changing circulation patterns. 

Ash Woods. Ash Road would become primarily

a pedestrian walk and secondarily an access

road. The restroom would be replaced with a 

new facility between the World War II and 

Lincoln memorials. The U.S. Park Police stables 

would be screened from view. A new parking 

area and vehicle access would be provided from

Independence Avenue. 

West Potomac Park (South of 

Independence Avenue) 

Tidal Basin Area. The Tidal Basin area would 

be upgraded with high-quality paved walks,

improved circulation, furniture, facilities, and 

services to enhance strolling and viewing experiences. The basin walls would be rebuilt to allow

wider walkways so as to protect the cherry trees. 

Three pedestrian bridges near Inlet, Outlet, and

Kutz bridges would be added to reduce congestion, along with pedestrian lighting for visitor 

safety and enjoyment. 

Seating would be added, and facilities would be 

redesigned to reduce congestion and to complement the historic character of the National Mall. 

A small-scale, year-round, multipurpose facility 

would replace the refreshment stand. Restrooms

would be provided, and the recreation equipment rental facility would be upgraded.

The parking lot would be removed if and when a 

new underground garage was provided on the 

south grounds of the Washington Monument. 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial. Under 

alternative B food service would be provided in a

location that would also be convenient to the 

future Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial. Visitor 

use patterns would be assessed to determine 

how to protect vegetation in areas where it is 

being trampled. 

West Potomac Riverfront Park. The West Potomac Park river walls would be reconstructed 

as higher, stone-faced structural walls so they 

would not be overtopped by water and floating

debris. A small staging area for demonstrations

and events would be developed south of 23rd 

Street and Independence Avenue SW. 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial and Grounds. 

Utilities and infrastructure would be installed on

xiv 
Alternatives 

the plaza for demonstrations and special events. 

The refreshment stand would be replaced. 

Alternative C — Focus on Urban 

Open Space, Urban Ecology, 

Recreation, and Healthy Lifestyles 

Alternative C would meet evolving recreational 

needs in the nation’s capital by providing beautiful, enjoyable, and ecologically sustainable open 

spaces that could be adapted to changing recreational patterns of diverse local and national 

users. This concept would contribute to healthy 

lifestyles, healthy parks, and healthy, more 

sustainable cities. 

Recreational activities would be expanded by

redesigning some areas, increasing recreation 

equipment rentals (such as boats, skates, and 

bicycles), adding playgrounds, and emphasizing

connections to the recreational and enjoyment 

opportunities in East Potomac Park, the Georgetown Waterfront, and Rock Creek Park, as well 

as the southwest waterfront. 

The Mall 

Union Square. The Ulysses S. Grant Memorial 

would be the focal point of an active, paved 

urban civic square that would be a visitor destination and that would showcase reflective and 

interactive water features with an environmentally friendly design to highlight sustainable 

water management practices. 

The Capitol Reflecting Pool would be redesigned as a shallow pool that could be drained

for demonstrations and events or frozen for ice 

skating. Infrastructure would be provided for

demonstrations and events. Food and retail sales 

would be provided, plus automated, self-cleaning public restrooms.

USE IMPACTS AT THE FRANKLIN DELANO ROOSEVELT MEMORIAL

Visitor use patterns would be assessed in areas where vegetation is being trampled. 

The Mall. The Mall would be redesigned to 

better accommodate high levels of use for 

demonstrations and special events. It would 

provide additional, sustainable areas for recreational enjoyment (gardens, fountains) and 

improved lawn conditions (for informal pickup 

games and play). A children’s play area would be 

provided, as well as interactive water features at 

some locations. The center grass panels would 

be reconfigured by removing crosswalks to 

provide larger spaces for informal recreation. 

Soil, turf, and tree-growing conditions would be 

improved. No temporary event facilities, such as 

tents, stages, or vehicles, would be allowed in the 

elm tree panels. Gravel walkways would be replaced with sustainable, universally accessible 

surface materials. 

A visitor contact station would continue to be 

provided near the Smithsonian Metro stop. The 

Mall would be enhanced with additional lighting 

and floral displays. Small restroom facilities 

would be provided near the refreshment stands. 

The Washington Monument and Grounds

High-quality indoor/outdoor visitor services 

(food service, retail, restrooms) would be provided between 14th and 15th streets. The circular restroom would be replaced, and automated, 

self-cleaning restrooms would be installed near 

Constitution Avenue. The Sylvan Theater would 

be reconstructed and reoriented to provide a 

new entertainment venue with improved

viewing. 

A 14th Street vehicular tunnel would be built to

improve pedestrian movement and safety. Pedestrian crosswalks would be enhanced to 

increase their visibility to drivers, pedestrian 

waiting areas would be widened, and crossing

times on 15th Street would be extended. Roads, 

parking, bicycle, and pedestrian circulation 

would be redesigned to better connect park 

areas, to improve safety and recreational opportunities, and to connect to the southwest 

xv
SUMMARY

waterfront and East Potomac Park. A separate 

dedicated bike trail would be constructed. 

West Potomac Park (North of 

Independence Avenue) 

Constitution Gardens. Constitution Gardens 

would be a restful, quality visitor destination,

with a garden café. Soils and vegetation would 

be rejuvenated. The lake would be reconstructed 

to be self-sustaining for fish and plants, and it 

would be incorporated into the urban stormwater retention systems to control flooding. A

nonpotable water source would be found. 

Recreation equipment rentals, such as model

boats and lawn chairs, would be provided for 

visitor enjoyment. A children’s play area would 

be added, along with an informal interactive 

water feature. Walks would be repaved and 

widened in some areas to create venues for small 

events (exhibits, tents, performances), with 

some mobile refreshment carts. 

The Lockkeeper’s House would be preserved 

and moved slightly away from the intersection 

for safety reasons. After rehabilitating the 

interior, the building would be staffed for visitor

information. Vehicular and pedestrian movements would be improved at the intersection. 

Lincoln Memorial and Grounds. Restrooms 

would be expanded inside the memorial, and 

additional restrooms would be provided near 

the south refreshment stand. 

Water taxi stops could be accommodated at the 

Watergate steps, with a redesign of Ohio Drive 

for safe pedestrian access. 

Korean War Veterans Memorial. Visitor use 

patterns would be assessed, and additional entry 

walks would be provided.

Ash Woods. The U.S. Park Police stables would 

be reconstructed, and information about the 

U.S. Park Police and horse patrols would be 

provided. The restroom would be replaced with

a new facility between the World War II and 

Lincoln memorials. Recreation fields in the area 

would be upgraded with backstops, and other 

facilities to avoid the practice of leagues leaving 

their equipment on the fields. Vehicular access

would be provided to the fields. 

West Potomac Park (South of 

Independence Avenue) 

Tidal Basin Area. The Tidal Basin area would 

be upgraded with high-quality paved walks, improved circulation, and facilities, as well as additional recreational opportunities. Soil and vegetation conditions would be improved. The basin 

walls would be rebuilt to allow wider walkways, 

and pedestrian bridges would be added to 

reduce congestion. Pedestrian lighting would be 

installed in a manner that would not affect the 

evening lighting ambience of memorials. 

Visitor amenities, including the refreshment 

stand and recreation equipment rental facilities, 

would be replaced. Recreation rentals would be 

expanded to include kayaks and rowboats. The 

bay north of Kutz Bridge would be filled to 

provide additional recreation fields. 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial. A refreshment stand without restrooms would be

built at a site that would also be convenient to 

the future Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial. 

West Potomac Park Riverfront. Where feasible, a sustainable, vegetated shoreline would be 

developed. The river walls would be reconstructed where necessary. Trees would be 

added, and river views would be emphasized. 

Separate bike and walking trails would be provided, with an emphasis on trail connections to

East Potomac Park and Rock Creek Park, as well

as to the southwest waterfront. Roads and parking areas would be redesigned as needed to 

accommodate bike lanes. 

U.S. PARK POLICE STABLES IN ASH WOODS

The U.S. Park Police area is visible from the JFK Hockey Fields

to the north. 

xvi 
Environmental Consequences

Thomas Jefferson Memorial and Grounds. 

Utilities and infrastructure would be installed on

the plaza for demonstrations and special events. 

The refreshment stand would be relocated to be 

more convenient to bicycle and pedestrian

walkways, as well as the tour bus drop-off. 

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

This management plan develops a vision, or a 

shared understanding between NPS managers

and the public, about the kinds of resource 

conditions, visitor experiences, and facilities that 

would best fulfill the purposes of the National

Mall. Part of this process is the analysis of environmental impacts. This document identifies the

types of impacts that would occur and where. 

Impact topics were identified in accordance with 

federal laws, regulations, and executive orders; 

NPS Management Policies 2006; and NPS knowledge of limited or easily affected resources. 

Public input during the scoping process was also 

used to determine impact topics. 

Impact topics that are analyzed include cultural 

resources (including historic properties and 

cultural landscapes); natural resources (water 

resources, soils, vegetation, and fish and wildlife); demonstrations, special events, and 

national celebrations; access and circulation; 

visitor experience; the socioeconomic environment; and park operations. Topics that were 

dismissed from further detailed analysis are 

discussed beginning on page 32 in the main 

document. 

Impact intensity levels or thresholds were defined for each impact topic. The following definitions generally apply to all topics; however, the 

analysis of cultural resources has additional 

requirements in accordance with the National 

Historic Preservation Act (see page 368). 

• Negligible — The impact would be barely

detectable. 

• Minor — The impact would be detectable, 

or it would have a limited effect, either 

adverse or beneficial. 

• Moderate — The impact would be readily 

apparent, and it would have an appreciable 

impact, either adverse or beneficial. 

• Major — The impact would be readily apparent, and it would be severely adverse or 

exceptionally beneficial. 

Impacts could be beneficial or adverse. The 

duration of impacts would be temporary (a few 

hours up to two days), short term (up to one 

year or the length of a construction project), 

long-term (up to the life of the plan or 50 years), 

or permanent (longer than 50 years). 

Impacts Common to All 

Alternatives 

Direct and indirect impacts of the alternatives 

are summarized below. Cumulative impacts of 

past, present, reasonably foreseeable projects are 

discussed in the main impact analysis. The analysis compares the impacts of the alternatives to 

existing conditions (the no-action alternative). 

Cultural Resource Impacts. The impacts of

preserving and protecting memorials under all 

alternatives would be long-term and beneficial,

but only negligible to minor in intensity because 

perceived differences would be limited.

Actions proposed in the plan are conceptual, 

and their actual impact on cultural resources 

cannot be determined at this time, so potential 

impacts are described. A park-specific programmatic agreement with the D.C. Historic Preservation Office and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation would be developed as part of 

this planning process. 

Natural Resource Impacts. Water quality 

problems in designed water features would

continue to be addressed, and alternative management methods, such as addressing algae 

growth in designed water features, would help

improve water quality, with long-term, negligible, beneficial impacts. No proposals would 

affect natural floodplains or cause a meaningful

change in the development or use of floodplains. 

Soils would be managed to restore natural 

processes and functions, resulting in long-term, 

moderate, beneficial impacts. Vegetation would

be managed to improve the appearance of turf, 

plants, and trees, resulting in long-term, moderate, beneficial impacts.

Impacts on Demonstrations, Special Events,

and National Celebrations. There would be no 

xvii
SUMMARY

change in permit regulations under any alternative. Impacts on event organizers from periodic 

closings of areas for construction, restoration, or

maintenance would be short- to long-term, minor, and adverse. If some events were relocated 

from the National Mall to other venues, impacts

would be long-term, major, and beneficial because of reduced resource impacts on the 

National Mall. 

Access and Circulation Impacts. Adding the 

National Mall name to the Smithsonian Metro 

station, continuing to redesign tour bus dropoffs and pickups, and working with the city and

local businesses to provide an appropriate

amount of convenient parking for tour buses 

and visitors would result in long-term, moderate 

to major, beneficial impacts. 

Visitor Experience Impacts. Continuing to 

work with local tourist organizations and the 

tour bus industry to ensure that they have accurate information for visitors would have longterm, moderate to major, beneficial impacts. 

Other beneficial actions would make access to 

areas on the National Mall easier (affecting 

20%–30% of visitors), as well as other nearby

destinations (such as the U.S. Capitol and the 

White House). 

Socioeconomic Impacts. Impacts on the local 

and regional economy would be long-term, 

minor, and beneficial as a result of visitation to

existing monuments and memorials on the 

National Mall. Impacts on commercial business

opportunities in and around the National Mall, 

as well as in the metropolitan area, would be

long-term, minor, and beneficial as a result of 

new business opportunities for retail and food 

service near the National Mall and ongoing use 

of businesses in nearby areas. 

Impacts on Park Operations. Overall impacts

on park operations would be long-term, moderate to major, and beneficial because of more 

efficient custodial and trash collection, less 

intrusive temporary fencing, and a solid waste 

and recycling plan. Short-term, moderate, 

beneficial impacts would result from continuing 

to use a visual quality team to identify highprofile problems and concerns that would be

addressed promptly by a quick response team. 

Impacts of the No-Action 

Alternative 

Cultural Resource Impacts. The no-action 

alternative would result in long-term, negligible 

to minor impacts on cultural resources that 

would either be adverse or beneficial. Maintaining park areas in their present condition would 

result in the continued deterioration of features 

such as the Capitol Reflecting Pool and vegetation on the Mall. Replacing the temporary visitor 

service tent at the Washington Monument could 

potentially affect components of the cultural 

landscape, such as views and vistas. The dry-laid

seawalls along the West Potomac Park riverfront 

would continue to deteriorate because of erosion from wave action and periodic flooding. 

Natural Resource Impacts. Impacts on groundwater and surface water resources, including potable water use, would continue to be short- and 

long-term, minor to moderate, and adverse. Soil 

impacts would continue to be short- and longterm, minor to major, and adverse; impacts 

would be considered unacceptable because 

compacted soils would impede the attainment of 

the park’s desired future conditions for natural 

and cultural resources, but no key park resource 

would be impaired. Vegetation impacts would

continue to be short- and long-term, major, and

adverse. Impacts especially on the elm trees on 

the Mall could be severe enough to be unacceptable because of continued impedance to the 

attainment of desired future resource conditions 

and diminished opportunities for current or

future generations to enjoy or be inspired by 

park resources. The impacts on vegetation could 

lead to impairment of a key park resource unless 

successful mitigating measures were employed. 

Impacts on native and naturalized fish and 

wildlife populations would continue to be longterm, moderate, and adverse. 

Impacts on Demonstrations, Special Events,

and National Celebrations. Present impacts on 

participants and organizers of demonstrations,

special events, and national celebrations would 

continue, with the National Mall continuing to 

host a large number of events and demonstrations at current venues, including the Mall elm 

tree panels, with growing demand for space 

(particularly the Mall, the Washington Monument grounds, and the Lincoln Memorial). Over 

xviii
Environmental Consequences

the life of this plan impacts would likely become

moderate to major and adverse because of inadequate venues and the lack of visitor facilities

and amenities.

Access and Circulation Impacts. There would 

be no change to access and circulation under the 

no-action alternative, but over the long-term 

impacts would be moderate to major and adverse because visitor access would become more 

difficult as use increased. The pedestrian environment would become less desirable, with 

inadequate walkway surfaces and amenities and 

more impacts from vehicle traffic. Facilities 

would not be improved for bicyclists, and increased traffic congestion would affect both 

motorists and visitors. 

Visitor Experience Impacts. The impacts of the 

no-action alternative on visitor experiences 

would be long-term, moderate to major, and

adverse despite the fact that visitors would 

continue to be inspired by the National Mall and 

its memorials. Visitor expectations for quality 

experiences would not be met because of the 

degraded condition of natural resources, inadequate information and education about park

resources and opportunities, insufficient 

facilities (such as restrooms and food service) 

for present user volumes, and continued public 

health and safety challenges. 

Socioeconomic Impacts. Impacts on the local 

and regional economy under the no-action 

alternative would be long-term, negligible, and 

beneficial because of slightly increased visitation 

levels to the National Mall and related visitor 

expenditures at commercial businesses. 

Impacts on Park Operations. Impacts on park

operations under the no-action alternative 

would continue to be long-term, moderate to 

major, and adverse because of not meeting 

desired standards (including a deferred maintenance backlog; difficult-to-maintain systems and

infrastructure; and lack of venues designed to 

accommodate intensive levels of use), inefficient 

operations, and unsustainable practices. The gap 

in funding between what is required and the 

current park budget would continue to leave the 

entire park funded at about 54% of need. Despite the long-term, moderate to major, beneficial impacts of actions common to all alternatives, the no-action alternative would continue 

to cause ongoing operational challenges.

Impacts of the Preferred 

Alternative 

Cultural Resource Impacts. Long-term, minor

to moderate, beneficial impacts on cultural resources would result from restoring the Ulysses

S. Grant Memorial; replacing compacted soils 

and installing irrigation systems and underground utility infrastructure for demonstrations 

and special events on the Mall; constructing a 

new multipurpose visitor service facility for the 

Washington Monument; moving the Lockkeeper’s House to a safer location and adaptively 

rehabilitating it; rehabilitating landscape features 

at Constitution Gardens, including the lake; and 

stabilizing dry-laid stone seawalls along the West 

Potomac Park riverfront. Redesigning Union 

Square would change its appearance, resulting in 

long-term, major, adverse impacts. Long-term, 

minor to moderate, adverse impacts would 

result from widening some walkways, paving 

gravel walkways, providing additional seating 

and interactive water features, and developing a 

welcome plaza near the Metro station on the 

Mall; providing a new multipurpose facility at 

the east end of Constitution Gardens; adding a

restroom near the south Lincoln Memorial

refreshment stand; rebuilding the Tidal Basin 

seawalls and widening walks; constructing 

separate bicycle and pedestrian trails; and 

redesigning the tour bus drop-off area and 

replacing the refreshment stand at the Thomas 

Jefferson Memorial. The impacts of other 

actions would be negligible. There would be no 

impairment of cultural resources.

Natural Resource Impacts. There would be no 

unacceptable impacts on natural resources 

under the preferred alternative and no impairment of key park resources. Impacts on potable 

water use, as well as on groundwater and surface 

water resources, would be short-term, moderate, and adverse during construction at the 

Tidal Basin and along the Potomac River. Longterm impacts would be minor and beneficial. 

Impacts on soils during construction would be 

short-term, minor, and adverse. Long-term 

impacts would be moderate and beneficial due 

to soil augmentation or replacement. New or 

widened sidewalks would result in long-term, 

xix
SUMMARY

minor, adverse impacts on vegetation, but other 

actions to improve growing conditions for park 

vegetation would result in long-term, moderate, 

beneficial impacts. Impacts on fish and wildlife 

would be long-term, minor, and beneficial

because of stewardship messages to visitors, a

self-sustaining pond/wetland ecosystem at

Constitution Gardens Lake, higher seawalls 

along the Tidal Basin, and a naturalized Potomac 

River shoreline. Short- and long-term, negligible 

to moderate, adverse impacts on fish and 

wildlife would result from various construction 

projects throughout the National Mall. 

Impacts on Demonstrations, Special Events,

and National Celebrations. The impacts of the 

preferred alternative on participants and organizers for demonstrations, national celebrations, 

and special events would be long-term, major, 

and beneficial because of changes in the permitting, scheduling, and management process; 

additional and more sustainable venues in highly 

desirable locations; conveniently located civic 

infrastructure to facilitate event operations; 

permanent visitor facilities such as restrooms; a 

redesigned Union Square that could accommodate larger crowds; a new Sylvan Theater with a

flexible multipurpose space; and a new venue at 

Constitution Gardens. However, impacts on the 

few organizers who could no longer use the elm 

tree panels on the Mall for temporary event 

facilities (such as tents and stages) would be

long-term, major, and adverse. 

Access and Circulation Impacts. The preferred 

alternative would result in long-term, major, 

beneficial impacts on access and circulation 

because of a greater emphasis on a pedestrianoriented environment; improved, safer, and 

more comfortable walking and bicycle environments; separate bicycle routes or lanes; improved roadway access in the southeast area of

the Tidal Basin; and more options and access for 

people with disabilities. 

Visitor Experience Impacts. Compared to the

no-action alternative, the impacts of the preferred alternative on visitor experiences would 

be long-term, major, and beneficial because of 

well-maintained areas that would meet desired 

conditions, enhanced website information, a 

more welcoming atmosphere (including a 

welcome plaza on the Mall and daily interpretive 

program listings), more opportunities to understand core American values through expanded

educational themes, well-dispersed and pleasant 

visitor facilities that were adequately sized to 

meet user needs, more food service choice, an

improved pedestrian and bicycling environment, 

increased opportunities for informal enjoyment, 

additional recreational opportunities and improved playing fields, more shaded seating, additional pedestrian lighting, and an emergency 

notification system. 

Socioeconomic Impacts. The preferred alternative would result in long-term, minor, beneficial impacts on the local and regional economy

because of longer visitor stays due to better 

resource conditions and new and improved 

visitor services and facilities, increased and 

diversified commercial business opportunities 

that would meet visitor needs on the National 

Mall and in surrounding areas, and minor increases in construction-related expenditures. 

Impacts on Park Operations. Compared to the

no-action alternative, the overall impacts of the

preferred alternative on park operations would

be long-term, major, and beneficial as a result of 

improved park conditions, a reduced deferred 

maintenance backlog, increased maintainability

of mechanical systems and infrastructure, improved operational access, a streamlined permitting process for demonstrations and special

events, a reduced funding gap between desired 

conditions and park budgets, and exceedance of 

sustainability standards for development, 

renewable energy, and water use. 

Impacts of Alternative A 

Cultural Resource Impacts. Negligible to

minor, beneficial impacts on cultural resources 

would result from restoring the Grant Memorial, 

replacing soils and installing irrigation systems 

on the Mall, and removing vehicle parking along

north-south streets (3rd, 4th, and 7th streets). 

Redesigning Union Square, including the Capitol Reflecting Pool, would be a major, adverse, 

impact. Minor to moderate, adverse impacts 

would result from developing a visitor service 

facility for the Washington Monument between 

14th and 15th streets; altering circulation patterns from Arlington Memorial Bridge to Rock 

Creek Parkway; not addressing impacts of high

xx 
Environmental Consequences

use on the designed landscape at the Korean 

War Veterans Memorial; widening Tidal Basin 

walks and raising the height of the seawall; and

replacing visitor facilities on the northeast side 

of the Tidal Basin. The impacts of other actions

would be negligible. There would be no impairment of cultural resources. 

Natural Resource Impacts. There would be no 

unacceptable impacts on natural resources 

under alternative A and no impairment of key

park resources. Short-term impacts on water 

resources would be negligible and adverse 

during construction of new Tidal Basin seawalls; 

long-term impacts would be negligible to minor 

and beneficial. Soil impacts would be shortterm, negligible, and adverse from construction 

and long-term, moderate, and beneficial from

soil augmentation or replacement. Park vegetation would be affected by new construction, 

which would result in long-term, negligible, 

adverse impacts and long-term, moderate, beneficial impacts. There would be long-term, negligible to minor, beneficial impacts on fish and 

wildlife from actions at Constitution Gardens 

Lake and the Tidal Basin. Construction projects 

at other sites would result in short- and longterm, negligible to minor, adverse impacts. 

Impacts on Demonstrations, Special Events,

and National Celebrations. The overall impacts of alternative A on demonstrations, national celebrations, and special events would be 

long-term, minor, and beneficial because of 

changes in the permitting, scheduling, and 

management process; somewhat improved 

venue conditions; and permanent small visitor 

facilities such as restrooms. However, the user 

capacity of desirable venues would remain the 

same, and mandated recovery time between 

events would mean fewer events could take 

place in high visibility venues such as the Mall 

and the Washington Monument grounds. 

Impacts on the few organizers who could no

longer use the elm tree panels on the Mall for 

temporary event facilities (such as tents and 

stages) would be long-term, major, and adverse. 

Access and Circulation Impacts. Alternative A 

would have long-term, moderate, beneficial 

impacts on visitor access to the Mall and the 

pedestrian environment due to increased 

crosswalk timing and additional pedestrian 

amenities. Impacts on bicycle users would be 

long-term, moderate, and adverse because 

unsafe riding conditions would continue. 

Visitor Experience Impacts. Alternative A 

would have long-term, moderate, beneficial 

impacts on visitor experiences because of substantially improved resource conditions and the 

appearance of the National Mall, better website 

information, educational themes focused on

memorials and the development of the capital 

city, improved visitor facilities supplemented by 

small visitor facilities and food service at refreshment stands, a better pedestrian environment, 

improved playing field conditions, and an emergency notification system. However, needs 

related to high use would not be met. 

Socioeconomic Impacts. Actions under alternative A would result in long-term, minor, beneficial impacts on the local and regional economy.

Visitor experiences would be enhanced due to 

improved conditions of the historic landscape 

and vistas, but visitation levels would likely 

increase only slightly. Commercial business 

opportunities on the National Mall would 

increase slightly with improved food service 

facilities. There would be a minor increase in 

construction-related expenditures. 

Impacts on Park Operations. Impacts on park

operations under alternative A would be longterm, moderate, and adverse because impacts of

high use would not be fully addressed, such as

developing more sustainable venues for demonstrations, special events, and national celebrations or seeking sustainable water sources for

large water features. 

Impacts of Alternative B 

Cultural Resource Impacts. Minor to moderate, beneficial impacts on cultural resources 

would result from restoring the Grant Memorial; 

replacing compacted soils and installing irrigation systems and underground event utility 

infrastructure on the Mall; constructing a new 

multipurpose visitor facility to replace the Sylvan

Theater at the Washington Monument; and 

moving the Lockkeeper’s House to a safer 

location and adaptively rehabilitating it. Longterm, major, adverse impacts would result from

redesigning Union Square, including removing

xxi
SUMMARY

the Capitol Reflecting Pool to create a paved 

civic square, and from constructing an underground parking garage between 12th and 15 

streets with portals on 15th Street. Minor to 

moderate, adverse impacts would result from 

installing an interactive water feature at the 8th 

Street cross axis, constructing a visitor contact 

station and restroom facilities on the Mall, along 

with enlarging and paving walkways and providing additional paved areas for demonstrations and special events; providing pedestrian 

bridges or underpasses and underground parking below the south grounds of the Washington

Monument; redesigning Constitution Gardens 

Lake to be drainable for demonstrations and 

special events; installing additional restroom 

facilities near the north and south refreshment 

stands near the Lincoln Memorial; widening 

Tidal Basin walkways, constructing three pedestrian bridges, and replacing the refreshment 

stand and restrooms; constructing higher stonefaced walls along the Potomac River; and replacing the refreshment stand at the Thomas Jefferson Memorial. The impacts of other actions 

would be negligible. There would be no

impairment of cultural resources. 

Natural Resource Impacts. There would be no 

unacceptable impacts on natural resources 

under alternative B and no impairment of key

park resources. Impacts on water resources 

would be short-term, moderate, and adverse 

during construction at the Tidal Basin and along

the Potomac River. Over the long-term there 

would be both adverse and beneficial impacts on 

groundwater and surface water resources, with

combined impacts being neutral. Impacts on 

soils would be short-term, negligible, and adverse from construction and long-term, moderate, and beneficial from soil augmentation or 

replacement. Vegetation impacts would be longterm, negligible, and adverse because of new and 

widened sidewalks. Overall, long-term impacts

would be moderate and beneficial because of

improved growing conditions for park vegetation. The continued use of the Mall elm tree 

panels, however, could result in long-term, 

major, adverse impacts if turf/root zones and 

soils were not properly protected through an 

acceptable and authorized method. There would

be short- and long-term, negligible to minor, 

adverse impacts on fish and wildlife from a 

drainable lake at Constitution Gardens, modifications of the Tidal Basin, and various construction projects. A more natural Potomac River 

shoreline in some areas would result in longterm, minor, beneficial impacts. 

Impacts on Demonstrations, Special Events,

and National Celebrations. Taken as a whole,

alternative B would result in long-term, major, 

beneficial impacts on demonstrations, national

celebrations, and special events because of 

changes in the permitting, scheduling, and management process; more sustainable venues in

highly desirable locations; conveniently located 

civic infrastructure to facilitate event operations; 

permanent visitor facilities such as restrooms; a 

redesigned Union Square that could accommodate larger crowds; a new Sylvan Theater with a

flexible multipurpose space; and a new venue at 

Constitution Gardens. 

Access and Circulation Impacts. For access 

and circulation, alternative B would result in 

long-term, major, beneficial impacts because of 

improved access, underground parking garages,

a safer pedestrian environment (including safer 

crosswalks), and reduced conflicts with traffic. 

Impacts on bicycle users would be long-term, 

moderate, and adverse because neither the 

needs of bicyclists nor local planning goals 

relating to bicycling would be met. 

Visitor Experience Impacts. Compared to the

no-action alternative, the impacts of alternative 

B on visitor experiences would be long-term,

major, and beneficial because of well-maintained areas that would meet desired conditions 

for the National Mall, better website information, educational themes focused on the memorials and the civic function of the National Mall, 

well-dispersed and pleasant visitor facilities that 

were adequately sized to meet user needs, more 

food service choice, an improved pedestrian 

environment, increased opportunities for 

informal enjoyment as well as additional recreational opportunities and improved playing fields,

more shaded seating, additional pedestrian lighting, and an emergency notification system. 

Socioeconomic Impacts. Impacts on the local 

and regional economy under alternative B would 

be long-term, minor, and beneficial because of 

longer visitor stays due to better resource conditions and improved services and facilities, increased and diversified commercial business 

xxii 
Environmental Consequences

opportunities that would meet visitor needs, and 

minor increases in construction-related expenses. Parking costs for underground garages 

(if determined feasible) would result in longterm, minor, adverse impacts on visitor costs. 

Impacts on Park Operations. The overall 

impacts of alternative B on park operations 

would be long-term, major, and beneficial as a

result of improved park conditions, a reduced 

deferred maintenance backlog, increased maintainability of mechanical systems and infrastructure, improved operational access, a streamlined 

permitting process for demonstrations and 

special events, a reduced funding gap between 

desired conditions and park budgets, and 

greater reliance on renewable energy sources. 

However, unlike the preferred alternative and 

alternative C, no measures would be taken to 

make water use more sustainable or to support 

local goals to encourage greater use of 

alternative modes of access. 

Impacts of Alternative C 

Cultural Resource Impacts. Minor to moderate, beneficial impacts on cultural resources 

would result from restoring the Grant Memorial; 

removing compacted soils and installing irrigation systems and underground event utility 

infrastructure on the Mall; replacing the Sylvan 

Theater with new facilities; moving the Lockkeeper’s House to a safer location and adaptively 

rehabilitating it; rehabilitating Constitution 

Gardens Lake; rehabilitating the Tidal Basin 

seawalls; and stabilizing the dry-laid stone seawall along the Potomac River. Redesigning 

Union Square would result in long-term, minor 

to major, adverse impacts. Filling in the north 

bay of the Tidal Basin to provide additional

athletic fields would be a permanent, major, 

adverse effect, which would also alter the setting 

of the John Paul Jones Memorial. Minor to 

moderate, adverse impacts would result from 

removing some north-south walks near 8th 

Street, adding interactive water features, paving

walkways, and adding restrooms and refreshment stands on the Mall; constructing a new 

visitor service facility at the Washington Monument between 14th and 15th streets, and decking 

over Maine Avenue to connect to the Tidal Basin 

area; adding a new restroom near the south refreshment stand at the Lincoln Memorial; 

widening walks around the Tidal Basin, redesigning roads and parking, and constructing new 

pedestrian bridges; and providing separate bicycle and pedestrian lanes. The impacts of other 

actions would be negligible. However, under this 

alternative several actions could affect character-defining features. There would be no impairment of cultural resources.

Natural Resource Impacts. There would be no 

unacceptable impacts on natural resources 

under alternative C and no impairment of key

park resources. Impacts on water resources 

would be short-term, moderate, and adverse 

during construction at the Tidal Basin and along

the Potomac River. Long-term impacts on 

potable water use, and on groundwater and 

surface water resources, would be negligible to 

minor and beneficial. Soil impacts would be

short-term, negligible, and adverse from construction and long-term, moderate, and beneficial from soil augmentation or replacement. 

There would be long-term, negligible, adverse 

impacts on park vegetation from new and widened sidewalks. Improved growing conditions 

for park vegetation would result in long-term, 

moderate, beneficial impacts. Impacts on fish

and wildlife would be long-term, negligible to 

minor, and beneficial from stewardship messages to visitors, a self-sustaining pond/wetland 

ecosystem at Constitution Gardens Lake, and 

higher seawalls around the Tidal Basin. Various 

other construction projects throughout the 

National Mall would result in short- and longterm, negligible to moderate, adverse impacts. 

Impacts on Demonstrations, Special Events,

and National Celebrations. The overall impacts of alternative C on participants and 

organizers for demonstrations, national celebrations, and special events would be long-term, 

major, and beneficial because of changes in the 

permitting, scheduling, and management process; additional and more sustainable venues in 

highly desirable locations; conveniently located 

civic infrastructure to facilitate event operations; 

permanent visitor facilities such as restrooms; a 

redesigned Union Square that could accommodate larger crowds; a reoriented Sylvan Theater 

to improve viewing from the hillside; and a new 

venue at Constitution Gardens. However, 

impacts on the few organizers who could no

longer use the elm tree panels on the Mall for 

xxiii
SUMMARY

temporary event facilities (such as tents and 

stages) would be long-term, major, and adverse. 

Access and Circulation Impacts. Impacts on 

access and circulation under alternative C would 

be long-term, major, and beneficial because of 

improved access and parking, a greater emphasis 

on safer and pleasanter pedestrian and bicycling

environments, and more options for families and 

people with disabilities. 

Visitor Experience Impacts. Alternative C 

would have long-term, major, beneficial impacts

on visitor experiences because of improved conditions on the National Mall, better website information, educational themes focused on memorials along with stewardship and healthy 

lifestyles, well-dispersed and pleasant facilities 

adequately sized to meet user needs, more food 

service choice, an improved pedestrian and 

bicycling environment, more opportunities for 

informal enjoyment, additional recreational 

opportunities and improved playing fields, more 

shaded seating, additional pedestrian lighting,

and an emergency notification system. 

Socioeconomic Impacts. Impacts on the local 

and regional economy would be long-term, 

minor, and beneficial because of longer visitor

stays due to better resource conditions, improved services and facilities, and more yearround recreational opportunities; diversified 

commercial business opportunities that would 

meet visitor needs; and minor increases in 

construction-related expenses. 

Impacts on Park Operations. The overall 

impacts of alternative C on park operations 

would be long-term, major, and beneficial as a

result of improved park conditions, a reduced 

deferred maintenance backlog, increased maintainability of mechanical systems and infrastructure, improved operational access, a 

streamlined permitting process for demonstrations and special events, a reduced funding gap 

between desired conditions and park budgets, 

and exceedance of sustainability standards for 

development, renewable energy, and water use. 

THE NEXT STEPS

After the distribution of this Draft National Mall 

Plan / Environmental Impact Statement, there 

will be a 90-day public review and comment 

period, after which the NPS planning team will 

evaluate comments from other federal agencies, 

organizations, businesses, and individuals regarding the draft plan. Appropriate changes will 

be incorporated into a Final National Mall Plan / 

Environmental Impact Statement. The final plan

will include letters from governmental agencies, 

any substantive comments on the draft document, and NPS responses to those comments. 

Following distribution of the final plan and a 30-

day no-action period, a record of decision approving a final plan will be signed by the NPS 

National Capital regional director. The record of

decision will document the NPS selection of an

alternative for implementation. Once it is signed, 

the plan can then be implemented. 

The approved National Mall plan will provide a 

comprehensive vision and framework to protect 

the historic character of the National Mall, to 

restore its health and beauty, to help it function 

better as America’s civic space, and to meet the 

needs of local, national, and international visitors today and tomorrow for enjoyment, education, and recreation. 

However, completing the plan does not ensure 

that all actions will take place nor ensure funding. The National Park Service requires implementation projects to be within an approved 

vision plan, and the approved plan would take 

this important step toward implementation. As 

the plan is implemented, many of the proposed

projects would provide additional opportunities 

for pubic involvement. They would undergo 

reviews by and consultation with the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, the National Capital Planning Commission, the Advisory Council on 

Historic Preservation, and the D.C. Historic

Preservation Office. Some projects might require 

congressional action or changes in federal or

park regulations.

xxiv
PURPOSE OF

AND 

NEED FOR THE PLAN

DRAFT 

NATIONAL MALL PLAN / 

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT

THE NATIONAL MALL

WASHINGTON

 MONUMENT

CONTENTS: PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN ..............................................................................................1

Introduction ..........................................................................................................................................................3

Purpose of the Plan ......................................................................................................................................3

Need for a Plan .............................................................................................................................................4

Plan Objectives .............................................................................................................................................4

The Planning Process and Public Engagement ........................................................................................8

The Next Steps .............................................................................................................................................8

Foundation for Planning and Management......................................................................................................9

The National Mall ........................................................................................................................................9

Purpose .................................................................................................................................................9

Significance.........................................................................................................................................10

Fundamental Resources ...................................................................................................................10

Fundamental Values..........................................................................................................................11

Primary Interpretive Themes...........................................................................................................14

Other Important Resources .............................................................................................................14

Legal Considerations .................................................................................................................................15

NPS Laws, Regulations, and Policies ..............................................................................................15

First Amendment Jurisprudence .....................................................................................................16

Regulating Public Use .......................................................................................................................16

Memorials and the Reserve..............................................................................................................18

Commercial Activities and Transportation....................................................................................19

Scope of this Document.....................................................................................................................................20

Opportunities, Problems, and Challenges ..............................................................................................20

National Mall Issues and Background............................................................................................21

Specific Area Issues and Background .............................................................................................27

Environmental Impact Topics..................................................................................................................31

Impact Topics Analyzed in Detail ...................................................................................................31

Impact Topics Dismissed from Further Consideration ...............................................................32

Interrelationships with Other Plans and Projects ..........................................................................................42

Architect of the Capitol .............................................................................................................................42

National Capital Planning Commission..................................................................................................42

District of Columbia ..................................................................................................................................44

Smithsonian Institution.............................................................................................................................44

NPS Planning Efforts.................................................................................................................................44

Visitor Transportation Study ...........................................................................................................44

The White House and President’s Park..........................................................................................47

Center for Urban Ecology ................................................................................................................47

Interagency Planning Efforts ....................................................................................................................47

CapitalSpace .......................................................................................................................................47

Planning Together for Central Washington...................................................................................48

i
Contents 

PLAN MAPS 

National Mall Plan Area.......................................................................................................................................5

Monumental Core Framework Plan Opportunities ..................................................................................... 43

Urban Design Framework ................................................................................................................................ 45

FIGURES 

Figure 1: The National Mall ............................................................................................................................. 12

Figure 2: Mall Tree Conditions........................................................................................................................ 21

Figure 3: A National Demonstration at the U.S. Capitol and Union Square ............................................. 22

Figure 4: A Special Event on the Mall ............................................................................................................. 23

Figure 5: Recreation on the National Mall..................................................................................................... 25

Figure 6: Union Square ..................................................................................................................................... 27

Figure 7: The Smithsonian Metro Station ...................................................................................................... 28

Figure 8: Washington Monument Temporary Food/Retail Tent ............................................................... 28

Figure 9: Constitution Gardens Lake.............................................................................................................. 29

Figure 10: Tidal Basin Walkway....................................................................................................................... 30

Figure 11: West Potomac Park Riverfront...................................................................................................... 30

Figure 12: North Plaza of the Thomas Jefferson Memorial......................................................................... 30

TABLES 

Table 1: Recent First Amendment Case Law Summary ............................................................................... 17

Table 2: Species of Greatest Conservation Need, Washington, D.C. ......................................................... 37

 ii
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 

ACHP Advisory Council on Historic Preservation 

ADAAG Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines 

AIA American Institute of Architects 

AOC Architect of the Capitol 

ASLA American Society of Landscape Architects 

CEQ Council on Environmental Quality 

CFA U.S. Commission of Fine Arts 

CUE Center for Urban Ecology (NPS) 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

DBID Downtown Business Improvement District

DDOT D.C. Department of Transportation 

FHWA Federal Highway Administration 

GAO Governmental Accounting Office 

GSA General Services Administration 

LCS List of Classified Structures 

LEED Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design 

MWCOG Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments

NAMA National Mall and Memorial Parks 

NCPC National Capital Planning Commission 

NCR National Capital Region (NPS) 

NHPA National Historic Preservation Act 

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act 

NPS National Park Service 

PMIS project management information system (NPS) 

SCS Soil Conservation Service 

USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

USC United States Code 

USDI U.S. Department of the Interior 

US EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

USFS U.S. Forest Service 

USGS U.S. Geological Survey 

USPP United States Park Police 

WABA Washington Area Bicyclist Association 

WMATA Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 

WMATC Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commission 

 iii
This page has been left blank intentionally. 
PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE 

PLAN 

1 
This page has been left blank intentionally. 
INTRODUCTION

The National Mall stretches west from the U.S. 

Capitol to the Potomac River, and north from 

the Thomas Jefferson Memorial to Constitution 

Avenue (see the “National Mall Plan Area” 

map). This highly recognizable space, perhaps 

the most significant historic landscape in the 

United States, needs a comprehensive plan to 

address a number of issues. In 2003 Congress 

stated that the National Mall is a “substantially 

completed work of civic art” and that no new or 

unapproved memorials or visitor centers could 

be added within the area labeled as the Reserve 

(40 USC 8901 et seq.). Congress also directed the 

National Park Service )NPS), as the responsible 

federal agency, to begin planning for the future 

of the National Mall. The mandate of the 

National Park Service is to protect resources and 

provide for visitor enjoyment. 

The National Mall is managed as a unit of the 

national park system by the National Park Service through the National Mall and Memorial 

Parks (NAMA); many park areas in central 

Washington, D.C., are managed by the National 

Mall and Memorial Parks. The National Mall, 

which is about 684 acres, received more than 22 

million visits in 2008, more than twice the 

number of annual visits reported for Yellowstone, Yosemite, and Grand Canyon national 

parks combined (10.9 million visits in 2008). 

Accommodating this level of use and balancing 

all types of activities within this limited area 

present enormous challenges. 

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 network; as 

the location of the nation’s primary memorials 

and museums; and as the stage for First Amendment demonstrations, national celebrations, and 

regional and local special events and activities. 

The demands on the National Mall are constant 

and wide-ranging. Each year the National Park 

Service receives over 6,000 applications for 

public gathering permits, resulting in around 

3,000 events. 

The wear and tear of concentrated activity 

affects the landscape and visitor experiences. 

Facilities can be overwhelmed with use, vegetation cannot easily recover, and turf may be 

worn to the ground and soils heavily compacted, 

which in turn adversely affects the vigor of trees 

and other vegetation. Walks are not wide 

enough for current levels of use, and adjacent 

areas may be damaged when use spills off walks 

or when people choose a more direct route. The 

combined effects generate heartfelt complaints 

by visitors about the deteriorated appearance of 

the National Mall. 

Planning must take into consideration the 

unique urban planning environment of Washington, D.C. Multiple agencies have jurisdiction 

over lands and roads within and adjacent to the 

plan area. These agencies include the National 

Park Service, the Architect of the Capitol, the 

National Gallery of Art, the Smithsonian Institution, and the Department of Agriculture. Other 

governmental entities with some level of responsibility within or near the National Mall 

include the General Services Administration 

(GSA), the District of Columbia, and the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 

(WMATA). In addition, governmental organizations such as the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, 

the National Capital Planning Commission, and 

the D.C. Historic Preservation Office have 

consultation, planning, review, and in some 

cases approval authority for issues related to 

planning, historic preservation, commemorative 

works, and design. 

Civic engagement with the public, a vital component of the planning process, has been and will 

continue to be an open and inclusive process. 

PURPOSE OF THE PLAN

The purpose of this planning effort is to prepare 

a long-term plan that will restore the National 

Mall so that it may continue to symbolize the 

ideals and greatness envisioned for the United 

States of America. The approved plan will serve 

as an overarching organizational document for 

subsequent project implementation. Future 

implementation plans will generally include 

standard procedures for site-specific design, 

commission reviews, public engagement, and 

3 
Introduction: Plan Objectives 

historic preservation consultation. As a result, 

this will be a multiyear and multidisciplinary 

planning effort. Certain actions may require 

congressional authorization or revision of 

federal or park regulations. 

Critical to this planning effort is the establishment of a common public understanding of the 

extent and identity of the National Mall. The 

National Park Service uses the term National 

Mall to encompass three specific areas: 

• the Mall, which extends from the grounds 

of the U.S. Capitol to the Washington 

Monument and includes Union Square 

• the Washington Monument and its grounds 

• West Potomac Park, which is the setting for 

numerous memorials, including the Lincoln 

Memorial, the World War II Memorial, the 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial, the Korean 

War Veterans Memorial, the Franklin 

Delano Roosevelt Memorial, the Tidal 

Basin, and the Thomas Jefferson Memorial 

Often the terms National Mall and the Mall are 

used interchangeably, and map labeling and 

references to the National Mall have further 

created public confusion. 

NEED FOR A PLAN

Comprehensive planning is needed to define the 

future for the National Mall and to detail specific desired conditions and actions. The approved plan will be similar to a general management plan, which the National Park Service 

requires for all parks, but it will not address all 

areas managed by the National Mall and 

Memorial Parks, so it is more focused than a 

general management plan. A comprehensive 

plan for the National Mall is needed for the 

following reasons: 

• Congress has directed the National Park 

Service to plan for the National Mall within 

the Reserve so as to preserve its character. 

• The National Mall must be refurbished so 

that (1) its treasured memorials and historic 

landscapes can be preserved, (2) very high 

levels of use can be sustained, and (3) the 

needs of visitors can be met. The National 

Mall plan must address 

◦ how to improve resource conditions; establish a standard of quality that invites 

respect and generates stewardship; and 

raise the standard of care and maintenance 

◦ how to prepare for intensive levels of use 

for First Amendment demonstrations, 

national celebrations, and special events 

◦ how to provide desired experiences, such 

as opportunities for education, contemplation, rest, relaxation, recreation, 

entertainment, and social experiences 

◦ how to address user capacity, which for 

this plan is defined as the type and level 

of visitor use that can be accommodated 

while sustaining desired resource and 

visitor experience conditions on the 

National Mall 

◦ how to provide for the physical needs, 

enjoyment, and convenience of visitors 

and park users, including information, 

restrooms, food, retail, drinking water, 

and access 

• There may be opportunities for partnership 

groups to help fund construction, landscape renovation, and maintenance 

projects. 

The need for the plan is further discussed in “Opportunities, Problems, and Challenges” (beginning on page 20). 

PLAN OBJECTIVES

Plan objectives identify what achievements would 

make the plan successful. The objectives take into 

account the park purpose and significance, NPS 

policies, planning principles developed in cooperation with other federal and city agencies with 

planning responsibilities within the District of Columbia, public comments, and park goals and 

needs. 

• Cultural Resource Protection

 Primary east-west vistas and several northsouth vistas on the National Mall are improved and perpetuated.

 Cultural resources, including memorials 

and their settings, are preserved and 

protected. 

4
Introduction: Plan Objectives 

National Mall Plan Area 

5 
This page has been left blank intentionally. 
Introduction: Plan Objectives 

Historic plans for the National Mall are 

respected. Resources are managed compatibly with the intent of historic plans. 

• Natural Resource Protection

 Natural resources, such as water, turf, 

trees/vegetation, and soils, are improved to 

be part of a sustainable urban ecosystem. 

• Demonstrations and Special Events

The National Mall remains a venue for First 

Amendment demonstrations and national 

celebrations. 

 Special events are managed to sustain the 

health of park resources, to balance the 

desires of all users, and to ensure a safe 

environment. No one’s enjoyment of the 

National Mall is unacceptably compromised by others, now or in the future. 

 Venues and facilities for demonstrations 

and special events are provided that are 

compatible with the historic significance of 

the National Mall, that enhance the experiences of users, and that accommodate 

operations efficiently and effectively with 

minimal impacts on nationally significant 

resources. 

• Access and Circulation

 Public access and circulation are convenient, and visitors are easily able to find their 

way to all sites on the National Mall. 

The National Mall is better integrated with 

and connected to the urban fabric of 

Washington, D.C. 

• Visitor Information, Education, and 

Enjoyment

 The National Mall provides the quintessential American experience where visitors 

can 

◦ feel welcome 

◦ fully understand the importance of this 

preeminent civic area for First Amendment rights 

◦ learn about our core values as a nation by 

making an educational, emotional, 

inspirational, or patriotic connection to 

the memorials that commemorate our 

history and the physical design that 

reflects our democratic form of 

government 

◦ appreciate the beauty of the National 

Mall during the day, at night, and yearround 

 Lighting on the National Mall evokes emotion and provides enjoyment, while respecting historic fixtures and existing 

lighting at memorials. The Washington 

Monument, Lincoln Memorial, and 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial (as well as the 

U.S. Capitol and the White House) continue to be the most prominent nighttime 

features. 

 Visitor information is convenient, accurate, 

easy to understand, and consistent 

throughout the site. Information reaches 

the widest audience possible. 

 Visitors understand and appreciate the social experiences they are likely to encounter 

— millions of people come here to celebrate, commemorate, demonstrate, or 

recreate. 

 Learning opportunities are provided to 

engage all ages and abilities of an increasingly multicultural and technologically 

sophisticated society. Educational information inspires all visitors, including populations that have not typically visited national 

parks. 

 Recreational opportunities are balanced 

with other uses of the National Mall, and 

both active and passive forms of recreation 

meet the needs of visitors, residents, and 

workers. 

• Visitor Amenities

 Facilities are of high quality and reflect a 

compatible and enduring character, thus 

creating a sense of place that reinforces the 

civic, historic, and symbolic role of the 

National Mall to our nation. 

 Various visitor and commercial amenities 

are provided that are conveniently located 

and that are sized and configured to meet 

visitor use levels on high-volume days. 

7 
Introduction: The Next Steps 

8

• Health, Public Safety, and Security

 Safe, healthy, secure visits are provided, and 

visitors have adequate notification of 

emergency situations. 

• Park Operations 

 Facilities are consistently maintained to the 

desired standards of excellence. 

 All maintenance and park operations emphasize efficient, effective, and sustainable 

practices. 

 Cooperating agencies coordinate planning, 

information, services, facilities, and 

programs for visitors, residents, and the 

local workforce. 

THE PLANNING PROCESS AND PUBLIC 

ENGAGEMENT

In recognition of the importance of the National 

Mall to many Americans, this planning effort has 

and will continue to emphasize open and 

inclusive communications to engage the public 

and to understand their desires and concerns. 

Completing the National Mall plan and subsequent implementation plans will require 

ongoing consultation and coordination with 

other entities involved in planning and 

construction efforts. 

The planning process and public involvement 

are described in detail in the “Consultation and 

Coordination” chapter, beginning on page 543. 

THE NEXT STEPS

After the distribution of this Draft National Mall 

Plan / Environmental Impact Statement, there 

will be a 90-day public review and comment 

period, after which the NPS planning team will 

evaluate comments from other federal agencies, 

organizations, businesses, and individuals 

regarding the draft plan. Appropriate changes 

will be incorporated into a Final National Mall 

Plan / Environmental Impact Statement. The final 

plan will include letters from governmental 

agencies, any substantive comments on the draft 

document, and NPS responses to those comments. Following distribution of the final plan 

and a 30-day no-action period, a record of decision approving a final plan will be signed by the 

NPS National Capital regional director. The 

record of decision will document the NPS 

selection of an alternative for implementation. 

Once it is signed, the plan can then be 

implemented. 

The approved National Mall plan will provide a 

comprehensive vision and framework to protect 

the historic character of the National Mall, to 

restore its health and beauty, to help it function 

better as America’s civic space, and to meet the 

needs of local, national, and international visitors today and tomorrow for enjoyment, education, and recreation. 

However, completing the plan does not ensure 

that all actions will take place nor ensure funding. The National Park Service requires implementation projects to be within an approved 

vision plan, and the approved plan will take this 

important step toward implementation. As the 

plan is implemented, many of the proposed 

projects would provide additional opportunities 

for pubic involvement. They would undergo reviews by and consultation with the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, the National Capital Planning Commission, the Advisory Council on 

Historic Preservation, and the D.C. Historic 

Preservation Office. Some projects might require 

congressional action or changes in federal or 

park regulations. 
FOUNDATION FOR PLANNING 

AND MANAGEMENT

Park planning and management are based on the 

legal purposes of a park, its significance, its fundamental resources and values, and its primary 

interpretive themes. These elements establish a 

foundation for planning and management so that 

everyone has a shared understanding of what is 

most important about the park. It is also important to identify the constraints of special mandates on planning and management. The purpose 

of the foundation statement is to help ensure that 

planning and management stay focused on what 

is most important. All alternatives must be consistent with and contribute to fulfilling the park’s 

purpose, significance, and mandates. 

• Purpose — The park purpose is the specific 

reason a park was established by Congress 

or the president. Purpose statements are 

grounded in a thorough analysis of the 

park’s establishing legislation or executive 

order, as well as the legislative history and 

studies prior to authorization. Purpose 

statements may go beyond a restatement of 

the law to document shared assumptions 

about what the law means in terms specific 

to the park. 

• Park Significance — Park significance 

statements express why the park’s resources and values are important enough to 

warrant national park designation. The 

statements capture the essence of the park’s 

importance to our nation’s heritage and 

help ensure that managers make decisions 

that preserve the resources and values for 

which the park was established or that are 

necessary to accomplish the park’s mission. 

• Fundamental Resources and Values —

These are the most important ideas, tangible resources, or intangible values to be 

communicated to the public about a park 

and that warrant primary consideration 

during planning and management because 

they contribute to significance and are 

critical to achieving the park’s purpose. A 

fundamental resource and value is one that 

was specifically sanctioned by Congress in 

legislation (such as for a memorial or 

monument), an important element or 

remnant of a historic plan (such as the 

L’Enfant plan), or an element without 

which the park would be greatly diminished. 

• Primary Interpretive Themes — These are 

the major messages that visitors to a park 

should receive during their visit, and they 

connect park resources to relevant ideas, 

meanings, concepts, contexts, beliefs, and 

values. They support the desired interpretive outcome of increasing visitor understanding and appreciation of the significance of the park’s resources. Primary 

interpretive themes are based on the park’s 

purpose and significance. 

• Other Important Resources and Values —

Additional resources and values may have 

particular importance and warrant special 

consideration during general management 

planning, even though they do not contribute directly to the purpose and significance of the park. 

The five foundational elements for the National 

Mall plan are presented below. They were developed as part of an NPS Foundation Workshop 

for the larger National Mall and Memorial Parks 

held in July 2006. The following purpose and 

significance statements were derived from court 

decisions; congressional statements; the laws, 

regulations, and policies that guide the National 

Park Service; and other laws and plans for 

Washington, D.C. (The overarching foundation 

elements for the National Mall and Memorial 

Parks that relate to the National Mall plan are 

included in appendix A.) 

THE NATIONAL MALL

Purpose 

The purposes of the National Mall are to 

• Maintain the National Mall in the heart 

of our nation’s capital as a stage for national 

events and a preeminent national civic 

space for public gatherings because “it is 

9 
Foundation for Planning and Management: The National Mall 

here that the constitutional rights of speech 

and peaceful assembly find their fullest 

expression.” 

• Provide a monumental, dignified, and symbolic setting for the governmental structures, museums, and national memorials as 

first delineated by the L’Enfant plan and 

further outlined in the McMillan plan, as 

well as other significant plans. 

• Maintain and provide for the use of the 

National Mall with its public promenades 

as a completed work of civic art — a designed historic landscape providing 

extraordinary vistas to symbols of our 

nation. 

• Maintain National Mall commemorative 

works (memorials, monuments, statues, 

sites, and gardens) that honor presidential 

legacies, distinguished public figures, ideas, 

events, and military and civilian sacrifices 

and contributions. 

• Forever retain the West Potomac Park section of the National Mall as a public park 

for recreation and enjoyment of the people. 

• Maintain the National Mall as an area free 

of commercial advertising while retaining 

the ability to recognize sponsors. 

Significance 

The National Mall is significant for the following 

reasons: 

• The National Mall is the home to the enduring symbols of our country. It provides an 

inspiring setting for memorials, the backdrop for the legislative and executive 

branches of our government, as well as a 

visual connection between the branches of 

government, represented by the United 

States Capitol and the White House. The 

National Mall’s monuments, memorials, 

statues, and other commemorative works 

honor important personages, historical 

events, and the ideals of democracy. As a 

result, it offers emotional and intellectual 

connections that affect our national 

perceptions, consciousness, and identity. 

• The National Mall is the heart of our nation’s 

capital and has endured since the city’s 

original design by Pierre L’Enfant over 200 

years ago. The form and character of our 

planned national capital still reflect the 

historic L’Enfant and McMillan plans. 

• The National Mall is an inclusive and open 

environment where we celebrate our national identity and important events. The 

National Mall, the nation’s foremost civic 

space, is the primary location for political 

demonstrations, First Amendment activities, rallies, parades, and numerous festivals. Visitors of every race, nationality, and 

faith come to the National Mall to celebrate, commemorate, demonstrate, or 

recreate. 

• The National Mall is a preeminent national 

landscape, and its history and appearance 

have been enriched by gifts to the United 

States from other countries. It is a combination of formal designed areas, such as the 

Mall and the grounds of the Washington 

Monument, and naturalistic areas, such as 

the Tidal Basin and West Potomac Park. 

Various trees and gardens symbolize cultural and diplomatic exchanges and gifts 

from other nations — such as the Japanese 

cherry trees, pagoda, and lantern, and the 

German-American Friendship Garden, and 

the Arts of Peace ( gift of Italy). 

• The National Mall is the center of our nation’s cultural heritage. The National Mall is 

surrounded by many of the country’s most 

significant educational and cultural institutions, including the national museums of 

the Smithsonian Institution and the 

National Gallery of Art, along with the 

nearby National Archives, the U.S. Bureau 

of Engraving and Printing, and the U.S. 

Holocaust Memorial Museum. 

Fundamental Resources 

Memorials 

• Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial 

• Korean War Veterans Memorial 

• Lincoln Memorial and Reflecting Pool 

• Thomas Jefferson Memorial 

• Ulysses S. Grant Memorial 

10
Foundation for Planning and Management: The National Mall 

• Vietnam Veterans Memorial, “In Memory” 

plaque, The Three Servicemen statue, 

Vietnam Women’s Memorial, catalog listing 

of names on the wall, the flagpole 

• Washington Monument 

• World War II Memorial 

• 56 Signers of the Declaration of Independence Memorial (Constitution Gardens 

and Lake) 

• D.C. War Memorial 

• First Air Mail Flight Marker 

• George Mason Memorial 

• John Ericcson Memorial 

• John Paul Jones Memorial 

• Martin Luther King, Jr. Commemorative 

Plaque — “I Have a Dream” Speech (steps 

of the Lincoln Memorial) 

Park Areas 

• Constitution Gardens and Lake 

• German-American Friendship Garden 

• Mall (1st Street to 14th Streets) 

• Tidal Basin — first cherry tree planting, first 

planting plaque, inlet bridge, Japanese 

lantern, Japanese pagoda, Kutz Bridge, 

Outlet bridge, seawall, paddleboat kiosk 

Statues 

• Arts of Peace — Rock Creek and Potomac 

Parkway entrance (the complementary 

sculptures, Arts of War, are under the 

jurisdiction of George Washington 

Memorial Parkway) 

Views and Vistas 

• Hierarchy of internationally recognized 

symbolic views and vistas based on the 

L’Enfant and McMillan plans 

• Key vistas defined or framed by vegetation, 

such as the formal rows of American elms 

on the Mall, European elms along the 

Lincoln Reflecting Pool, and cherry trees 

around the Tidal Basin 

• The primary east-west cross axis between 

the Capitol and the Potomac River and 

beyond, planned by L’Enfant and symbolizing potential westward expansion of the 

nation, and the north-south vista from the 

White House to the Thomas Jefferson 

Memorial 

• The Washington Monument — a pivotal, 

central element of most views and vistas 

Plans 

• “L’Enfant Plan of the City of Washington” 

(1791) 

• “Ellicott Plan for the City of Washington in 

the Territory of Columbia” (1792) 

• “Report of the Senate Committee on the 

District of Columbia on the Improvement 

of the Park System of the District of 

Columbia” (Senate Report No. 166, 57th 

Congress, 1st Session, 1902); hereafter 

referred to as the McMillan plan 

Fundamental Values 

• A majestic landscape and a fitting setting for 

the pomp and ceremony of state events, 

with the symbolism of strength, power, 

protection, and safety. 

• Free and open public access, both to the 

physical space (which belongs to all citizens 

and is under the stewardship of the 

National Park Service) and to the 

government. 

• The nation’s premier civic space — a venue 

for First Amendment demonstrations, national celebrations, reflection and contemplation, recreation, and special events; a 

place to explore values and ideas that 

reflect how Americans see themselves; an 

area free of commercial advertising.

• A visible connection between the legislative 

and executive branches of government. 

• The portrayal of our nation’s history in the 

monuments and memorials that bear testimony to the vision of the founding fathers, 

and the struggles and sacrifices of extraordinary leaders and ordinary citizens to 

achieve that vision. 

11 
Foundation for Planning and Management: The National Mall 

FIGURE 1: THE NATIONAL MALL

The National Mall 

• the home to the enduring 

symbols of our country 

• the heart of our nation’s 

capital 

• a preeminent national 

landscape 

12
Foundation for Planning and Management: The National Mall 

13 
Foundation for Planning and Management: The National Mall 

• The ideas and values symbolized in commemorative works — freedom of speech, 

national union, democracy, courage to fight 

for ideals, citizenship, patriotism, leadership, invention / innovation, international 

friendship, justice, unity leading to nationhood, and the emotional connections that 

provide inspiration and healing. 

• The physical and symbolic gateway of the 

nation’s capital, which was oriented to the 

west, representing national expansion. 

• Educational opportunities (museums, 

cultural institutions, NPS interpretive 

programs). 

• The visibility day and night of the National 

Mall’s architecture and designed landscapes from the sky. 

• The contribution of the design and architecture to the city’s character, and landmarks that orient visitors to the city. 

• Association with the preeminent names in 

late 19th and early 20th century landscape 

architecture, including Frederick Law 

Olmstead Jr. 

• Healthy green infrastructure, ecosystems, 

and rivers; recognition that the National 

Mall is a significant component of the 

District’s park system. 

Primary Interpretive Themes 

• The history of our capital and the story of 

our nation 

• The symbolic nature and unique purposes 

of civic space in the nation’s capital: 

◦ First Amendment freedom of speech 

◦ celebration and patriotism 

◦ The National Mall and Reserve as a 

completed work of civic art 

◦ L’Enfant and McMillan plans 

◦ Themes directly related to commemorative works: 

- themes common to multiple memorials (presidential legacies, sacrifice, 

liberty, equality, democracy, freedom, 

Civil War, etc.) 

- the Lincoln Memorial at the west end 

of the National Mall and the Grant 

Memorial at the east end, which physically and symbolically represent the 

re-unification of the nation at the end 

of the Civil War 

• Land reclamation by the U.S. Army Corps 

of Engineers and the creation of park lands 

for a range of recreational uses 

Other Important Resources 

• Washington Monument flagpoles and U.S. 

flags, dedication flag, commemorative 

stones, plaques, elevation obelisk, 

Monument Lodge (tickets / bookstore), 

Survey Lodge (ranger station and 

information), Jefferson pier marker, Sylvan 

Theater, Bullfinch gateposts 

• Museum collections and/or exhibits associated with the memorial sites — George 

Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham 

Lincoln, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and 

Vietnam Veterans 

• Character-defining historic site furnishings 

— historic seating (NPS standard Washington benches) and lighting (Olmsted plan, 

Washington globe, Twin Twenty and 

Saratoga lantern streetlights) 

• Lockkeeper’s House for the Washington 

Canal 

• Rainbow Pool Fountain renovated as a 

central feature at the World War II 

Memorial 

• West Potomac Park — Watergate steps, 

Constitution Avenue belvedere, riverfront, 

seawall, and the historic fountain at the 

George Mason Memorial 

• Trails and walks 

• Active recreation space and athletic fields 

for the local workforce, residents, and 

visitors: 

◦ ballfields at the Washington Monument 

and the Franklin Delano Roosevelt 

Memorial 

◦ JFK hockey fields 

◦ Lincoln Memorial volleyball courts and 

ballfields 

14
Foundation for Planning and Management: Legal Considerations 

◦ activities such as bicycling, kite flying, 

Frisbee, baseball, softball, kickball, 

soccer, touch football 

◦ Tidal Basin paddleboats 

LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

To aid in the discussion about the future of the 

National Mall, it is important to understand 

some of the key legal authorities that affect the 

management of these special areas and that will 

factor into the planning decisions for the 

National Mall plan. By no means does this 

discussion mention all of the authorities that 

apply. For more information about laws and 

regulations applying to the National Park 

Service, see the NPS website at www.nps.gov/ 

applications/npspolicy/index.cfm. 

NPS Laws, Regulations, and 

Policies 

The National Park System 

As part of the national park system, the National 

Mall is administered by the National Park 

Service. NPS historians describe the National 

Mall as one of the oldest elements of today’s 

national park system, dating from the creation of 

the District of Columbia in the 1790s. Knowing 

why these legal considerations apply is essential 

to factoring them into planning decisions for the 

National Mall plan. In this instance, many of 

these laws and other requirements are applicable 

because these areas are part of the national park 

system. As described by the NPS Management 

Policies 2006,

The national park system was created to conserve unimpaired many of the world’s most 

magnificent landscapes, places that enshrine 

our nation’s enduring principles, and places 

that remind us of the tremendous sacrifices 

Americans have made on behalf of those 

principles. They are the most remarkable 

collection of places in America for recreation 

and learning. Visitors can immerse themselves 

in places where events actually happened and 

enjoy some of the most significant natural and 

historic places in America. As required by the 

1916 Organic Act, these special places must be 

managed in a special way — a way that allows 

them to be enjoyed not just by those who are 

here today, but also by generations that 

follow (NPS Management Policies 2006, p. iii). 

Laws, regulations, and authorities that govern 

the management of the National Mall include 

those that are applicable to all national parks and 

to the National Park Service as a federal agency. 

As explained in the NPS Management Policies

2006,

The management of the national park system 

and NPS programs is guided by the Constitution, public laws, treaties, proclamations, 

executive orders, regulations, and directives 

of the Secretary of the Interior and the Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Water 

(NPS Management Policies 2006, p. 2). 

The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), 

the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 

the Clean Air Act, and the Clean Water Act are 

among these laws applicable across the system. 

Other laws apply to specific situations, such as 

those for making planning decisions affecting 

parks in the greater Washington, D.C., area and 

that involve the National Capital Planning Commission and the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts. 

Still other laws and requirements apply to just the 

National Mall, such as those for individual 

memorials. 

NPS Organic and General Authorities 

Acts 

According to the NPS Management Policies 2006, 

the most important statutory directive for the 

National Park Service is provided by interrelated 

provisions of the NPS Organic Act of 1916 and 

the NPS General Authorities Act of 1970, including amendments to the latter law in 1978. The 

key management-related provision of the 

Organic Act (16 USC 1) is as follows: 

[The National Park Service] shall promote 

and regulate the use of the Federal areas 

known as national parks, monuments, and 

reservations hereinafter specified . . . by such 

means and measures as conform to the fundamental purpose of the said parks, monuments, and reservations, which purpose is to 

conserve the scenery and the natural and 

historic objects and the wild life therein and 

to provide for the enjoyment of the same in 

such manner and by such means as will leave 

them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future 

generations. 

Congress supplemented and clarified these 

provisions through enactment of the General 

Authorities Act in 1970, and again through 

15 
Foundation for Planning and Management: Legal Considerations 

enactment of a 1978 amendment to that act (16 

USC la-1). These acts added 

[t]he authorization of activities shall be 

construed and the protection, management, 

and administration of these areas shall be 

conducted in light of the high public value 

and integrity of the National Park System 

and shall not be exercised in derogation of 

the values and purposes for which these 

various areas have been established, except 

as may have been or shall be directly and 

specifically provided by Congress. 

First Amendment Jurisprudence 

Any governmental regulation of demonstrations 

and related sales activities is subject to First 

Amendment jurisprudence. The National Park 

Service’s regulation of demonstrations and sales 

activities on federal parkland has been the subject of extensive First Amendment litigation for 

many years. 

Recognizing the importance of the National 

Mall and its nearby monuments and memorials, 

the United States Court of Appeals for the 

District of Columbia Circuit stated that “the 

Mall is more than home to these enduring 

symbols of our nationhood.” The court opinion 

continues, 

Its location in the heart of our nation’s capital 

makes it a prime location for demonstrations. 

It is where Martin Luther King, Jr., delivered 

his famous “I Have a Dream” speech, where 

both sides of the abortion debate have staged 

their demonstrations, and where on any given 

day one may witness people gathering to voice 

their public concerns. As the court has stated 

before, “It is here that the constitutional rights 

of speech and peaceful assembly find their 

fullest expression” (Friends of Vietnam Memorial v. Kennedy, 116 F.3d 495, 496 (D.C. Cir. 

1997), quoting ISKCON of Potomac v. 

Kennedy, 61 F.3d 949, 952 (D.C. Cir. 1995)). 

In the context of such longstanding First 

Amendment jurisprudence, and consistent with 

NPS regulations and policies that allow demonstrations and sales activities under certain conditions, as discussed below, demonstrations must 

be considered to be at least legally consistent 

with the special nature and sanctity of the National Mall. Other cases involving First 

Amendment rights are listed in Table 1. 

Regulating Public Use 

Regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations

(CFR) apply to all federal agencies, and certain 

regulations apply only to the administration of 

the national park system. The Code of Federal 

Regulations addresses public use limits, which 

the superintendent may establish based on a 

determination that limits are “necessary for the 

maintenance of public health and safety, protection of environmental and scenic values, 

protection of natural and cultural resources, . . . 

or implementation of management responsibilities, equitable allocation and use of facilities, or 

the avoidance of conflict among visitor use 

activities” (36 CFR 1.5). 

Permitted activities “shall be consistent with 

legislation, administrative policies and based 

upon a determination that public health and 

safety, environmental or scenic values, natural or 

cultural resources, scientific research, implementation of management responsibilities, 

proper allocation and use facilities, or the 

avoidance of conflict among visitor use activities 

will not be adversely affected” (36 CFR 1.6). A 

permit may be denied if the capacity of the area 

or facility would be exceeded by one or more of 

the factors previously listed. 

Regulations at 36 CFR 7.96 contain provisions 

specific to the greater Washington, D.C., area. 

The following are provisions that center on 

public uses and figure prominently in the 

administration of the National Mall.

Demonstrations, Special Events, and 

National Celebrations 

Demonstrations, special events, and national 

celebrations are defined as follows (36 CFR 

7.96(g)(1)): 

• Demonstrations — The term includes 

demonstrations, picketing, speechmaking, 

marching, holding vigils or religious services, and all other like forms of conduct 

that 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 

16
Foundation for Planning and Management: Legal Considerations 

TABLE 1: RECENT FIRST AMENDMENT CASE LAW SUMMARY

Date Topic/Issue and Outcome 

1972 If one group is allowed to use structures to communicate views, then others must be similarly allowed. 

Women Strike for Peace v. Morton, 472 F.2d 1273 (D.C. Cir. 1972). 

1975 The National Park Service may regulate demonstrations, including permit denial (36 CFR 7.96 (g)) if "enforced 

uniformly and without discrimination." The National Park Service may not limit the duration of demonstrations in view of the availability of less restrictive methods. A Quaker Action Group v. Morton, 516 F.2d 717 

(D.C. Cir. 1975). 

1982 The application of NPS camping regulations on the National Mall and in Lafayette Park does not violate the 

First Amendment. The regulation meets the requirements for a reasonable time, place, or manner restriction 

of expression, whether oral, written, or symbolized by conduct. The regulation is neutral and narrowly focuses 

on the federal government’s substantial interest in maintaining the parks in the heart of the capital in an 

attractive and intact condition, readily available to the millions of people who wish to see and enjoy them. 

Clark v. Community for Creative Non-Violence, 468 U.S. 288 (1984). 

1992 A prohibition against the free distribution of leaflets on certain sidewalks within the restricted zone of the 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial (36 CFR 7.96(j)(2)(vi)) was voided as not “narrowly tailored.” Henderson v. Lujan, 

964 F.2d 1129 (D.C. Cir. 1992). 

1992 A conviction (36 CFR 2.12(a)(1)(i)) for creating an audio disturbance was voided. While the court recognized 

that the government may justifiably impose sound volume restrictions, the regulation was not "narrowly 

tailored." United States v. Doe, 968 F.2d 86 (D.C. Cir. 1992). 

1995 NPS sales regulations (36 CFR 7.96(k)) were upheld as consistent with the First Amendment. ISKCON of 

Potomac v. Kennedy, 61 F.3d 949 (D.C. Cir. 1995). 

1997 NPS sales regulations were again upheld as consistent with the First Amendment. Friends of the Vietnam 

Veterans Memorial v. Kennedy, 116 F.3d 495 (D.C. Cir. 1997). 

2001 NPS sales regulations were again upheld as consistent with the First Amendment, as well as consistent with 

Religious Freedom and Restoration Act and equal protections. Henderson v. Kennedy, 253 F.3d 12 (D.C. Cir. 

2001). 

tourists which does not have an intent or 

propensity to attract a crowd or onlookers. 

• Special events — The term 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 as previously 

defined, 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. 

• National celebration events — The term 

means the annually recurring special events 

regularly scheduled by the National Capital 

Region, including Lighting of the National 

Christmas Tree and Christmas Pathway of 

Peace, Cherry Blossom Festival, Fourth of 

July Celebration, Smithsonian Folklife 

Festival, Columbus Day Commemorative 

Wreath-Laying, and Presidential Inaugural 

Ceremonies. 

Public gatherings or demonstrations involving 

more than 25 people within the National Mall 

and Memorial Parks generally require a permit 

issued by the National Park Service. To preserve 

an atmosphere of calm, tranquility, and reverence, certain memorial areas exclude demonstrations or special events. These areas include 

specific portions of the Washington Monument, 

the Lincoln Memorial, the Thomas Jefferson 

Memorial, the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, and 

the World War II Memorial (see 36 CFR 

7.96(g)(3)(ii) for specific exclusions). 

A permit may be denied if multiple uses cannot 

be accommodated in the same area at the same 

time; there is a clear and present danger to the 

public safety, good order, or health; the proposed demonstration or special event is of such 

a nature or duration that it cannot reasonably be 

accommodated in a certain area; or activities are 

17 
Foundation for Planning and Management: Legal Considerations 

contrary to other applicable laws or regulations 

(36 CFR 7.96(g)(4)(iii)). 

Permit conditions for demonstrations and 

special events include how long events may last; 

hours of operation to avoid unreasonable interference with rush-hour traffic; and allowance of 

temporary structures erected for the purpose of 

symbolizing a message or meeting logistical 

needs (such structures may not unreasonably 

harm park resources and shall be removed as 

soon as practicable). Permits for special events 

are limited to four months. Permits for demonstrations may be extended if space is available 

(36 CFR 7.96(g)(5)). The regional director may 

impose reasonable restrictions on the use of 

temporary structures in the interest of protecting park areas, traffic, and public safety. 

Sound amplification equipment is allowed in 

connection with permitted demonstrations or 

special events as long as it does not unreasonably 

disturb nonparticipating persons in, or in the 

vicinity of, the area (36 CFR 7.96(g)(5)(xii)). 

Recreational Activities 

Regulations pertaining to recreational activities 

require permits for organized games such as 

baseball and football, and for model airplane 

flying; prohibit athletics if the grounds are wet or 

otherwise unsuitable for play without damage to 

the turf; allow fishing in accordance with state 

law; allow ice skating only in designated areas; 

and prohibit swimming (36 CFR 7.96(b) through 

(e)). 

Soliciting 

Soliciting is allowed if under a permit (ISKCON 

of Potomac v. Kennedy, 61 F.3d 949 (D.C. Cir. 

1995)). 

Sales 

A permit is required for the sale or distribution 

of books, newspapers, leaflets, pamphlets, 

buttons, and bumper stickers from a stand or 

structure during a special event (36 CFR 

7.96(k)). 

Memorials and the Reserve 

Each memorial on the National Mall was placed 

there pursuant to a specific law or laws enacted 

by Congress for that particular memorial. Since 

the mid-1980s the process through which a 

memorial is authorized, funded, designed, and 

sited has been governed by the Commemorative 

Works Act (40 USC 8901 et seq.). This law provides standards and requirements for the location, design, and construction of new memorials 

on federal lands administered by the National 

Park Service and the General Services Administration in the District of Columbia and a portion 

of northern Virginia near the District. Provisions 

of the Commemorative Works Act include those 

requiring consultation with the National Capital 

Memorial Commission and for the review and 

approval of new memorials by the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts and the National Capital Planning Commission. Compliance with this law is 

informed by memorial guidance plans that have 

been developed by these commissions and 

others. Some of the 2003 amendments to this law 

stemmed from recommendations in these plans 

that were also presented to Congress in hearings. 

The purposes of the Commemorative Works Act 

include preserving the integrity of the comprehensive design of the L’Enfant and McMillan 

plans for the nation’s capital; ensuring the 

continued public use and enjoyment of open 

space in the District of Columbia; preserving and 

maintaining open space; and ensuring that these 

memorials are appropriately designed, constructed, and located, and that they reflect a 

consensus of the lasting national significance of 

their subjects. 

Congress, in the 2003 amendments to the Commemorative Works Act, defined the Reserve as 

“the great cross-axis of the Mall which . . . generally extends from the United States Capitol to 

the Lincoln Memorial, and from the White 

House to the Jefferson Memorial” (sec. 202(a)). 

The National Mall is located within the Reserve. 

Frequently, memorials have some visitor facilities such as restrooms, visitor contact stations, 

and bookstores, but they stop short of being 

visitor centers both in size and in range and 

types of facilities they contain. Further, 

Congress provided that following enactment of 

the 2003 amendments “no commemorative 

work or visitor center shall be located within the 

18
Foundation for Planning and Management: Legal Considerations 

Reserve” (sec. 202(b)). This did not include 

those unbuilt memorials that had been previously approved for sites on the National Mall, 

such as the Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial 

and the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Center. 

On December 16, 2003, Congress authorized the 

establishment of the National Museum of 

African American History and Culture as part 

of the Smithsonian Institution and stated that it 

could be sited in some places on the National 

Mall. The site selected in January 2006 pursuant 

to that law is on the Washington Monument 

grounds, between 14th and 15th Streets NW and 

Constitution Avenue and Madison Drive NW. 

At present the site temporarily houses a tent 

from which an NPS concessioner sells refreshments and sundries. The National Park Service 

will not be administering this museum or its 

grounds. 

Commercial Activities and 

Transportation 

The National Park Service Concessions Management Improvement Act of 1998 directs that 

“except as provided by this title or otherwise 

authorized by law, the Secretary [of the Interior] 

shall utilize concessions contracts to authorize a 

person, corporation, or other entity to provide 

accommodations, facilities, and services to visitors of the National Park System” (Public Law 

[PL] l05-391, sec. 403, 112 Stat. 3504). The NPS 

regulations concerning concessions are found at 

36 CFR Part 51. 

It is the policy of Congress and the Secretary of 

the Interior that visitor services in park areas 

may be provided only under carefully controlled 

safeguards against unregulated and indiscriminate use so that commercial activities will not 

unduly impair park values and resources. 

Development of visitor services is limited to 

locations that are consistent to the highest 

practicable degree with the preservation and 

conservation of the resources and values of the 

park area. It is also the policy of the Congress 

and the secretary that development of visitor 

services in park areas must be limited to those as 

are necessary and appropriate for public use and 

enjoyment of the park area in which they are 

located. 

At present, the National Park Service has a concession contract with Guest Services, Inc., to 

provide an array of services to visitors to the 

National Mall. Visitors to the National Mall may 

also obtain interpretive transportation services 

through the NPS concessioner known as 

Landmark Services Tourmobile Inc. 

The Department of the Interior and Related 

Agencies Appropriations Act, 2004 (PL 108-108, 

Nov. 10, 2003) contains provisions to prohibit 

the erection, placement, or use of structures and 

signs bearing commercial advertising at special 

events on the National Mall (sec. 145). The 

sponsors of special events may be recognized 

provided that the size and form of the recognition is consistent with the special nature and 

sanctity of the National Mall. 

The following regulations restrict commercial 

activities in all units of the national park system: 

• Advertisements — Commercial notices or 

advertisements shall not be displayed, 

posted, or distributed on federally owned 

or controlled lands within a park area 

unless prior written permission has been 

given by the superintendent. Permission 

may be granted only if such notices and 

advertisements are found by the superintendent to be desirable and necessary for 

the convenience and guidance of the public 

(36 CFR 5.1). 

• Business operations — Engaging in or 

soliciting any business in park areas, except 

in accordance with the provisions of a 

permit, contract, or other written agreement with the United States, except as such 

may be specifically authorized under 

special regulations applicable to a park area, 

is prohibited (36 CFR 5.3).

19 
SCOPE OF THIS DOCUMENT

This chapter discusses opportunities, problems, 

and challenges that the alternatives need to 

address in order to fully meet the purpose of and 

need for the plan. Following this discussion is a 

list of the environmental impact topics that have 

been analyzed in detail; these topics are based on 

this discussion of opportunities, problems, and 

challenges, as well as on federal laws, regulations, and policies, and also on public scoping 

comments. This chapter concludes with a list of 

the topics that were dismissed from further 

consideration because there would be no impacts or because the impacts would be negligible 

or minor. 

Both the National Mall and Pennsylvania Avenue were addressed during the early stages of 

this planning effort. Because the issues facing 

these areas are somewhat different, a separate 

environmental document will be prepared for 

Pennsylvania Avenue. This is consistent with the 

Monumental Core Framework Plan: Connecting 

New Destinations with the National Mall, a joint 

effort of the National Capital Planning Commission and the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts 

(NCPC 2009). 

OPPORTUNITIES, PROBLEMS, AND 

CHALLENGES

A number of critical issues need to be addressed 

through comprehensive planning. Areas of public interest and concern include preservation of 

resources and the historic character, the health 

and appearance of the National Mall, appropriate uses and levels of use, the impacts of special events and security on public and recreational use, and the challenges of maintaining the 

National Mall to high standards of excellence. 

The most important goal for planning is to 

define a clear and common vision for balancing 

use of the National Mall, while achieving desired 

natural and cultural resource conditions. The 

Ongoing Projects on the National Mall

Several ongoing projects are related to this plan but are beyond its scope because they would be undertaken by 

other entities or because they have been previously approved and funded and implementation is underway. 

When Congress amended the Commemorative Works Act in 2003, it stated that the National Mall is a “completed work of civic art,” and it established the Reserve area to protect it (see page 259). The Reserve is to remain 

free of additional memorials and visitor centers except for the following, which Congress had already approved: 

• Vietnam Veterans Memorial Center — An underground facility will include restrooms, information, exhibits, 

administrative space, and a bookstore. 

• National Museum of African American History and Culture — Land has been transferred to the Smithsonian 

Institution. The food service and retail functions at the Washington Monument will be relocated. 

• Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial — The new memorial will include restrooms, a visitor contact station, and 

a bookstore. 

Memorials are now being considered for sites outside the Reserve. These sites have been indentified in the 2001 

Memorials and Museums Master Plan, which was produced by the National Capital Planning Commission working 

with the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts and the National Capital Memorial Commission (which includes the 

National Park Service) as the Joint Task Force on Memorials. Existing memorials on the National Mall will be 

maintained and protected under applicable law, regulations, and policy.

Five deferred maintenance projects affecting the National Mall have been funded through the American Recovery 

and Reinvestment Act of 2009. They include the Lincoln Memorial reflecting pool area (lower approachway, pool, 

and related landscape, plus the north and south elm walks), the D.C. War Memorial, the Thomas Jefferson Memorial plaza seawall, Madison Drive, and Ohio Drive. Also the preferred alternative in the NPS 2006 Visitor Transportation Study, which addresses strategies to reduce and manage transportation demand within the area, as well 

as a visitor transportation service around the National Mall, is under review for future implementation. Other 

projects include a coordinated National Mall sign system, which has been approved, and the Potomac Park levee 

project, which will address flood protection for downtown D.C. These projects are considered as present and 

reasonably foreseeable projects in the cumulative impact analyses in “Environmental Consequences.” 

 20
Scope of this Document: Opportunities, Problems, and Challenges 

NPS presence is not readily apparent on the 

National Mall, and the agency’s stewardship 

mission and regulations may not be understood. 

FIGURE 2: MALL TREE CONDITIONS

It takes many years for replacement trees to reach the height 

of established trees. The bare spots are the result of temporary 

event facilities. 

National Mall Issues and 

Background 

Cultural Resources 

The National Mall’s Evolving History 

Issue — To what extent can the evolving history 

of the National Mall be balanced with the conservation of the historic landscape character, 

and what desired cultural resource management 

standards should be achieved? 

Background — The National Mall concept 

dates from the 1791 L’Enfant plan) and took its 

present form as a result of the 1901 McMillan 

plan and other historically significant plans. 

Within the National Mall separate park areas 

have evolved as memorials and have been built 

to honor famous Americans or to commemorate 

important events. Planning over the last quarter 

of the 20th century focused on specific projects, 

such as memorials. The result has been a fragmented approach that affects our country’s 

premier national historic landscape with its great 

American symbols of democracy. 

Primary vistas that were defined in historic landmark plans, along with large areas of unprogrammed open space that emphasize historic 

landscape features, may be obscured. For 

example, the view from the White House to the 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial is somewhat 

obscured by trees on the northeast side of the 

Tidal Basin, and temporary facilities for events 

on the Mall can sometimes obstruct the view 

between the U.S. Capitol and the Washington 

Monument. 

The Historic Landscape’s Health 

and Appearance 

Issue — To what extent can the highest standards for various landscapes be achieved and 

sustained while accommodating frequent 

intensive public use? 

Background — The National Mall is a symbol of 

our nation and is expected to exemplify superior 

standards. Nearly 600 American elms line the 

Mall and over 2,100 Japanese cherry trees encircle the Tidal Basin. Flower beds are botanical 

showplaces for thousands of tulips, pansies, and 

annuals. The impressive mingling of natural and 

cultural resources has made Washington, D.C., 

one of the most heavily visited and photographed cities in the world. However, the 

National Park Service has repeatedly heard from 

the general public that landscape conditions and 

maintenance need to be improved. 

Turf and trees are generally perceived as renewable resources, but it takes generations to grow 

the Mall’s magnificent shade and ornamental 

trees, which are important contributing features 

of the historic landscape. Over the last two 

decades there has been a substantial loss of tree 

cover within the District of Columbia, affecting 

not only air quality and temperature, but also the 

quality of life. Soil compaction affects the health 

of trees, as well as the urban ecosystem, and urban flooding.

Natural Resources 

Issue — What is the most appropriate way to 

deal with water quality issues of natural and 

man-made features, soil and vegetative conditions, flood control, and urban wildlife? 

Background — Water quality issues affect most 

water features, such as pools and ponds, and 

changes in water chemistry have resulted in 

algae growth. Some pools and ornamental 

fountains lack proper circulation systems, and 

the Tidal Basin does not flush as intended. Three 

major water features (the Lincoln Reflecting 

Pool, Constitution Gardens Lake, and the 

21 
Scope of this Document: Opportunities, Problems, and Challenges 

Capitol Reflecting Pool at Union Square) use 

millions of gallons of potable water each year. 

About half of the National Mall has been constructed from tidal flats, and much of the western portion of the National Mall lies within the 

100- and 500-year floodplains. Imported soils 

have often been of poor quality. Additionally, 

soil compaction and hardened turf areas from 

high levels of use affect tree root systems, particularly the cherry trees near the Tidal Basin and 

the American elms on the Mall. Social trails 

(user-created trails off paved paths) adjacent to 

formal trails or water edges destroy turf and 

further compact soils. In 1992 the director of the 

National Capital Region wrote to the director of 

the National Park Service about the impact of 

activities on turfgrass on the Mall: 

The only way maintenance efforts can be 

realized is to restrict the recurrent scheduled 

activities and heavy visitor use patterns that 

negate every effort the National Park Service 

expends to manage the site. 

Various urban wildlife species are present, along 

with less frequently seen fox and deer. Visitors 

have complained about droppings from resident 

ducks and Canada geese. 

Urban air quality is impacted by vehicular exhaust. Urban sounds, such as traffic and airplane 

noise, are audible throughout park areas. Water 

features may mask noise to some degree. 

Park managers can do little to prevent global 

climate change; however, they can take some 

steps to mitigate its impact. A 3-foot rise in sea 

levels would affect areas and infrastructure 

throughout Washington, D.C., including the 

National Mall. Increased storm severity could 

result in tidal surges that inundate more park 

areas. 

A U.S. Army Corps of Engineers flood control 

levee runs north of the Lincoln Reflecting Pool 

to the Washington Monument grounds. Standards for flood control were modified after Hurricane Katrina, and the levee will need to meet 

higher standards. As a result, new improvements 

for the levee are being developed. 

Large rainstorms may temporarily exceed the 

capacity of the stormwater drainage system and 

result in flooding. There is a high water table as a 

result of putting Tiber Creek underground to 

create Constitution Avenue. 

Demonstrations, Special Events, and 

National Celebrations 

Issues — Different regulations apply to demonstrations and special events, so the issues are 

slightly different. 

• Within the confines of policy and regulation, to what extent can the ability to accommodate First Amendment demonstrations be improved on the National Mall? 

• Within the confines of policy and regulation, to what extent can events be sustainably and efficiently staged on the National 

Mall while simultaneously achieving 

desired resource conditions? 

• What is the role and physical expression of 

the civic stage in the 21st century? 

Background — The National Mall has been referred to as the nation’s front yard, the space 

where national pageantry, celebrations, cultural 

events, and demonstrations occur. This highly 

visible space in the heart of our nation’s capital 

has evolved into the national forum — the place 

where large and small demonstrations and rallies 

take place, and where people can petition their 

government, present and debate differing 

positions, advocate for action, or express pride 

in their identity, organizations, or causes. 

Over 3,000 demonstrations and events take 

place annually on the National Mall, including 

• public demonstrations in connection with 

First Amendment rights

FIGURE 3: A NATIONAL DEMONSTRATION AT THE U.S.

CAPITOL AND UNION SQUARE

Demonstration organizers frequently choose the National Mall 

because of its high visibility and recognizable national symbols. 

22
Scope of this Document: Opportunities, Problems, and Challenges 

• annual celebrations, such as the National 

Cherry Blossom Festival, Memorial Day, 

the Smithsonian Folklife Festival, and the 

Fourth of July 

FIGURE 4: A SPECIAL EVENT ON THE MALL

Tents and other structures are used during special events. 

Food tents set up in the elm tree panels on the Mall for a 

special event. 

• regularly scheduled concerts and cultural 

programs 

• hundreds of events such as solar technology displays, book fairs, public employee 

recognition events, the laying of commemorative wreaths, re-enlistment ceremonies, 

or school group musical performances, as 

well as one-time events, such as a state 

funeral or home building for Hurricane 

Katrina victims 

• annual marathons, triathlons, and foot 

races benefiting various causes, and hundreds of recreational league team sports 

Additionally around 900 commercial filming 

permits are issued every year. 

The sheer number of special events with attendant deliveries and logistics, setup and takedown, and temporary facilities affects landscape 

health and the ability of the staff to maintain 

park natural resources such as turf and trees. 

Significant character-defining elements and 

historic planned vistas are also affected. Temporary facilities, which include stages, signs, tents, 

bleachers, portable restrooms, and food service, 

are frequently located on turf or under tree 

canopies. Turf may be demolished and its health 

impacted by compaction that affects water 

infiltration. Compaction near the roots of trees 

is detrimental to tree health. 

A late 1980s practice of installing 6 inches of 

mulch under trees was abandoned because of 

the cost burden of clean up. Instead, mats or 

temporary surfaces are used in some areas. 

Temporary walks, which spread weight to 

reduce soil compaction, at the same time deprive 

the turf of air and moisture, and in hot weather 

result in burning of the turf. In 1989 construction trenching of more than 4,400 linear feet 

severed tree roots on the Mall. 

Utility infrastructure is lacking, and tent stakes 

used during events have penetrated into the 

irrigation system, rendering the system largely 

dysfunctional. 

There are a number of highly visible venues attractive for First Amendment demonstrations 

because their backdrops contain symbols of our 

nation. Improvements to access, paving, facilities, or utilities could facilitate demonstrations. 

The Code of Federal Regulations limits special 

events (not demonstrations) on the National 

Mall to four months, including setup and 

takedown time. This event time limit has not 

been enforced uniformly. The reservation 

system for events does not take advantage of 

current technology. 

Access and Circulation 

Issue — To what extent can public access be 

improved? 

Background — The urban streets near the 

National Mall accommodate around 400,000 

commuters every weekday. The road system 

may be difficult to navigate for infrequent 

visitors. Crosswalks have limited pedestrian 

23 
Scope of this Document: Opportunities, Problems, and Challenges 

crossing times. There is a large regional bicycle 

riding population that commutes and engages in 

recreational riding. Up to 25% of visitors may 

not be able to walk long distances or may become exhausted from walking between memorials. There are few amenities for pedestrians 

walking to the National Mall. 

The addition of public transit, including the 

Metro stop in front of the Smithsonian Castle, 

and increased nighttime visitation are important 

changes that were not anticipated by the original 

planners. Once visitors are on the National Mall, 

public transit access is limited. Tourmobile 

provides hop-on/-off service to attractions on 

the National Mall for $27 per day. The Smithsonian–National Gallery of Art Circulator 

provides seasonal service on Independence and 

Constitution avenues west to 17th Street. 

Parking is at a premium within and near the 

National Mall, with many more vehicles than 

parking spaces. The National Park Service 

provides approximately 1,000 free on-street 

public parking spaces in and around the Mall. 

About 550 public parking spaces under the 

Smithsonian Institution museums were closed 

between 1983 and 1985 for security reasons. The 

District of Columbia has 200 parking meters on 

north-south cross streets (3rd, 4th and 7th 

streets NW/SW). There are 3,750 on-street 

metered parking spaces with 0.5 mile north and 

south of the National Mall. Drop-off locations 

for visitors with disabilities are not always convenient. 

Public scoping comments have suggested that 

underground parking should be provided on the 

National Mall. Approved plans by the National 

Capital Planning Commission and the D.C. 

government envision a transit-oriented future 

for central Washington to address congestion 

and insufficient parking. Up to a third of visitors 

to the National Mall may arrive by tour bus. 

The National Park Service has prepared an 

Environmental Assessment and Visitor Transportation Study (NPS 2006c) to continue providing interpretive visitor transportation service 

that would provide access to museums and other 

visitor destinations on or near the National Mall 

and Pennsylvania Avenue. The system would 

provide more frequent service to destinations, 

improved connections to public transit, and 

links to public transportation. The preferred 

alternative in the study would be common to all 

alternatives and has been described under 

cumulative impacts in the “Environmental 

Consequences” portion of this document. 

Visitor Education, Interpretation, and 

Enjoyment 

The National Mall within a Complex Urban 

Framework 

Issue — To what extent can this national symbolic landscape function efficiently and be compatible with desired experiences of national and 

international visitors while meeting the needs of 

federal and city governmental agencies, local 

residents, and the local workforce? 

Background — The National Mall is a pilgrimage site for many people, precisely because it is 

located at the core of our national capital. It 

symbolizes the openness and diversity of a 

democratic society, and its design captures the 

country’s core values and ideals. When it was 

planned, the National Mall was at the edge of 

the downtown area, now it is the heart of the city 

and its role in the city has evolved. The concentration of visitor destinations within the core 

area and ongoing numerous large-scale gatherings bring vitality to the urban environment, but 

also complicate maintenance tasks. Landscape 

conditions are not maintained to the highest 

standards. Streets accommodate heavy commuter traffic, and a large number of bicyclists 

use the same walkways as slower pedestrians. To 

orient people to the city, the Smithsonian makes 

Tourmobile brochures available at the Smithsonian Castle visitor center, and the NPS Mall 

kiosk by the Metro entrance is supplied with a 

Smithsonian-designed Mall map on tear-off 

pads. 

Interpretation / Education 

Issue — What kinds of opportunities or improvements in interpretation and education 

should be made so that park visitors and all 

Americans can be inspired by the National Mall, 

as well as understand and enjoy it, and develop a 

personal stewardship ethic toward supporting 

its preservation? 

24
Scope of this Document: Opportunities, Problems, and Challenges 

Background — Visitors come to the National 

Mall to experience and learn more about our 

national capital and the wealth of educational, 

cultural, civic, and recreational opportunities 

that it offers, from the many NPS-managed 

monuments and memorials on the National 

Mall, to the museums of the National Gallery of 

Art and the Smithsonian Institution, along with 

the National Archives, the U.S. Capitol, the 

Library of Congress, the U.S. Botanic Garden, 

the Supreme Court, the Bureau of Engraving and 

Printing, and the U.S. Holocaust Memorial 

Museum. 

Memorials and park areas provide numerous 

opportunities to learn about commemorative 

sites, unique features, activities or uses such as 

demonstrations, and site history. With many 

international tourists, special efforts are made to 

communicate with non-English speaking visitors. Educational and interpretive opportunities 

are affected by the numerous activities that occur within the boundaries of the National Mall, 

from First Amendment demonstrations to largescale annual celebrations. Space and time constraints also limit interpretive contacts. 

Enjoyment 

Issue — To what extent can additional opportunities be offered for visitors to enjoy themselves on the National Mall, while respecting the 

historic design and significance of the area? 

Background — Inspiration, welcome, and 

patriotism are components of an enjoyable visit 

to the National Mall. Visits may also include 

programs, performances, demonstrations, 

sightseeing, and taking pleasure in eating, 

recreation, or other activities within the context 

of a nationally symbolic landscape. 

FIGURE 5: RECREATION ON THE NATIONAL MALL

Portions of the National Mall are regularly used by local 

residents for informal recreation. 

Recreational Use 

Issue — To what extent can recreational uses of 

the National Mall be achieved in combination 

with public gatherings and visitation to monuments, memorials, and museums? 

Background — The National Mall has historically been the location for numerous local recreational activities. Passive recreation, such as 

picnicking, strolling, or sunbathing, occurs simultaneously with informal or organized activities, such as pickup games and league sports 

(softball, baseball, football, and soccer). The 

majority of active recreation occurs on open turf 

areas, with groups supplying their own equipment, such as goals and bases. The only recreational facilities provided are the paddleboats on 

the Tidal Basin, seasonal ice skating facilities, 

and a few locations with backstops or goal posts. 

Skateboarding is prohibited since it damages 

memorials, curbing, steps, and walls. Swimming 

and wading in memorial fountains are also 

prohibited. 

Differing goals may result in safety concerns for 

various types of users. Out-of-town visitors typically want opportunities for passive recreation 

and sightseeing, along with access to monuments, memorials, and cultural destinations. 

Local residents, however, may desire consistent 

access to public open space that is suitable for 

active recreation. Large-scale events in particular may interfere with either or both of these 

uses. 

Visitor Amenities 

Issue — What visitor amenities and services are 

appropriate? How should the architectural 

character be unified? 

Background — The National Park Service provides visitor amenities such as restrooms, bookstores, and concession and food service facilities. Past planning proposed a wider variety of 

restaurants and food service. 

25 
Scope of this Document: Opportunities, Problems, and Challenges 

The variety of architectural styles in visitor facilities within the National Mall does not contribute to a unified identity to make them, as well 

as the NPS presence, readily apparent. Some 

facilities are outdated and difficult to maintain. 

Restrooms are insufficient for demand and are 

not located near food service outlets. Park furniture is not coordinated, and seating is insufficient at some times and is not focused on views. 

Shaded seating is highly desirable in the summer 

as is group seating. Shelter is desirable in case of 

inclement or hot weather. 

The use of multiple types of paving throughout 

the National Mall does not contribute to a sense 

of place or unified character. Loose paving 

material, such as gravel, migrates onto paved 

walks and into grass. Gravel is also slippery to 

walk on, dust has resulted in complaints, and it 

makes access difficult for people with disabilities. Existing paving materials may not meet the 

needs of joggers and bicyclists. 

The night sky in Washington, D.C., is dominated 

by five symbolic icons that focus how people see 

the city — the U.S. Capitol, the White House, the 

Washington Monument, the Lincoln Memorial, 

and the Thomas Jefferson Memorial. Other 

public and private buildings, memorials or 

public art, streets and walks, and park areas are 

lit to varying degrees, with the potential for 

conflict. There is no written and approved 

lighting plan to protect the city’s nighttime 

character and provide guidance. 

Food service is offered at refreshment stands 

and mobile carts, and retail items are available at 

some locations. Public comments indicate that 

additional commercial visitor services are desired, including recreational opportunities, such 

as kayaks, rowboats, model boats, and lawn 

chairs. The alternatives indicate general locations for these types of opportunities. The park 

must assess the economic feasibility, necessity, 

and appropriateness of any service changes. 

The park must assess the economic feasibility, 

necessity, and appropriateness of additional 

commercial services, plus determine the service 

types and levels that would be offered. Commercial service would be offered using available 

authorities. Currently authorized visitor services 

would be continued. 

Health, Public Safety, and Security 

Issue — What health and safety improvements 

are needed? How do safe, secure visits correlate 

with the openness that is characteristic of a 

democracy? 

Background — The National Mall attracts immense numbers of visitors who need and expect 

adequate safety, public notification, protection 

from crime, and the ability to get help if they 

have health emergencies. 

The National Capital Planning Commission and 

consultants have been involved for many years in 

reviewing the planning, design, and implementation of security measures throughout the District, 

even before the events of September 11, 2001. 

Constructed and proposed interim and permanent measures to protect important national 

symbols have been criticized for altering the 

character, openness, and democratic symbolism 

of the National Mall, and also for not addressing 

the area comprehensively. 

NPS perimeter security projects have been completed or are underway for the Washington 

Monument, the Lincoln Memorial, and the 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial. Museums lining 

the Mall also have perimeter security projects 

underway or completed. 

Highly used areas with many different activities 

can result in safety concerns or use conflicts. 

Examples are bicycle use on sidewalks and 

softball games near areas where people are 

picnicking or walking. Paving materials make 

some areas difficult to access for visitors with 

disabilities, and some furniture does not meet 

accessibility guidelines for disabled individuals. 

Pedestrian waiting areas at some intersections 

are too small. Street crossing times may be too 

short for many visitors, and jaywalking is 

common in some areas. Some pedestrian walks 

are not lit at night. No lighting and low lighting 

can contribute to occurrences of criminal 

activity. 

Hot, humid weather and air pollution contribute 

to visitor discomfort and health issues for the 

public as well as staff. Weather-related warnings 

are issued as needed both for the public and 

staff. Drinking fountains need frequent repairs, 

and surfaces and basins may not be sanitary. 

26
Scope of this Document: Opportunities, Problems, and Challenges 

Plastic water bottles generate a large amount of 

trash, and recycling is not universal.

The General Services Administration operates 

an aging steam tunnel / vent system that runs 

under the National Mall. The system needs 

extensive repairs. It contributes to excess moisture inside the Washington Monument and can 

adversely affects nearby trees and vegetation. 

The vents attract use by homeless people during 

cold weather. Steam leaks may result in burns. 

Shrub beds and other densely planted areas are 

used for storage and sleeping by the city’s homeless population. Federal regulations prohibit 

camping on the National Mall. Restrooms and 

fountains may be misused for personal hygiene. 

Nighttime visitation has become more common. 

Public comments have indicated the need for 

better lighting in some areas. 

Park Operations 

Maintenance and Operational Challenges 

Issue — What types of facilities, furnishings, or 

organizational practices would make park 

maintenance operations more efficient? 

Background — There is a substantial amount of 

deferred maintenance on the National Mall, 

totaling approximately $508 million. Park staff 

may not be able to keep up with planned and 

scheduled maintenance due to multiple, often 

conflicting and immediate demands. There are 

over 20,000 light fixtures and various site furnishings, such as bollards, post-and-chain 

fences, and signs. Park standards are outdated 

and limited to grounds maintenance; consequently, service improvement opportunities are 

neglected. 

Adequate access for vehicles was never designed, affecting deliveries, trash removal, and 

grounds maintenance. As a result, vehicles drive 

over curbs and damage resources, as well as 

make operations less efficient. Some operations, 

such as trash removal, can be mechanized to 

improve efficiencies. There are nearly 900 trash 

containers, and 3–4 tons of trash are removed 

daily and up to 32 tons during special events, 

such as the Fourth of July. Even though eating 

and drinking are prohibited at memorials, spills, 

stains, and gum removal may require special 

maintenance techniques. 

Site furnishings such as signs, bicycle racks, or 

seating at specific memorials have been custom 

designed, or they may be contributing elements 

of historic landscapes and listed on the National 

Register of Historic Places. Various non-standardized furnishings (such as irrigation systems, 

mechanical systems for water features, and light 

fixtures and bulbs) contribute to maintenance 

challenges because of the need to stock an 

assortment of replacement parts and for staff to 

be familiar with multiple maintenance practices. 

Communication capabilities for park operations, 

events, public information/education, emergencies, or media use are inefficient or lacking. 

Specific Area Issues and 

Background 

The Mall 

• Union Square (1st to 3rd Streets) — The 

Ulysses S. Grant Memorial needs to be 

repaired and restored, and the Capitol 

Reflecting Pool needs to be rehabilitated. 

The Capitol backdrop makes this a popular 

venue for demonstrations and events, but 

there are no amenities or utilities to meet 

the needs of visitors or demonstrations and 

special events. The large pool is an obstacle 

to convenient pedestrian circulation 

between the Capitol and the National Mall. 

Multiple levels or grade changes inhibit 

universal access and include narrow walks 

that limit pedestrian circulation and park 

FIGURE 6: UNION SQUARE 

Grade level changes at Union Square and deteriorated paving 

make access difficult for visitors in wheelchairs. 

27 
Scope of this Document: Opportunities, Problems, and Challenges 

operations. The reflecting pool contains 2.5 

million gallons of potable water, but no circulation system, so the water becomes stagnant every summer. The pool is drained 

and cleaned twice a year. The Architect of 

the Capitol is responsible for roads surrounding Union Square, including permit 

parking.

• The Mall (3rd to 14th Streets) — The Mall is 

the designed historic landscape that articulates the vision of the McMillan plan in 

1901 and renowned landscape architect 

Frederick Law Olmsted Jr. in the 1930s. 

The rows of American elm trees define the 

view between the Capitol and the Washington Monument and are internationally recognized. The shade provided by the mature 

elms is much appreciated by visitors during 

the hot, humid summer. Access to the Mall 

for million of visitors is by way of the 

Smithsonian Metro station, the only one 

within the National Mall. In addition to 

hosting millions of sightseers, the Mall is 

heavily used for demonstrations and special 

events. Resulting soil compaction affects 

the designed historic landscape and the 

health of trees and turf, as well as the urban 

ecosystem. Poor water infiltration may contribute to urban flooding. The Mall lacks 

restrooms; while restrooms are available in 

adjacent museum buildings (see appendix 

D), these buildings have prescribed hours 

of operation, and visitors need to go 

through a security check to use them. 

Gravel-paved walkways make access difficult for some visitors, and gravel migrates 

onto lawns. The former Adams and Washington drives, which ran parallel to 

Jefferson and Madison drives, were closed 

to traffic in 1975 and replaced with wide 

graveled walkways over asphalt that run 

along the inner edges of the rows of American elms. 

FIGURE 7: THE SMITHSONIAN METRO STATION

The Smithsonian Metro stop has minimal facilities for visitors. 

There is an opportunity to improve information for visitors 

getting off the Metro at the Smithsonian stop. 

FIGURE 8: WASHINGTON MONUMENT TEMPORARY 

FOOD/RETAIL TENT 

The temporary refreshment and retail tent for the Washington 

Monument is at the future site of the National Museum of 

African American History and Culture. 

The Washington Monument and Grounds 

• Celebrations, demonstrations, special 

events, and recreational activities take place 

on the monument’s grounds. Food and 

retail in a temporary tent must be relocated 

to allow for construction of the National 

Museum of African American History and 

Culture on the northeast corner of the 

grounds. Survey Lodge, the main visitor 

contact station, is off the main circulation 

routes and not easy to identify. Circular 

28
Scope of this Document: Opportunities, Problems, and Challenges 

restrooms near a tour bus drop off are outdated and inadequate for demand. The 

north grounds are highly used for demonstrations, special events, celebrations, civic 

activities, and recreation, but no infrastructure is provided. The south grounds (south 

of Independence Avenue), which are cut off 

by park drives and roadways from both the 

monument and the Tidal Basin, provide 

recreation fields. 

FIGURE 9: CONSTITUTION GARDENS LAKE

Constitution Gardens Lake has water quality problems from a 

lack of adequate water recirculation. The original 1970s plan 

included a restaurant at the east end of the lake. 

West Potomac Park (North of 

Independence Avenue) 

• World War II Memorial — No large-scale 

changes are recommended other than 

increased education at the World War II 

Memorial. 

• Constitution Gardens — The gardens were 

designed as a resting area for people visiting 

the memorials. Poor quality soils have 

stunted tree growth, and the 7-acre concrete-lined shallow lake, which contains 5.5 

million gallons of potable water but no circulation system, resulting in water quality 

problems. Asphalt walks embedded with 

small stones are deteriorating and are difficult to maintain. 

 The historic lockkeeper’s house, previously 

moved to the corner of 17th Street and 

Constitution Avenue NW, is not being used 

and requires some preservation. Its location 

near the intersection affects pedestrian 

visibility and represents a possible threat to 

its preservation. 

• Vietnam Veterans Memorial — No opportunities for contemplation are provided 

near the memorial. 

• Lincoln Memorial and Grounds — Multiple 

tour bus arrivals cause peak-season crowding, and restrooms are inadequate and frequently overwhelmed by demand. Recently 

opened north and south concession / refreshment stands provide visitor services 

but no restrooms. Concentric rows of elm 

trees affect where facilities can be placed. 

The exhibit area and bookstore are 

outdated. 

 Events on the lower approachway require 

organizers to install temporary utilities and 

equipment. Issues related to the reflecting 

pool, approachway, and elm walkways are 

being addressed under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. 

 The Watergate area is on the northwest 

edge of the National Mall, and it has been 

identified by the National Capital Planning 

Commission as a location for future national memorials. This area is discussed in 

the Monumental Core Framework Plan: 

Connecting New Destinations with the National Mall (NCPC 2009). This primary vehicular entrance to the city contains historic features, volleyball courts, and ballfields. There are proposals by other agencies to rebuild and simplify the road system 

and celebrate the Constitution Avenue 

belvedere. 

• Korean War Veterans Memorial — Narrow 

entry walks are frequently congested. Visitor walking patterns have changed, and 

there is no access from the east. 

• D.C. War Memorial — This small events 

venue requires major preservation work, 

which has been funded by the American 

Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. 

Use of the area as a performance venue 

could be enhanced. 

• Ash Woods — Utilitarian wood fencing, 

truck and horse trailer parking, and the mobile office at the U.S. Park Police mounted 

patrol facilities are not in keeping with the 

historic character of the National Mall. The 

access road has become a popular pedes29 
Scope of this Document: Opportunities, Problems, and Challenges 

trian route. The circular restrooms on Ash 

Road are outdated and hard to maintain; 

this facility is near the newer restrooms at 

the World War II Memorial. 

West Potomac Park (South of 

Independence Avenue) 

• Tidal Basin Area — Local streets and parking bisect recreation areas. Commuter and 

recreational bicyclists share narrow sidewalks with much slower pedestrians. 

 The Tidal Basin was designed to help flush 

the Washington Channel to support navigation. Over the last 100 years the flushing 

capability has been reduced and the basin 

has silted in. The Tidal Basin gates were replaced in 2007 to help restore the flushing 

function to the basin, but additional studies 

and improvements are needed. 

 The deteriorating Tidal Basin walls are 

overtopped in some areas by high tides, 

spilling onto walkways and resulting in 

social trails as visitors try to avoid the water. 

 Walkways are too narrow for current levels 

of use, so the adjacent cherry tree root systems are trampled by visitors. Paddleboats 

are the only boating choice for recreation, 

seasonal refreshment and recreation equipment rental facilities are outdated, and no 

restrooms are available with the exception 

of those located at the Jefferson Memorial 

and the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial. 

• Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial — 

Visitors trample some planting areas to take 

photos or shortcuts. 

FIGURE 10: TIDAL BASIN WALKWAY

The walkway around the Tidal Basin is frequently flooded by 

high water. 

• West Potomac Park Riverfront — Dry-laid 

stone river walls are deteriorating and are 

overtopped by tidewater and debris. 

• Thomas Jefferson Memorial — The plaza 

edge is uneven due to the shifting of the 

Tidal Basin seawalls in front of the memorial, which is being addressed through the 

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 

of 2009. Pedestrian access near the tour bus 

drop-off area has been controlled to prevent unwanted visitor paths to the Tidal 

Basin and the memorial. Walks near the 

Tidal Basin have been relocated so that they 

are not inundated daily by tides. 

FIGURE 11: WEST POTOMAC PARK RIVERFRONT

Dry-laid stone riverwalls have deteriorated, and riprap is used is 

some areas to control erosion. 

FIGURE 12: NORTH PLAZA OF THE THOMAS JEFFERSON 

MEMORIAL

Temporary paving repairs have been made on the north plaza 

to correct problems caused by the settling seawalls. Permanent 

repairs have been funded through the American Recovery and 

Reinvestment Act of 2009. 

30
Scope of this Document: Environmental Impact Topics 

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT TOPICS

This management plan develops a vision, or a 

shared understanding between NPS managers 

and the public, about the kinds of resource 

conditions, visitor experiences, and facilities that 

would best fulfill the purposes of the National 

Mall. Part of this process is the analysis of environmental impacts. This document identifies the 

types of impacts that would occur and where. 

Impact topics were identified on the basis of 

federal laws, regulations, and executive orders; 

NPS Management Policies 2006; and NPS knowledge of limited or easily affected resources, as 

well as public input. A brief rationale for the 

selection of each impact topic is given below. 

Impact Topics Analyzed in Detail 

Cultural Resources 

Impact topics were evaluated for archeological 

resources, historic properties, cultural landscapes, ethnographic resources, Indian Trust 

resources, and museum collections. It was determined that historic properties (buildings, sites, 

structures, objects, districts) and cultural landscapes could be affected by the implementation 

of the alternatives considered in this document, 

and they are the focus of the discussion of 

cultural resource impacts. 

• Historic properties consist of several types 

— memorials, buildings, sites, structures, 

objects (such as statues), and districts. 

• Cultural landscapes are defined areas associated with significant events, persons, 

design styles, or ways of life (such as a park 

or an estate). 

Only properties listed on, or eligible for listing 

on, the National Register of Historic Places are 

considered cultural resources for the purposes 

of this plan. 

It was determined that archeological resources, 

ethnographic resources, Indian Trust resources, 

and museum collections would be dismissed 

from further analysis, as explained below. 

Natural Resources 

Impacts on soils, water resources (including 

water quality and quantity, floodplains and 

stormwater, and use of potable water), vegetation, and fish and wildlife are analyzed in detail. 

Demonstrations, Special Events, and 

National Celebrations 

Impacts on First Amendment demonstrations, 

and on celebrations and events are analyzed. 

The analysis also considers opportunities to 

participate in demonstrations and events, 

including knowledge about what is happening, 

where, and how to participate. The capacities of 

various venues under each alternative are 

presented. 

Access and Circulation 

The analysis looks at (1) visitor access and circulation, including vehicle access, parking, and 

transit access (Metro system as well as taxis); (2) 

the pedestrian environment , including pedestrian experiences on the National Mall and connections to adjacent areas; (3) bicycle use; and 

(4) motorized uses and the road system. 

Visitor Use and Experience 

Impacts are analyzed on a quality visitor experience, which is defined as one that would allow 

visitors (1) to understand and be able to contemplate core American values, government, and 

democracy as symbolized by the National Mall’s 

history and memorials, as well as the adjacent 

cultural institutions; (2) to enjoy a welcoming 

experience and the beauty of the National Mall, 

both during the day and at night; and (3) to make 

emotional or intellectual connections to the 

National Mall and what it represents. The impacts of opportunities for information and 

education; for enjoyment, entertainment, and 

informal recreation; for active recreation are 

evaluated, along with the impacts of visitor 

facilities and amenities on the visitor experience. 

Finally impacts on public health and safety and 

user carrying capacities are analyzed. 

Socioeconomic Environment 

The analysis considers the impacts of increased 

visitation; impacts on commercial business 

opportunities, including commercial facilities 

for recreation and food service, and the type and 

dispersal of facilities; the impacts of construction opportunities on the local and regional 

31 
Scope of this Document: Environmental Impact Topics 

economy, and visitor costs if free parking is 

converted to paid parking. 

Park Operations 

Impacts on park conditions are evaluated in 

terms of deferred maintenance projects, infrastructure, permitted activities, and staffing. The 

aspect of efficient and safe operations looks at 

permit processes for special events, the maintainability of mechanical systems, and best practices for operations that are used for maintaining 

high-use urban parks. Sustainability is considered in terms of facility design, recycling, water 

use, renewable energy, and circulation (vehicle 

trips and congestion). 

Impact Topics Dismissed from 

Further Consideration 

The following impact topics were considered, 

but further analysis showed that there would be 

no impacts or that the impacts would be negligible to minor. 

Cultural Resources 

Archeological Resources 

Archeological resources — the physical evidence 

of past human activity — can represent both prehistoric and historic occupations. There is little 

potential for prehistoric sites to occur in much 

of the National Mall and Memorial Parks due to 

the fact that much of the area was created by the 

filling of Potomac River wetlands. In other areas 

any prehistoric resources would be so deeply 

buried as to be effectively inaccessible. There 

may, however, be areas where prehistoric 

archeological sites remain intact, although 

minimal archeological investigations have been 

undertaken. 

The infill that created much of the National Mall 

and Memorial Parks may contain historic debris 

of archeological interest. Historic archeological 

features likely remain at each of the monument 

and memorial sites. Examples might be the foundations of buildings that once existed on the 

Mall, road traces, the remains of railroad structures and tracks, remnants of old landscape 

features, and canal structures. 

While no complete survey or inventory of archeological resources on the National Mall has 

been attempted in accordance with section 110 

of the National Historic Preservation Act of 

1966, as amended, NPS policies and procedures 

require a professional archeologist to evaluate 

the possibility of such resources occurring before any ground disturbance. Based on previous 

archeological work, further testing or excavation 

may or may not be necessary before ground 

disturbance. As an additional precaution to 

avoid inadvertent destruction of archeological 

resources and to expedite project planning, the 

National Park Service will coordinate with the 

D.C. Historic Preservation Office to more thoroughly identify areas where archeological monitoring and testing may be appropriate. Should 

unexpected archeological resources be discovered during the course of proposed work, NPS 

policy requires that all work be halted until a 

professional archeological evaluation of the find 

can be made and a determination of its 

significance made. 

The NPS regional archeologist of the National 

Capital Region will determine the efficacy of a 

complete archeological resource survey of the 

National Mall in accordance with the National 

historic Preservation Act and NPS policy. Until 

then, or in the absence of a complete archeological inventory, these procedures should provide 

a level of protection for any archeological 

resources that remain. 

Because the National Park Service is required by 

law and policy to archeologically evaluate any 

site proposed for development, and because this 

plan does not entail actions that would affect 

specific known archeological resources, this 

topic has been dismissed from further 

consideration. 

Ethnographic Resources 

The NPS Management Policies 2006 define park 

ethnographic resources as “the cultural and 

natural features of a park that are of traditional 

significance to traditionally associated peoples” 

(NPS 2006e). Traditionally associated peoples 

may include contemporary park neighbors as 

well as ethnic or occupational communities that 

have been associated with what is now a park for 

two or more generations (40 years), whose inter32
Scope of this Document: Environmental Impact Topics 

ests in the park’s resources began before the 

park’s establishment and whose cultural heritage 

and traditional way of life are involved. 

Traditionally associated peoples generally differ 

as a group from other park visitors in that they 

typically assign significance to ethnographic 

resources — places closely linked with their own 

sense of purpose, existence as a community, and 

development as ethnically distinctive peoples. 

These places may be in urban or rural parks and 

support ceremonial activities or represent birthplaces of significant individuals, group origin 

sites, migration routes, or harvesting or collecting places. Although these places have historic 

attributes that are of great importance to the 

group, they may not necessarily have a direct 

association with the reason the park was established or be appropriate as a topic of general 

public interest. Some ethnographic resources 

might also be traditional cultural properties. A 

traditional cultural property is one that is eligible 

for inclusion in the National Register of Historic 

Places because of its association with cultural 

practices or beliefs of a living community that 

are (1) rooted in that community’s history, and 

(2) important in maintaining the continuing 

cultural identity of the community (NPS 2006e). 

No ethnographic overview and assessment study 

has been done for the National Mall to identify 

traditionally associated peoples; however, many 

park resources have significance to local Washingtonians, veterans, and individuals or groups 

who associate with the themes of the national 

memorials. An ethnographic overview and 

assessment could lead to a review of existing 

National Register of Historic Places nominations to determine the need for updating to 

include ethnographic data for traditional 

cultural property status. Some resources have 

special associations for specific groups of 

people. Veterans of conflicts may associate with 

the World War II, Korean War Veterans, Vietnam Veterans Memorial, or D.C. War Memorial. 

Asians may associate with the flowering cherry 

trees along the Tidal Basin, the Japanese lantern, 

and the pagoda. The Lincoln Memorial has 

associations for African Americans owing to 

President Abraham Lincoln’s emancipation of 

slaves, or events that occurred on its steps, such 

as Marian Anderson’s 1939 concert and Martin 

Luther King Jr.’s 1963 “I Have a Dream” speech. 

No American Indian tribes or sacred sites 

associated with the National Mall have been 

identified. 

Even though an ethnographic overview and 

assessment have not been completed, preliminary analysis indicates that this plan will not 

affect those features that have the potential to be 

determined ethnographic resources. This plan 

does not propose any actions that would limit 

access to any of the monuments, memorials, or 

other features, nor change their cultural meaning to any group. All visitors will continue to 

have access and use the monuments and memorials as they do now. Permits for events or 

ceremonies will continue to be issued or denied 

under current rules and regulations. As a result, 

this topic has been dismissed from further 

discussion. 

NPS Museum Collections 

The museum collections of the National Mall 

and Memorial Parks contain both natural and 

cultural objects. Collections of museum items 

are preserved either onsite or at the National 

Capital Region Museum Resource Center. 

The Lincoln Memorial collection is made up of 

approximately 60 objects, only a few of which 

are actually on exhibit in the museum area, with 

the rest at the Museum Resource Center. The 

majority of these objects are related to the 

construction of the memorial, the installation of 

the Daniel Chester French statue of Abraham 

Lincoln or the murals painted by Jules Guerin, 

objects related to individuals who participated in 

the construction of the memorial, statue, or 

murals (ca. 1911–22), and objects related to 

architect Henry Bacon’s involvement in the 

design and execution of the memorial. 

The collection associated with the Washington 

Monument is made up of objects related to (1) 

the planning, design, and construction of the 

monument, including involvement by the Washington Monument Society, the Army Corps of 

Engineer, and architect Robert Mills, (2) individuals who participated in the construction, 

and (3) the design, production, and installation 

of the 191 memorial stones that are set in the 

interior walls of the monument. All of these 

objects are housed at Museum Resource Center. 

33 
Scope of this Document: Environmental Impact Topics 

One object from the small Thomas Jefferson 

Memorial collection is on display at the memorial; the rest of this collection is housed at 

Museum Resource Center. 

The Vietnam Veterans Memorial collection is 

international in scope and is comprised of more 

than 100,000 objects that have been left at the 

memorial wall. The collection includes objects 

directly related to (1) military activities (dog tags, 

patches, uniforms and military clothing, combat 

boots, C rations, discharge papers, photographs, 

and medals); (2) framed and unframed materials 

(letters, poems, birth announcements, birthday 

cards, personal dedications, newspaper obituaries, books, Bibles, family photographs, and 

Vietnam snapshots); and (3) patriotic-to-protest 

objects (artificial flowers and wreaths, flags, 

missing-in-action and prisoner-of-war bracelets, 

clothing, canes, high school diplomas, records 

and tapes, teddy bears, liquor bottles, beer cans, 

and cigarette lighters). The collection also includes objects related to designer Maya Ying 

Lin’s involvement in the design and construction 

of the monument, along with objects related to 

the Joel Meisner Foundry’s involvement in the 

design, construction, and installation of the 

Three Servicemen statue. The proposed new 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial Center will exhibit 

many of the items in the collection, but the 

majority will remain at the Museum Resource 

Center. 

Under all alternatives nearly all NPS museum 

objects will continue to be stored offsite at the 

Museum Resource Center. A small number of 

selected museum objects will be exhibited in 

buildings outside the floodplain. In addition, 

museum objects will continue to be acquired, 

accessioned and cataloged, preserved, protected, and made available for access and use 

according to NPS standards and guidelines (NPS 

2000b). Therefore, museum objects would not 

be affected under any alternative, and this topic 

has been dismissed from further consideration. 

Indian Trust Resources 

The Department of the Interior is responsible 

for protecting Indian trust resources, including 

tribal lands, assets, resources, and treaty rights, 

that are held in trust by the Secretary of the 

Interior for the benefit of American Indians due 

solely to their status as American Indians. There 

are no Indian trust resources on the National 

Mall. Therefore, this topic was dismissed from 

further impact analysis. 

Natural Resources 

Geology, Paleontology, and Topography 

The District of Columbia lies on the line between the Atlantic Coastal Plain physiographic 

province on the southeast and the Piedmont 

province on the northwest. This line roughly 

follows Rock Creek Park. The National Mall lies 

in the Atlantic Coastal Plain. 

The Atlantic Coastal Plain province borders the 

Atlantic Ocean and consists of gravel, sand, silt, 

clay, and marl. Deposition of these sediments 

began 100 million years ago and continues to the 

present time. The oldest rocks in the Coastal 

Plain are poorly consolidated (i.e., easily 

crumbled) gravel, sand, silt, and clay derived 

from the weathering of rocks to the north and 

west that were carried to the Coastal Plain by 

south-flowing rivers. Younger rocks consist of 

sands and clays containing the minerals glauconite and mica, which were deposited in estuaries 

and on the Continental Shelf at a time when 

water covered the present Coastal Plain to 

depths of as much as 200 feet (USGS 1999). 

The Piedmont Plateau province lies west of the 

Coastal Plain. Piedmont rocks in and near 

Washington, D.C., are crystalline metamorphic 

rocks that are quite hard and resist weathering; 

they contain veins of quartz and pegmatite, and 

in many places have been intruded by igneous 

rock. These crystalline rocks can be seen most 

easily in valleys where the soil cover has been 

stripped away by erosion. Most of the crystalline 

rocks on the uplands were deposited about 550–

600 million years ago. Over the ages, they have 

weathered to saprolite, a porous, spongy, redbrown clay-rich material, as much as 200 feet 

thick (USGS 1999). 

From a surface geology standpoint, most of the 

study area is identified as disturbed ground and 

artificial fill. The southern part of the National 

Mall is low level Pleistocene-era fluvial and estuarine deposits and was originally swampland. 

It was reclaimed in the late 1800s by fill with 

material dredged from farther down the river. 

34
Scope of this Document: Environmental Impact Topics 

The National Mall includes numerous structures 

built from fossil-bearing rock, such as sandstone, limestone, and marble (metamorphosed 

limestone) from quarries throughout the country. For example, Indiana limestone (Mississippian-age Salem limestone quarried near Bedford, Indiana) is highly fossiliferous. Marine 

invertebrate fossils are readily visible in the 

Indiana limestone used in many structures, such 

as the Capitol Reflecting Pool. The Lincoln Memorial and other NPS-managed structures also 

contain fossils in their building stone (NPS 

2004c). 

Central Washington and the National Mall and 

Memorial Parks are on a series of terraces that 

increase in elevation from the Potomac River. 

The majority of this area reflects the pressures of 

urban density and growth. The original landform has been highly manipulated to create 

appropriate settings for government buildings 

and memorials. 

While the action alternatives include construction and landscape management actions, they 

would occur in previously disturbed areas. 

Because none of the alternatives presented in 

this document include any actions of the scale or 

type that would affect geologic formation, paleontology, or general topography of the area, 

these topics are dismissed from further analysis. 

Air Quality 

The planning area is within the National Capital 

Interstate Air Quality Control Region. While the 

District of Columbia region has been designated 

by the Environmental Protect Agency as a “serious non-attainment area” for fine particulate 

matter, it meets the national ambient air quality 

standards for other air pollutants. 

The General Conformity Rule of the Clean Air 

Act Amendment of 1990 requires any federal 

agency responsible for an action in a nonattainment area to determine that the action is 

either exempt from the conformity rule requirements or that the action conforms to the 

applicable state implementation plan. The 

conformity assessment process is intended to 

ensure that federal agency actions (1) will not 

cause or contribute to new violations of the 

national ambient air quality standards; (2) will 

not increase the frequency or severity of any 

existing violations of national ambient air quality 

standards; and (3) will not delay the timely 

attainment of ambient air quality standards. An 

agency may establish that the projected emission 

rates would be less than specified emission rate 

thresholds, known as de minimis thresholds. If 

these conditions are met, conformity of a project 

is presumed. 

The problem of urban pollution and acid precipitation (often called acid rain) is of increasing 

concern in the Washington metropolitan area. 

Pure, distilled water has a neutral pH of 7. Normal, unpolluted rain is slightly acid, with a pH of 

5.6, because the carbon dioxide in air combines 

with water to form small amounts of a weak acid 

called carbonic acid. Rainfall in the Washington 

area has an average pH of 4.2 to 4.4, more than 

10 times as acidic as unpolluted rain (USGS 

2007). The main source of pollution in the greater Washington region is exhaust from automobiles, trucks, and other forms of transportation. 

Vehicle exhaust contains nitrogen oxides and 

sulfur dioxide, which combine with water to 

form strong acids. 

The stones that form many of the buildings and 

monuments in Washington are limestone and 

marble, which are vulnerable to acid precipitation because they are predominantly made of the 

mineral calcite (calcium carbonate), which 

dissolves easily in acid. 

Should any of the action alternatives be selected, 

local air quality may be temporarily affected by 

construction-related activities. The operation of 

construction equipment would result in increased vehicle emissions in a localized area. 

Volatile organic compounds, nitrogen compounds, carbon monoxide, and sulfur dioxide 

emissions would be generated but would disperse fairly quickly from the construction area. 

This degradation would last only as long as construction activities occurred and would most 

likely have a negligible effect on regional pollutant levels. Fugitive dust from construction 

could intermittently increase airborne particulate concentrations in the area near the project 

site, but standard mitigating measures, such as 

wetting the disturbed soil, would be used to 

reduce potential adverse effects to a negligible 

level. One or more of the alternatives could 

result in a slight increase in visitation, with a 

35 
Scope of this Document: Environmental Impact Topics 

corresponding increase in vehicle emissions. 

The adverse impacts of this would be reduced as 

national vehicle emission and fuel-economy 

standards are revised. 

As mentioned above, the single main source of 

pollution in the greater District of Columbia 

metropolitan area is vehicle exhaust. The 

percentage of total vehicles in the metropolitan 

area that are directly related to visiting the 

National Mall is quite small during most of the 

year (non-summer months). 

Alternative B proposes adding underground 

vehicle parking garages. An increase in vehicles 

and their emissions in the core of the planning 

area would have adverse impacts on air quality. 

However, even if 1,000 parking spaces were 

added, this would be less than a 1% increase in 

total spaces in the vicinity of the Mall (currently 

around 400,000). With mitigating factors such as 

more efficient vehicle standards, this impact is 

expected to be minor. 

One of the goals of the preferred alternative and 

alternative C is to reduce the park’s current output of greenhouse gases by 18% by 2012, which 

would be a long-term beneficial effect. 

These actions would result in short- and longterm, negligible, adverse impacts on local air 

quality. Because no moderate or major impacts 

are anticipated from any of the potential actions 

in this plan, the topic of air quality has been 

dismissed from further analysis. 

Wetlands 

Most of the area now in the southern and western portions of the National Mall was a lowlying swampy wetland in the late 1800s. The 

swamp was later drained and/or filled in to 

create the landscape seen today. Photographs 

and maps from the 1870s through the early 

1900s show the small Babcock Lake near the 

original Tiber Creek, and a carp pond near the 

Washington Monument (Milner Associates 

2003). These were filled in by 1923. 

Currently, wetlands are present in or along the 

Tidal Basin, the Washington Channel, and 

Potomac River. The National Wetlands 

Inventory categorizes the Tidal Basin as a 

lacustrine unvegetated wetland. The National 

Wetlands Inventory also categorizes the 

Constitution Gardens Lake as a freshwater 

pond/palustrine wetland (USFWS 1998). 

Wetland habitat supports terrestrial and aquatic 

invertebrates, fish, waterfowl, reptiles, and 

amphibians. Uncontrolled growth of blue-green 

algae and some filamentous algae can reduce the 

ability of water to support fish. 

Federal and state partners of the Chesapeake 

Bay Program have adopted an interim goal of no 

overall net loss of the drainage basin’s remaining 

wetlands and a long-term goal of increasing the 

quality and quantity of the basin’s wetlands 

resource base. Under the preferred alternative 

and alternative C, naturalized riverbanks would 

be established in some areas along the Potomac 

River frontage where existing river walls have 

deteriorated. These could become small wetland 

strips along the river. Constitution Gardens 

Lake would be maintained as a sustainable water 

body capable of supporting fish. These actions 

would result in long-term, minor, beneficial 

impacts to wetlands. 

Under alternative B Constitution Gardens Lake 

would be reconstructed so that it could be 

drained for use during public events. This would 

result in the loss of an artificial wetland habitat, a 

long-term, negligible, adverse impact. Also 

under alternative B the Capitol Reflecting Pool 

would be removed, but this feature provides 

only a very small habitat need for some waterfowl, so the loss would be negligible. There 

would be no other impacts to wetlands. 

Because there would be no moderate or greater 

impacts, this topic has been dismissed from 

further analysis. 

Special Status Species 

Except for occasional transient individuals, no 

proposed or federally listed endangered or 

threatened species are known to exist within the 

planning area (USFWS letter, Sept. 18, 2007). 

A federally endangered species, the shortnose 

sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum), has recently 

been found in the Potomac River as far north as 

Little Falls (USFWS 2009). This large (up to 3 

feet) native fish occurs mainly in rivers along the 

Atlantic coastline from southeastern Canada to 

36
Scope of this Document: Environmental Impact Topics 

Florida but may venture into saltwater. Shortnose sturgeons reportedly prefer deep pools 

with mixed or hard substrates and vegetated 

bottoms, but individuals may vary in preference 

for various water depths and substrate types. 

They eat mollusks, crustaceans, worms, and 

aquatic insects. 

The current potential for the sturgeon to spawn 

within this area is of major interest because of 

the federally endangered status of the species 

and the federally mandated responsibility of the 

National Park Service to protect and enhance 

endangered species. Principal responsibility for 

the sturgeon rests with the National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration’s Fisheries Service. 

The National Park Service is responsible for 

managing the bed of the Potomac River within 

the District of Columbia where the shortnose 

sturgeon could potentially spawn. 

The shortnose sturgeon was placed on the 

original endangered species list on March 11, 

1967 (32 FR 4001) due to the damming of rivers 

and over-harvesting throughout its range. The 

fish was considered extirpated from the 

Potomac River but, as a result of the Atlantic 

Sturgeon Reward Program established in 1996 

by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the first 

shortnose sturgeon since 1899 was found in the 

river. To date, 10 shortnose sturgeons have been 

documented from the Potomac (Minkkinen, 

pers. comm. 2007). Two females were telemetrytagged, one in 2005 and another in 2006, in an 

effort to study their movements. Study results 

were included in an annual report dated March 

21, 2007. 

It is unlikely that shortnose sturgeon would be 

present in the Tidal Basin because of warm 

water temperatures and their preference for 

using deep channels and a variety of mixed or 

hard (non-mud) foraging substrates. However, 

there is always the possibility that an individual 

could wander into the basin. Therefore, any 

planned modifications to the substrate in the 

basin should follow NEPA compliance procedures and address the possibility of adverse 

impact on this endangered species. While 

Washington, D.C., maintains water control into 

the basin, the National Park Service should 

exercise vigilance for any actions that could 

degrade water quality. 

Under the action alternatives the subsiding Tidal 

Basin seawalls would be rebuilt, and under the 

preferred alternative and alternatives B and C 

the walkways atop the walls would be widened. 

Widening the walkways could require moving 

the basin walls into the basin, resulting in the 

loss of about 5 acres of warm, shallow water 

habitat. However, since the Tidal Basin is artificial, the long-term impacts of this would be 

adverse but negligible. Construction would 

result in short-term, negligible, adverse impacts 

because of habitat disturbance and sedimentation. Since it is unlikely that the shortnose 

sturgeon inhabits the basin, construction-related 

impacts would be unlikely to adversely affect 

this species. Other actions would have no effect 

on listed species or their habitat because they are 

not known to inhabit the planning area. 

Species identified by the D.C. Department of the 

Environment as those in greatest need of conservation are listed in Table 2. 

Bald eagles have been observed using the project 

area. Many black-crowned night herons are seen 

in the park, including Constitution Gardens 

Lake. Scarlet tanagers and wood thrushes have 

been seen in the vicinity of the National Mall. 

Both birds are migratory and have been recorded as breeding in the area (DC 2007). No 

nesting sites for either species are known within 

the study area. 

Under the preferred alternative and alternative 

C portions of the wall along the Potomac River 

would be removed and replaced with native 

materials to create more natural riparian areas. 

This would result in a long-term, negligible, 

beneficial impact for special status species with 

riparian habitat needs, such as the D.C. listed 

black-crowned night heron. 

Implementing the no-action alternative would 

have no effect on special status species. The 

TABLE 2: SPECIES OF GREATEST CONSERVATION NEED,

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

Common Name Scientific Name 

Bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus 

Black-crowned night heron Nictocorax nictocorax 

Scarlet tanager Prianga olivacea 

Wood thrush Hylocichla mustelina 

SOURCE: D.C. Department of the Environment, electronic 

letter, August 27, 2007.

37 
Scope of this Document: Environmental Impact Topics 

action alternatives could affect, but would be 

unlikely to adversely affect, the federally listed 

shortnose sturgeon. They would result in 

negligible beneficial impacts to the D.C. listed 

black-crowned night heron. Because there 

would be no moderate or greater impacts and no 

adverse effects to special status species, this 

topic has been dismissed from further analysis. 

Soundscape Management 

In accordance with NPS Management Policies 

2006 and Director’s Order #47, Sound Preservation and Noise Management, an important part of 

the National Park Service mission is the preservation of natural soundscapes associated with 

national park system units. Natural soundscapes 

exist in the absence of human-caused sound. 

The natural ambient soundscape is the aggregate 

of all the natural sounds that occur in park units, 

together with the physical capacity for transmitting natural sounds. Natural sounds occur 

within and beyond the range of sounds that 

humans can perceive and can be transmitted 

through air, water, or solid materials. The 

frequencies, magnitudes, and durations of 

human-caused sound considered acceptable 

varies among national park system units, as well 

as potentially throughout each park unit, being 

generally greater in developed areas and less in 

undeveloped areas. 

The National Mall is in a highly urbanized area, 

where the protection of a natural ambient 

soundscape and/or opportunities for visitors to 

experience natural sound environments is not an 

objective of the park. Visitors would not come to 

the park to seek the quiet, intermittent sounds of 

nature. 

Any construction associated with the implementation of the selected alternative, e.g., the hauling 

of material or the operation of construction 

equipment, could result in dissonant sounds, but 

such sounds would be temporary and not outof-place in an urban setting. Because protection 

of a natural ambient soundscape and/or opportunities for visitors to experience natural sound 

environments is not an objective of the park, 

soundscape management was dismissed as an 

impact topic. 

Lightscape Management 

In accordance with NPS Management Policies 

2006, the National Park Service strives to 

preserve natural ambient landscapes, which are 

natural resources and values that exist in the 

absence of human-caused light. 

Due to its highly urbanized setting, the preservation of natural ambient landscapes is not an 

objective at the National Mall. The night sky in 

Washington, D.C., is dominated by lighting of 

five symbolic icons — the U.S. Capitol, the 

White House, the Washington Monument, the 

Lincoln Memorial, and the Thomas Jefferson 

Memorial. Other public and private buildings, 

memorials, public art, streets and walks, and 

park areas are lit to varying degrees. 

Under the action alternatives the National Park 

Service would work closely with the Commission of Fine Arts, the National Capital Planning 

Commission, the Architect of the Capitol, the 

Smithsonian Institution, and D.C. city agencies 

to reestablish the lighting task force to develop 

an approved, written comprehensive lighting 

guideline for the monumental core that would 

address protection to maintain dominant lighting of the five symbolic icons, desired lighting 

character for urban and park areas, appropriate 

light levels and color for different areas, and 

light pollution / protection of night sky from 

excessive, horizontal light pollution. Any impacts of a lighting guideline would be beneficial, 

and lightscape management was dismissed as an 

impact topic. 

Agricultural Lands, Prime and Unique 

Farmlands 

No soils known in the planning area are regulated under the Federal Farmland Protection 

Policy Act. Additionally, no soils are identified as 

prime farmland, unique farmland, farmland of 

statewide importance, or hydric soils by the 

Natural Resource Conservation Service. None 

of the alternatives would affect agricultural lands 

or prime and unique farmlands as defined by the 

Natural Resource Conservation Service, so these 

resources are dismissed as an impact topic. 

38
Scope of this Document: Environmental Impact Topics 

Energy Requirements and Conservation 

Potential 

Implementing any of the action alternatives 

would result in new facilities requiring energy 

use. The National Park Service has adopted the 

concept of sustainable design as a guiding principle of facility planning and development (NPS

Management Policies 2006, sec. 9.1.1.6). The objectives of sustainability are to design facilities to 

minimize adverse effects on natural and cultural 

values, to reflect their environmental setting, and 

to require the least amount of nonrenewable 

fuels or energy. All NPS facility development 

must include improvements in energy efficiency 

and reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. In all 

the action alternatives new and reused facilities 

would be designed with long-term sustainability 

in mind. 

Action alternatives could result in a changed 

energy need, but this change is expected to be 

negligible when seen in a regional context. Thus, 

this topic is being dismissed from further 

analysis. 

Climate Change 

Related to the energy use discussion is climate 

change, the human-caused change to global 

climate patterns. Climate change is perhaps the 

most far-reaching and irreversible threat the 

national park system has ever faced (NPCA 

2007). Climate change in this context refers to a 

suite of changes occurring in Earth’s atmospheric, hydrologic, and oceanic systems. These 

changes, including increased global air and 

ocean temperatures, widespread melting of 

snow and ice, and rising average sea level, 

provide unequivocal evidence that the climate 

system is warming. While the warming trend, 

commonly referred to as global warming, is 

discernible over the entire past century and a 

half, recent decades have exhibited an accelerated warming rate, with 11 of the last 12 years 

ranking among the 12 warmest years on record. 

While climate change is a global phenomenon, it 

manifests itself differently in different places. 

One of the most dramatic effects is the impact 

on sea level. A rise in sea level could affect natural and cultural resources, and it would likely 

interfere with public use and enjoyment of parks 

in low-lying coastal areas. Although many places 

in the world have already observed and recorded changes that can be attributed to climate 

change, the impacts on the National Mall have 

not been specifically determined. Climate 

change is a long-term phenomenon, and the 

likelihood that significant effects will be seen 

during the life of this plan (50 years) is fairly 

certain. Some models predict a sea level rise of 

15 to 37 inches in the Chesapeake Bay region. 

Climate change and the response of governmental agencies is guided by the following 

regulations and policies: 

• Executive Order 13423 (issued January 24, 

2007) requires federal agencies to “conduct 

their environmental, transportation, and 

energy-related activities under the law in 

support of their respective missions in an 

environmentally, economically, and fiscally 

sound, integrated, continuously improving, 

efficient, and sustainable manner.” It includes requirements for the reduction of 

greenhouse gases and implementation of 

other energy and water conservation measures. The order requires agencies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 3% 

annually through the end of fiscal year 

2015, or 30% by the end of fiscal year 2015, 

relative to the baseline of the agency’s 

energy use in fiscal year 2003. 

• DOI Secretarial Order 3226 (issued January 

19, 2001) ensures that climate change impacts are taken into account in connection 

with departmental planning and decision 

making. 

• The NPS Management Policies 2006 state 

that “the Service will use all available authorities to protect park resources and 

values from potentially harmful activities. . . . 

NPS managers must always seek ways to 

avoid, or minimize to the greatest degree 

possible, adverse impacts on park resources 

and values” (NPS 2006e, sec. 4.7.2). 

 The policies also discuss sustainable energy 

design, requiring any facility development 

to include improvements in energy efficiency and reduction in greenhouse gas 

emissions for both the building envelope 

and the mechanical systems that support 

the facility (NPS 2006e, sec. 9.1.1.6). Additionally, projects that include major visitor 

39 
Scope of this Document: Environmental Impact Topics 

services facilities must incorporate LEED 

standards to achieve a silver rating. 

 The National Park Service will interpret for 

the public the overall resource protection 

benefits from the efficient use of energy, 

and to actively educate and motivate park 

personnel and visitors to use sustainable 

practices in conserving energy (NPS 2006e, 

sec. 9.1.7). 

Implementing any of the alternatives described 

in this plan would have very little effect on the 

cumulative level of greenhouse gas emissions or 

other climate change factors (e.g., the carbon 

footprint) in the District of Columbia. However, 

the National Park Service is considering several 

management directions to reduce the park’s 

contribution to climate change factors. Examples include replacing the current fleet of vehicles and motorized equipment with more fuelefficient or alternate fuel models, adding insulation and weather-proofing to existing buildings, 

and using solar panels to generate electricity. 

New construction, such as restrooms and food 

service buildings under the preferred alternative, 

would be constructed to be energy efficient and 

sustainable. As part of an NPS initiative, the 

public would receive educational messages 

about reducing our impact on the climate. These 

programs and others would be implemented 

under all alternatives and would contribute to 

national and international efforts to decrease the 

effects of human-caused climate change. 

Over the life of this plan, it is anticipated that 

national emission-reduction efforts and new 

technologies will become available that would 

decrease the overall output of greenhouse gases 

and other pollutants from motor vehicles. 

Implementation of the preferred alternative 

could slightly increase total visitation to the 

park. If all of these visitors arrived by private 

vehicle, this would result in a corresponding 

increase in vehicle emissions. Therefore, the 

consequences of implementing this plan would 

be long-term, negligible, and adverse to climate 

change. Because there would be no impacts that 

would be moderate or higher in intensity, this 

topic is dismissed from further consideration. 

Natural or Depletable Resource Requirements and Conservation Potential 

Consideration of these topics is required by the 

Council on Environmental Quality’s NEPA 

regulations (40 CFR 1502.16). The National Park 

Service has adopted the concept of sustainable 

design as a guiding principle of facility planning 

and development (NPS 2006e, sec. 9.1.1.6). The 

objectives of sustainability are to design facilities 

to minimize adverse effects on natural and cultural values; to reflect their environmental 

setting and to maintain and encourage biodiversity; to operate and maintain facilities to 

promote their sustainability; and to illustrate and 

promote conservation principles and practices 

through sustainable design and ecologically 

sensitive use. Essentially, sustainability is the 

concept of living within the environment with 

the least impact on the environment. 

The planning area is an urban setting. Through 

sustainable design concepts and other resource 

management principles, no alternative analyzed 

in this document would result in an appreciable 

loss of natural or depletable resources. Thus, 

this topic is dismissed from further analysis. 

Visitor Experience: Commercially 

Provided Opportunities 

None of the alternatives would change the ability of commercial providers, sightseeing buses, 

or commercial guides to offer tours or guided 

walks on the National Mall. Financial transactions would continue to be made off park 

land. Therefore, impacts on commercially provided opportunities have been dismissed from 

further analysis. 

Park Operations 

Operational Partnerships 

The National Park Service has a number of 

partnerships related to bookstores, program 

activities, specific memorials, fundraising, law 

enforcement, recreation, and national celebrations or televised concerts. The Park Service 

maintains recreation fields that are permitted 

through the D.C. Department of Parks and 

Recreation. These partnerships would not 

change as a result of adopting a National Mall 

management plan. Under every alternative partnerships would continue, and agreements would 

40
Scope of this Document: Environmental Impact Topics 

be updated as needed. Therefore, this topic is 

dismissed from further analysis. 

Shared Infrastructure and Jurisdiction 

There are areas of shared infrastructure such as 

city-provided utilities (power, water, sewer), 

GSA steamlines, or issues related to overlapping 

jurisdiction (roads, signs, and traffic signals). 

Any future actions on the part of others would 

undergo collaborative planning, reviews, and 

approvals to ensure the actions were beneficial 

to all parties. Park interests in sustainability and 

efficient park operations would be included in 

the collaborative process. As a result, any infrastructure upgrades or jurisdictional revisions 

would be common to every alternative, resulting 

in no change as a result of the plan. Therefore, 

the topic was dismissed from further analysis. 

Perimeter Security 

Common to every alternative would be the installation of authorized and funded perimeter 

security for the Thomas Jefferson Memorial and 

the Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial, as well as 

the adjacent Smithsonian Institution museums, 

the National Gallery of Art, and federal buildings such as the Department of Agriculture. Any 

perimeter security improvements would undergo review by the National Capital Planning 

Commission and Commission of Fine Arts. The 

Washington Monument temporary security 

screening will be removed and replaced by an 

approved replacement screening approach. A 

goal of all security is to minimize the visual impact of security elements and disguise them so 

they do not detract from the open character that 

defines the desired experience. There would be 

no change as a result of the plan; therefore, this 

topic was dismissed from further analysis. 

Environmental Justice 

Executive Order 12898 requires all federal agencies to incorporate environmental justice into 

their missions by identifying and addressing 

disproportionately high and adverse human 

health or environmental effects of their programs and policies on minorities and low-income populations and communities. 

The Washington, D.C., metropolitan area contains both minority and low-income populations; 

however, environmental justice is dismissed as an 

impact topic for the following reasons: 

• The park staff and planning team actively 

solicited public participation as part of the 

planning process and gave equal consideration to all input from persons regardless 

of age, race, income status, or other 

socioeconomic or demographic factors. 

• Implementation of any alternative would 

not result in any identifiable adverse human 

health effects. Therefore, there would be no 

direct or indirect adverse effects on any 

minority or low-income population. 

• The impacts associated with implementation of any of the alternatives would not 

disproportionately affect any minority or 

low-income population or community. 

• Implementation of any of the alternatives 

would not result in any identified effects 

that would be specific to any minority or 

low-income community. 

• The impacts to the socioeconomic environment resulting from implementation of any 

of the action alternatives would be predominantly beneficial. In addition, the park staff 

and planning team do not anticipate the 

impacts on the socioeconomic environment 

to appreciably alter the physical and social 

structure of nearby communities.

41 
INTERRELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER 

PLANS AND PROJECTS

Planning by the National Park Service for the 

National Mall takes place within an urban 

framework of roads, buildings, and open space 

(see Urban Design Framework map). Washington, D.C., is an outgrowth of the L’Enfant and 

McMillan plans, and early in the 20th century 

Congress created the United States Commission 

of Fine Arts and the National Capital Planning 

Commission to protect the visions of these 

visionary plans. Since 1933 the National Park 

Service has been responsible for managing 

federal park lands in Washington, D.C. 

Planning for the National Mall is integrally tied 

to other comprehensive or cooperative planning 

efforts in the District of Columbia. These interrelated efforts are summarized below, and 

specific plans and projects are also considered in 

the cumulative impacts analysis in the “Environmental Consequences” portion of this document. 

Planning and compliance for the Vietnam 

Veterans Memorial Center, the Dr. Martin 

Luther King, Jr. Memorial, and the National 

Museum of African American History and 

Culture is ongoing by each sponsor. The National Park Service is assisting in the planning 

and compliance efforts for each of these projects, 

and opportunities for public involvement are 

being provided through the NEPA and NHPA 

compliance processes. 

ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL

The Architect of the Capitol’s Capitol Complex 

Master Plan is an update of the 1981 U.S. Capitol 

Master Plan, which aligned with the 1970s NPS 

plans for the Mall. The revised plan addresses 

areas east of the National Mall, including the 

Capitol, the U.S. Supreme Court, the U.S. Botanic Garden, and the Library of Congress. The 

plan is a long-range vision, master plan, and 

implementation strategy for the maintenance, 

renovation, and improvement of the Capitol 

complex over the next 20 years. The planning 

principles address stewardship, urban form and 

context, and workplace and visitor needs and 

issues. 

Planning for the design of Union Square would 

be coordinated with the Architect of the Capitol 

and could also consider design implications 

related to the U.S. Senate Youth Park and U.S. 

Botanic Garden Education and Outreach Center 

to the north, as well as the parking function 

within the rights-of-way of Maryland and 

Pennsylvania avenues between 1st and 3rd 

streets. 

NATIONAL CAPITAL PLANNING 

COMMISSION

In the 1920s the National Capital Park and Planning Commission (renamed the National Capital 

Planning Commission in 1952) hired Frederick 

Law Olmsted Jr., an original member of the McMillan Commission, to prepare plans to implement the McMillan plan. Some of his resulting 

plans addressed the entire area, such as an illustrative master plan from 1939 that delineated a 

somewhat simplified vision of the McMillan plan. 

The Olmsted Jr. plans were implemented in 

Union Square and the Mall. His work at Union 

Square was changed by the 1970s “Washington 

Mall Plan” (Skidmore, Owings and Merrill 1973), 

but his design on the Mall retains great integrity.

In 1997 the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) prepared Extending the Legacy, 

which laid the groundwork for Congress to 

amend the Commemorative Works Act in 2003 

to strengthen and clarify the act’s purpose and to 

designate the Reserve area. The Legacy plan 

provides an overarching vision for the nation’s 

capital that builds on the principles of the 

L’Enfant and McMillan plans and is their successor. It calls for re-centering the city on the U.S. 

Capitol by mixing public and private uses and 

extending new public buildings, memorials, and 

museums into all quadrants of the city. 

The 2001 Memorials and Museums Master Plan

identifies more than 100 sites in Washington, 

D.C., for future commemorative works and cul-

 42
Interrelationships with Other Plans and Projects: National Capital Planning Commission 

tural attractions, recognizing that the Reserve 

does not contain sufficient space to keep pace 

with our nation’s evolving history and the need 

to commemorate its culture, heroes, and history 

in the future. Five of these sites have been selected for new memorials, including the U.S. Air 

Force Memorial and the Dwight D. Eisenhower 

Memorial. 

The Comprehensive Plan for the National Capital: 

Federal Elements created a planning framework 

connected by the following goals: (1) accommodate federal and national activities, (2) reinforce 

smart growth, (3) support coordination with 

local and regional governments, (4) preservation 

and historic features, and (5) the federal environment (NCPC 2004a). Visitor elements, transportation, and open space goals are compatible 

with the National Mall plan. 

The Comprehensive Plan also called for an updated master plan for the National Mall. This 

Draft Plan / Environmental Impact Statement

presents the National Park Service’s vision for 

the National Mall, something that has been 

missing. It also includes additional topics not 

covered in a master plan as defined by the 

National Capital Planning Commission. 

The Monumental Core Framework Plan: Connecting New Destinations with the National Mall is 

a joint effort of the National Capital Planning 

Commission and the U.S. Commission of Fine 

Arts (NCPC 2009). It advances the vision articulated in the Legacy plan by focusing on the areas 

immediately adjacent to the National Mall. 

Through more detailed planning, it identifies 

opportunities to transform the architectural 

monumentality of the core to more contextual 

place-making. The Framework Plan lays out a 

series of proposals to integrate the civic qualities 

of the National Mall with the vitality of the city 

to create new destinations that will be prestigious 

locations for future cultural attractions, 

distinguished settings for government offices, 

and inviting places to enrich the experience of 

people who live, work, or visit here. 

Related to access and circulation, a long-term 

vision in the Framework Plan is to (1) relocate, 

Monumental Core Framework Plan Opportunities 

43 
Interrelationships with Other Plans and Projects: NPS Planning Efforts 

consolidate, and relocate the I-395/14th Street 

bridges (the George Mason, Rochambeau, 

Arland D. Williams Jr., Metro, and railroad 

bridges) to the south to create additional gathering space southeast of the Thomas Jefferson 

Memorial, (2) develop a new Metro station near 

the Thomas Jefferson Memorial, (3) provide new 

Metro station entries at 7th Street and Constitution Avenue NW, (4) add midblock crossings on Constitution Avenue, and (5) redesign 

roads north of Constitution Avenue and west of 

23rd Street NW to improve pedestrian access 

and connections to neighborhoods and the 

Kennedy Center. The Framework Plan focuses 

on this area and recommends minimizing abovegrade infrastructure and establishing: (1) a symbolic, visual, and physical connection between 

the Kennedy Center and the Lincoln Memorial; 

(2) commemorative and recreation space and 

improved pedestrian and bicyclist paths along 

the waterfront; and (3) an extension of Constitution Avenue to the historic belvedere. The 

National Park Service supports this vision. 

On April 2, 2009, the Framework Plan was 

approved (NCPC 2009). The National Mall 

planning effort has been coordinated with the 

development of the Framework Plan.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

The District of Columbia’s City Center Action 

Agenda 2008 identifies challenges and actions 

needed to ensure the vitality and vibrancy of 

central Washington. It recognizes the great opportunity to develop well-connected and distinct 

areas in a rapidly expanding downtown area that 

now has the National Mall as its centerpiece. The 

plan advances Washington’s identity as a waterfront city, and it recommends investment in key 

places, corridors, and transit to ensure economic 

vitality, sustainability, and cultural diversity 

(District of Columbia 2008). The plan identified 

4th, 7th, and 14th streets as priority corridors for 

crossing the Mall; 10th Street would be restored 

north of the National History Museum. Additionally, the NCPC Framework Plan proposes 

pedestrian improvements along 12th, 14th, 15th, 

and 17th streets, as well as west of 17th Street. 

SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION

The Smithsonian Institution’s Arts and Industries Building, which is just south of the Mall, has 

been suggested as a visitor or welcome center for 

the National Mall. The building is outside the 

Reserve, where visitor centers are prohibited. 

The Smithsonian Institution has stated that they 

believe visitors could be well served by coordinated and combined information. The building 

has large open exhibit halls, natural daylight, and 

is close to two subway stops. The Smithsonian 

Institution has begun repair and preservation 

work at the Arts and Industries Building, which 

has been funded by the American Recovery and 

Reinvestment Act of 2009. The ultimate use and 

treatment of the building is yet to be determined. 

On May 8, 2008, the National Museum of American Latino Community Commission Act was 

signed into law (Public Law 110-229). The Hispanic caucus has asked that no permanent decision on the Arts and Industries Building be made 

until the commission has assessed it as a possible 

location for a new National Museum of the 

American Latino. 

Under all alternatives the National Park Service 

will track progress on the future of this historic 

building and provide comment as needed. Any 

proposals affecting the National Park Service will 

be fully analyzed to determine their value, 

financial implications, and operational impacts. 

NPS PLANNING EFFORTS

Visitor Transportation Study 

The National Park Service prepared an Environmental Assessment for a Visitor Transportation 

Study for the National Mall and Surrounding Park 

Areas in 2006. The study recommends a convenient visitor transportation service that will help 

protect park resources and ensure high-quality 

visitor experiences by offering a sustainable, 

educational, integrated, and affordable transportation network for park visitors (NPS 2006c). 

The service will replace the existing educational 

hop-on / -off service known as Tourmobile. The 

plan proposes an integrated, easy-to-use system 

with basic orientation and a choice of additional 

educational / interpretive services. 

44
Interrelationships with Other Plans and Projects: NPS Planning Efforts 

Urban Design Framework 

11x17 

45 
This page has been left blank intentionally. 
Interrelationships with Other Plans and Projects: Interagency Planning Efforts 

The proposed service includes: 

• a two-way National Mall route and an additional one-way loop linking the memorial 

core area to downtown 

• a one-way loop serving Arlington Cemetery, 

with extensions to the U.S. Marine Corps 

(Iwo Jima) Memorial; future extensions are 

also proposed to the U.S. Air Force Memorial and the September 11th Memorial 

These proposals could be compatible with existing transit, such as the Metrobus Circulator. 

Free parking provided by the National Park 

Service in the vicinity of the National Mall would 

be changed to metered parking, and routes 

would be designated for the recreational use of 

Segway® HTs and electric scooters. 

All visitor transportation service should be more 

frequent and at a lower cost. Additional convenient stops will be provided at Metro stations. 

All alternatives in this document are consistent 

with the proposed transportation service. 

The White House and President’s 

Park 

The goal of the Comprehensive Design Plan for 

the White House and President’s Park (NPS 

2000a) is to improve the efficient functioning of 

the Office of the President, to preserve and enhance the symbolic and historic character of the 

site, and to improve the experience of the American public and all visitors who come to the 

house, the grounds, and the surrounding President’s Park. The plan emphasizes a pedestrianoriented experience within President’s Park, and 

the White House Visitor Center in the Commerce Building would be expanded. Any actions 

taken under a National Mall plan would complement the Comprehensive Design Plan for the 

White House and President’s Park. 

The Design Guidelines for the White House and 

President’s Park (NPS 1997) provide a framework of mutually agreed upon tenets that guide, 

but do not dictate, future designs. The White 

House and President’s Park will continue to 

exhibit a sense of unity and to be an integral 

element of the urban fabric, with a direct connection to the District of Columbia, the monumental core, and the National Mall. 

Center for Urban Ecology 

The National Park Service’s Center for Urban 

Ecology provides scientific guidance, technical 

assistance, and education for the preservation, 

conservation, and enhancement of park resources 

within urban landscapes. The center is committed 

to improving and conserving the quality of 

natural resources throughout the National Capital Region of the National Park Service. Working 

with resource managers, researchers, and the 

public, the center strives to discover and incorporate new ways to understand, preserve, and 

enhance natural communities within and around 

the national parks in the Washington, D.C., area. 

The center’s research and initiatives continue to 

provide planning guidance on issues affecting the 

National Mall plan. 

The center can undertake inventories, conduct 

monitoring, and prepare reports related to air and 

climate, geology and soils, water resources, biological integrity, and landscape dynamics. In the 

past they were involved in several studies of soils 

that addressed compaction. The booklet Values 

and Challenges in Urban Ecology (NPS 2008f) 

identifies several challenges in urban park areas, 

including impervious surfaces and trees. 

INTERAGENCY PLANNING EFFORTS

CapitalSpace 

Washington, D.C., has more than 7,650 acres of 

public parks, ranging from Rock Creek Park to 

small neighborhood parks, playgrounds and 

ballfields. The National Capital Planning Commission, the National Park Service, and the 

District of Columbia have formed CapitalSpace 

to enhance existing plans for D.C. parks by providing closer coordination of separate initiatives 

(NCPC et al. 2008). The goal is to develop a 

citywide framework to achieve the full potential 

of a beautiful, high-quality, and unified park 

system for the nation’s capital. As such, the National Mall and all of the areas managed by the 

National Mall and Memorial Parks play an important role in providing for active and passive 

recreation. The CapitalSpace initiative includes 

maps that provide a comprehensive analysis of 

access to various existing park resources, 

including active recreation fields, natural 

resources, and passive recreation amenities. 

47 
Interrelationships with Other Plans and Projects: Interagency Planning Efforts 

CapitalSpace envisions a beautiful, high-quality, 

unified park system for the nation’s capital that 

• is safe and accessible to everyone who 

lives in, works in, or visits the city 

• includes a variety of parks and open 

spaces that connect communities 

• incorporates stewardship and celebration 

or natural, cultural, commemorative and 

historic spaces 

• provides a diversity of active and passive 

recreation 

• contributes to a healthy, sustainable, and 

livable city 

• serves as a national and international 

model of citizen engagement and 

collaboration 

Planning Together for Central 

Washington 

Planning Together for Central Washington is a 

collaborative effort of the Architect of the Capitol, the Commission of Fine Arts, the District of 

Columbia, the National Capital Planning Commission, and the National Park Service. Each of 

these agencies is undertaking major planning 

initiatives for central Washington, which 

provides a framework to coordinate planning 

and investment to ensure that central Washington continues to serve as a model for the nation 

and the world through its cultural venues, its 

architecture and open spaces, its vibrant walkable neighborhoods and public transit, and the 

national and international presence. While each 

initiative reflects the mission and goals of its 

sponsoring agency, the plans share core objectives and implementation priorities. 

Common objectives that the agencies have 

adopted include the following: 

• Welcoming Atmosphere — Create an atmosphere that embraces local citizens and visitors, statesmen, foreign dignitaries, and the 

global media. Celebrate the warmth of a 

friendly town, the dignity of a seat of government, and the vibrancy of a progressive

international city. Provide opportunities for 

the exchange of ideas, citizen action, enjoyment, and meaningful encounters and 

events. Create public spaces that are attractive year-round as well as programs and 

services that are accessible and easy to use. 

• Well-Connected Public Space — Create a 

distinguished and accessible public realm of 

enduring quality shaped by beautiful civic 

infrastructure, architecture, streets, parks, 

and waterfronts. Connect destinations and 

overcome existing physical barriers with 

walkable landscaped corridors, interpretive 

and wayfinding systems, and engaging 

views. Meet the highest standards for design, construction, and maintenance. 

• Distinctive Places — Create or renew neighborhoods and public places throughout 

central Washington to provide a mix of uses 

and experiences that are authentic, diverse, 

and reflect the city’s history and culture. 

Devote attention and infrastructure reinvestment to ensure that the National Mall 

remains a destination worthy of its civic, 

historic, and symbolic role in serving the 

city and the nation. Refurbish historic government facilities and sites that serve the 

American people and house the three 

branches of government. 

• Green and Sustainable — Achieve a livable, 

healthy, and sustainable environment with 

clean air, water, and soil by using model 

development and maintenance practices. 

Apply an integrated ecological approach to 

implement programs that control emissions, 

plant trees, preserve and connect open 

spaces, encourage green and sustainable 

building practices, reduce pollutants, conserve energy, and reuse and recycle water 

and materials. 

• 21st Century Transportation — Establish a 

comprehensive, flexible, convenient, and 

coordinated network of public and visitor 

transit options — subway, light rail, streetcar, bus, water taxi — linking central Washington destinations to support economic 

investment and environmental health. Upgrade public infrastructure to encourage 

walking and bicycling, and develop comprehensive travel demand management programs to reduce congestion, improve air 

quality, and address parking and tour bus 

issues. 

48
ALTERNATIVES

DRAFT 

NATIONAL MALL PLAN / 

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT

THE NATIONAL MALL

CONTENTS: ALTERNATIVES

ALTERNATIVES...............................................................................................................................49

Overview of Alternatives....................................................................................................................................51

Development of Alternatives ....................................................................................................................51

Public Involvement and Preliminary Alternatives.........................................................................51

Using Choosing by Advantages to Develop a Preliminary Preferred Alternative.....................51

Range of Alternatives Considered in this Document ...................................................................52

Summary of Best Practices ........................................................................................................................53

Sustainable Sites Initiative ................................................................................................................53

Design Features for Public Use and Maintenance ........................................................................53

Cultural Resources ............................................................................................................................54

Natural Resources .............................................................................................................................54

Event Management............................................................................................................................54

Public Access ......................................................................................................................................54

Visitor Experience.............................................................................................................................55

Operations and Maintenance ..........................................................................................................55

Conservation Zones and User Capacities .......................................................................................................56

Conservation Zones...................................................................................................................................56

Memorials...........................................................................................................................................56

Character Protection.........................................................................................................................58

Multipurpose Areas...........................................................................................................................59

High-Use Areas..................................................................................................................................59

Resource Standards ...................................................................................................................................60

User Capacity..............................................................................................................................................61

Monitoring and Adaptive Management..................................................................................................66

Actions Common to All Alternatives ...............................................................................................................67

National Mall Actions................................................................................................................................67

Cultural Resources ............................................................................................................................67

Natural Resources .............................................................................................................................68

The Civic Stage: Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations.........................70

Access and Circulation......................................................................................................................70

Visitor Information, Education, and Enjoyment ..........................................................................70

Visitor Amenities ...............................................................................................................................71

Health, Public Safety, and Security..................................................................................................71

Park Operations .................................................................................................................................71

The Mall ......................................................................................................................................................71

Union Square (1st to 3rd Streets) ....................................................................................................71

The Mall (3rd to 14th Streets)..........................................................................................................72

Washington Monument and Grounds....................................................................................................72

Washington Monument ...................................................................................................................72

Washington Monument Grounds...................................................................................................72

West Potomac Park (North of Independence Avenue) ........................................................................73

World War II Memorial....................................................................................................................73

Constitution Gardens........................................................................................................................73

Vietnam Veterans Memorial............................................................................................................73

Lincoln Memorial and Grounds......................................................................................................74

Korean War Veterans Memorial .....................................................................................................75

D.C. War Memorial...........................................................................................................................75

Ash Woods..........................................................................................................................................75

i
CONTENTS

West Potomac Park (South of Independence Avenue).........................................................................75

Tidal Basin Area .................................................................................................................................75

Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial ............................................................................................76

West Potomac Park Riverfront........................................................................................................76

George Mason Memorial .................................................................................................................76

Thomas Jefferson Memorial ............................................................................................................76

The Alternatives ..................................................................................................................................................77

The No-Action Alternative — Continue Current Management..........................................................77

National Mall Actions .......................................................................................................................77

The Mall..............................................................................................................................................78

Washington Monument and Grounds ...........................................................................................79

West Potomac Park (North of Independence Avenue) ...............................................................79

West Potomac Park (South of Independence Avenue) ................................................................79

The Preferred Alternative .........................................................................................................................83

National Mall Actions .......................................................................................................................83

The Mall..............................................................................................................................................88

Washington Monument and Grounds ...........................................................................................91

West Potomac Park (North of Independence Avenue) ...............................................................91

West Potomac Park (South of Independence Avenue) ................................................................93

Alternative A — Focus on the Historic Landscape and Education .....................................................97

National Mall Actions .......................................................................................................................97

The Mall..............................................................................................................................................99

Washington Monument and Grounds .........................................................................................100

West Potomac Park (North of Independence Avenue) .............................................................100

West Potomac Park (South of Independence Avenue) ..............................................................101

Alternative B — Focus on a Welcoming National Civic Space for Public Gatherings, 

Events, and High-Use Levels .........................................................................................................105

National Mall Actions .....................................................................................................................105

The Mall............................................................................................................................................108

Washington Monument and Grounds .........................................................................................109

West Potomac Park (North of Independence Avenue) .............................................................110

West Potomac Park (South of Independence Avenue) ..............................................................111

Alternative C — Focus on Urban Open Space, Urban Ecology, Recreation, and 

Healthy Lifestyles ............................................................................................................................115

National Mall Actions .....................................................................................................................115

The Mall............................................................................................................................................117

Washington Monument and Grounds .........................................................................................118

West Potomac Park (North of Independence Avenue) .............................................................119

West Potomac Park (South of Independence Avenue) ..............................................................120

Actions Considered but Dismissed ................................................................................................................125

A National Mall Boundary Expansion ..................................................................................................125

A New National Mall Commission........................................................................................................126

Building Out the McMillan Plan for the National Mall ......................................................................127

Changing the Historic Landscape..........................................................................................................128

Features on the National Mall................................................................................................................129

Additional Memorials or Museums ..............................................................................................129

Moving, Removing, or Destroying Memorials or Historic Structures.....................................129

A Central Visitor Center .................................................................................................................130

Adding New Features......................................................................................................................131

Historic Appearance for New Features........................................................................................131

ii
Contents 

Visitor Access............................................................................................................................................131

Underground Connections to Memorials ...................................................................................131

Tram or Streetcar System ...............................................................................................................131

Comparison of Alternatives.............................................................................................................................132

Conceptual Cost Estimates .....................................................................................................................132

The Environmentally Preferred Alternative.........................................................................................133

The No-Action Alternative ............................................................................................................134

The Preferred Alternative...............................................................................................................135

Alternative A.....................................................................................................................................135

Alternative B .....................................................................................................................................136

Alternative C.....................................................................................................................................136

Comparison of Concepts and Alternatives...........................................................................................146

Contents for Table 7: Concepts and Alternatives for the National Mall..........................................147

PLAN MAPS 

No-Action Alternative — Current Use Map.................................................................................................. 80

No-Action Alternative — Existing Conditions.............................................................................................. 81

Preferred Alternative — Conservation Zoning.............................................................................................. 94

Preferred Alternative......................................................................................................................................... 95

Alternative A — Conservation Zoning.......................................................................................................... 102

Alternative A..................................................................................................................................................... 103

Alternative B — Conservation Zoning.......................................................................................................... 112

Alternative B ..................................................................................................................................................... 113

Alternative C — Conservation Zoning.......................................................................................................... 121

Alternative C..................................................................................................................................................... 123

FIGURES 

Figure 13: Ulysses S. Grant Memorial............................................................................................................. 71

Figure 14: The Mall............................................................................................................................................ 72

Figure 15: The Washington Monument ......................................................................................................... 72

Figure 16: World War II Memorial ................................................................................................................. 73

Figure 17: Constitution Gardens ..................................................................................................................... 73

Figure 18: Vietnam Veterans Memorial.......................................................................................................... 73

Figure 19: Lincoln Memorial............................................................................................................................ 74

Figure 20: Korean War Veterans Memorial ................................................................................................... 75

Figure 21: The D.C. War Memorial................................................................................................................. 75

Figure 22: Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial .......................................................................................... 76

Figure 23: Thomas Jefferson Memorial .......................................................................................................... 76

 iii
CONTENTS

TABLES 

Table 3: National Mall User Capacities .......................................................................................................... 62

Table 4: Conceptual Cost Estimates for Planning Comparisons Only ..................................................... 133

Table 5: Comparison of How the Alternatives Meet the Goals of the National Environmental Policy 

Act ............................................................................................................................................... 137

Table 6: How Well the Alternatives Meet the Plan Objectives .................................................................. 140

Table 7: Concepts and Alternatives for the National Mall......................................................................... 150

Table 8: Summary of Environmental Consequences .................................................................................. 244

iv
ALTERNATIVES 

49
This page has been left blank intentionally. 
OVERVIEW OF ALTERNATIVES

This part of the Draft Environmental Impact 

Statement presents the alternatives that are being 

considered for the long-term management of the 

National Mall. This overview section summarizes the process that was used to develop the 

alternatives, the range of alternatives being 

considered, and some of the best practices that 

were considered as the alternatives were developed. The overview is followed by a description 

of the conservation zones that are being proposed for the plan. The zones define desired 

resource and visitor experience conditions, 

along with the appropriate uses and facilities and 

user capacities. 

The next section describes actions common to 

all alternatives, followed by the highlights of 

each alternative presented in narrative form. 

Actions that were considered but dismissed are 

discussed beginning on page 125. The alternatives are then compared in terms of conceptual 

costs (beginning on page 132) and how well they 

would meet the goals of the National Environmental Policy Act (beginning on page 133) and 

plan objectives (Table 6, page 140). Table 7, 

beginning on page 150, presents all of the actions 

for each alternative in detail, allowing readers to 

directly compare what actions would take place 

under each alternative. Finally, a summary of 

impacts is presented in Table 8 (page 244) so 

readers can compare the level of impact under 

each alternative; this summary is based on the 

detailed impact analysis in the “Environmental 

Consequences.” 

DEVELOPMENT OF ALTERNATIVES

The National Park Service develops alternatives 

with input from several sources, including public 

comments, internal scoping, cooperating agency 

workshops, and cultural resource consultations 

in accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act. The process is a two-way exchange 

of ideas with the public, cooperating agencies, 

and others, and it ultimately leads to the development of the agency’s preferred alternative. 

The planning process began with an understanding and affirmation of the National Mall’s 

purpose and significance, along with planning 

constraints or mandates, and NPS Management 

Policies 2006. Through internal scoping the 

National Park Service continually identified and 

revisited planning issues that would need to be 

addressed. Internal scoping also included discussions and workshops with other federal and 

local agencies that cooperate in planning. 

Studies of best practices were undertaken to 

examine how others successfully deal with 

similar issues or what is considered today’s 

“state of the art” in pertinent topics. 

Public Involvement and 

Preliminary Alternatives 

Public participation and public comments were 

solicited through newsletters, public meetings, 

and on the park’s planning website (www.nps 

.gov/nationalmallplan/). Reports, newsletters, 

and background information were made 

available on the website. 

Three public meeting periods with multiple 

meetings were held during (1) scoping, (2) the 

development of alternatives, and (3) when a 

preliminary preferred alternative was 

announced. The National Park Service has met 

and made presentations to a number of citizen, 

civic, and educational groups and organizations. 

Newsletter 1 (fall 2006) was a public scoping 

newsletter, which asked the public to identify 

what is important about the National Mall and 

what actions they think need to be taken to 

address issues and concerns. Newsletter 2 

(summer 2007) summarized the resulting public 

scoping comments. Newsletter 3 (fall 2007) 

presented a range of preliminary alternatives 

that were based on public ideas. Readers were 

asked to identify which ideas they thought 

should be incorporated into a preferred alternative and why. 

Using Choosing by Advantages to 

Develop a Preliminary Preferred 

Alternative 

The planning team worked with park staff and 

cooperating agencies to refine all of the preliminary alternatives, and the Choosing by Advan51
ALTERNATIVES

tages process was used to compare, rate, and 

rank the advantages of alternative actions. This 

process looked at how well each alternative 

would address the following factors (in order of 

ranking importance, not the importance of 

resources): 

1. providing enjoyable visitor experiences 

(providing a quality American experience) 

2. improving natural resources 

3. improving the ability to host national celebrations, First Amendment demonstrations, 

and special events 

4. improving health and safety 

5. protecting cultural resources (cultural resources must be protected; there was little 

difference among the alternatives in how 

this would be done so this factor did not 

rank as high) 

6. improving park operations 

7. providing other benefits 

As a result of this process, the preferred alternative was developed, which included some new 

ideas as well as ideas from the preliminary alternatives presented in newsletter 3. Once the 

actions were identified, the comparable costs of 

the alternatives were considered (see page 132). 

The goal in developing the preferred alternative 

was to maximize the advantages to the public, as 

well as the National Park Service, and to provide 

an appropriate level of quality, while minimizing 

the costs. The preliminary preferred alternative 

was presented for public comment in newsletter 

4 in spring 2009, providing another opportunity 

for public involvement before this Draft Environmental Impact Statement was issued. 

Public and agency involvement in the development of the alternatives is further discussed 

under “Consultation and Coordination,” 

beginning on page 543. Because of interest and 

concern about the National Mall’s cultural 

resources, consultation under section 106 of 

National Historic Preservation Act began when 

the range of alternatives was developed, much 

earlier than the preferred alternative stage, 

which is the usual time for consultations. 

Range of Alternatives Considered 

in this Document 

Some actions are common to all alternatives. 

Actions already authorized by Congress for the 

National Mall would continue. First Amendment demonstrations would continue to be fully 

accommodated, along with national celebrations 

and permitted special events. Other actions that 

would be taken under all alternatives include 

certain actions relating to historic and natural 

resources; access and circulation; visitor 

information, orientation, and enjoyment; visitor 

amenities; health, public safety, and security; and 

park operations. 

The five alternatives that are being considered 

for the protection, use, and management of the 

National Mall are described in the following 

order: 

• No-Action Alternative — This alternative 

describes current conditions and the continuation of current management. It establishes the baseline to compare all the other 

alternatives. 

• Preferred Alternative — The preferred alternative is the National Park Service’s proposed course of action in this Draft Environmental Impact Statement. The intent of 

this alternative would be to establish a sense 

of place and an overall identity for the 

National Mall as the preeminent civic stage 

for our country, creating a coherent pedestrian environment that would complement 

and balance the natural environment, the 

National Mall’s historic character, the combination of formal and informal features, 

and national commemorative works. The 

preferred alternative includes actions from 

alternatives A, B, and C. 

• Alternative A — With a focus on the historic 

landscape and education, alternative A 

would restore and maintain the resources 

of the National Mall as a historic landscape. 

The designed historic landscape would 

evolve and its value over time would 

change, reflecting significant national 

events. 

• Alternative B — Alternative B would improve the National Mall as the nation’s 

premier civic space and would support very 

52
Overview of Alternatives: Summary of Best Practices 

high use levels. The National Mall’s evolving ceremonial, celebratory, cultural, and 

visitor uses would be emphasized. 

• Alternative C — Alternative C would meet 

evolving recreational needs in the nation’s 

capital by providing beautiful, enjoyable, 

and ecologically sustainable open spaces 

that could be adapted to changing recreational patterns of diverse local and national 

users. 

SUMMARY OF BEST PRACTICES

Before work was begun to develop the alternatives, best management practices used by others 

were researched to provide a foundation for 

determining what steps could be taken to improve maintenance and operations for the National Mall. Two studies examined a number of 

the best management practices used at designed 

landscapes in Washington, D.C., and at heavily 

used landscapes in New York City, Chicago, San 

Francisco, Atlanta, London, Ottawa, and Canberra. The review of best practices has been an 

ongoing process as alternatives were developed, 

and the most applicable practices have been included in the action alternatives. The best practices that have been considered in the development of alternatives are summarized below and 

are more fully discussed in appendix B. 

Sustainable Sites Initiative 

The Sustainable Sites InitiativeTM is an interdisciplinary partnership led by the American 

Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA), the 

Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center, and the 

United States Botanic Garden. The partnership 

is seeking to create and implement clear and 

rigorous design, construction, operations, and 

maintenance criteria that would supplement 

existing green building and landscape guidelines, 

as well as to create a stand-alone tool for site 

sustainability (ASLA et al. 2008). The main 

principle is that sustainable land practices enable 

natural and built systems to work together to 

protect and enhance the ability of landscapes to 

provide services such as climate regulation, clean 

air and water, and improved quality of life. The 

U.S. Green Building Council anticipates incorporating proposed benchmarks into future 

versions of the LEED® Green Building Rating 

SystemTM

.

The initiative’s guidelines and benchmarks are 

designed to preserve or restore a site’s sustainability within the context of ecosystem services 

— the idea that healthy ecosystems provide 

goods and services of benefit to humans and 

other organisms. Restoring soils and integrating 

green stormwater management that would 

address collection, conveyance, detention, treatment, and reuse are best practices. In addition to 

collecting and cleansing stormwater, these techniques can also help recharge groundwater supplies and reduce the use of potable water for 

irrigation and water features. Sustainable maintenance reduces resource consumption and 

waste, enhances flora and fauna health and 

diversity, and provides positive and healthy 

experiences. 

To maintain a landscape for long-term sustainability, the following operation and maintenance 

guidelines are recommended: 

• Develop a landscape maintenance plan that 

outlines the long-term strategic plan for the 

site and identifies short-term action plans 

to achieve sustainable maintenance goals. 

• Use vegetation trimmings generated during 

operations and maintenance as compost 

and mulch to improve soil health and reduce the need for chemical fertilizers, irrigation, and pesticides. 

• Provide space for collecting recyclables 

(including paper, glass, plastics, and metals) 

to facilitate recycling and reduce waste 

generation and waste disposal in landfills. 

• Use electricity from renewable sources to 

reduce a site’s carbon footprint and to minimize air pollution and habitat destruction. 

Design Features for Public Use and 

Maintenance 

Destinations should be convenient and flexible, 

and they should be well used throughout the day 

so people are comfortable being there. Best 

practices for design include creating a sense of 

place and enhancing landscape appearance 

through a hierarchy of design for site furniture 

(benches, trash cans, information stations, light 

 53
ALTERNATIVES

fixtures, and orientation signs), with coordinated logos, color systems, signage, uniforms, 

and messages. Quality places are pleasant to be 

in and appeal to all five senses. Quality is the 

result of design, construction, facility condition, 

and maintenance. All four are needed components to achieve the desired standards. Highquality and durable materials and details can 

attract users, contribute to respect and user 

stewardship, and deter vandalism. Quality, comfort, cleanliness, and feelings of safety make a 

good first impression. 

Certain visitor amenities go together, such as 

signs, seating areas, cafés, restrooms, and pathway intersections. Combining activities and uses 

in one area can help create a comfortable social 

place for people to relax and attend to several 

needs at once (Project for Public Spaces 2008). 

Encouraging visitors to linger at visitor service 

locations can concentrate trash where it can be 

handled, reducing trash at memorials or other 

trash-free zones. 

Designs need to consider the ease of maintenance and typical uses, as well as incorporate 

ergonomics that support employee safety. 

Access and circulation routes should accommodate staff and maintenance vehicles, in addition 

to pedestrians and other types of use. 

Excessive lighting and light pollution should be 

reduced. Cities as well as national and international associations (the American Medical 

Association, the International Dark-Sky 

Association, and environmental organizations) 

are increasingly concerned about the impact of 

light pollution and are seeking to reduce excessive lighting and its attendant biological and 

health concerns. Green and sustainable approaches are often required so that lighting provides safety, and night lighting is appropriate for 

the type of use and the environment. Less energy 

consumptive approaches are desirable. Standards are included in both LEED and the 

Sustainable Sites InitiativeTM

. 

Cultural Resources 

Maintaining the historic character and identity 

of places and adaptively reusing historic structures to ensure their preservation are widely 

used best practices. 

Natural Resources 

Soil function should be maintained or restored 

to support healthy plants, biological communities, infiltration, and water storage. Erosion and 

compaction should be alleviated. 

Green, organic landscapes are often safer, cleaner, and healthier for everyone. The public should 

understand “green” goals. Plants need to be selected that are suitable for the area to ensure that 

they will grow and that they can be easily maintained. Urban water ecology and sustainable 

management should be promoted. 

Event Management 

Spaces should be designed to sustainably accommodate demonstrations and events, including 

venues with hard surfaces and necessary infrastructure, specific locations for support facilities 

(such as portable restrooms), defined access 

routes, and specific procedures for event setup 

and takedown. On-line access for information 

and permit applications can make the process 

more efficient for event organizers in terms of 

scheduling and understanding permit requirements, as well as for onsite management. 

Public Access 

Walking environments should be safe, comfortable, convenient, efficient, and welcoming. 

Good pedestrian environments provide seating, 

human-scale street furniture, and interesting 

pedestrian amenities that make walking pleasurable. Multiple means of transportation access 

are available. Street crossings are safe, and various traffic-calming measures are used. Motorists 

and pedestrians are equitably treated, for example, waits at stoplights are equal for both pedestrians and drivers and vehicles do not have priority in walkable urban areas. 

Better public transportation access equates with 

improved quality of life and better environmental 

quality. Connections between different modes of 

transit (subways, buses) should be facilitated. 

Increased bicycle use and alternative public 

transportation are important components of 

sustainable urban areas. Congestion, air quality, 

and quality of life can be enhanced by reducing 

private vehicle use and providing more integrated 

transit services. 

54
Overview of Alternatives: Summary of Best Practices 

Curbside loading / unloading areas should be 

designated, along with areas where these uses 

are prohibited, and time limits should be enforced for stopping or idling (3–10 minutes). 

Long-term parking should be provided in 

peripheral areas or at centrally located off-street, 

multi-modal parking facilities. 

Visitor Experience 

Memorable visitor experiences can be created 

by considering all aspects of how visitors get to 

the park, find out where to go, learn about what 

they are seeing, and move through the site. In 

addition, providing quality places that are pleasant to be in can help visitors enjoy being on site, 

knowing that they are in a safe environment and 

that they can easily take care of personal needs. 

Onsite staff, settings, and programs should all 

support memorable visitor experiences. 

Providing many diverse types of activities and 

choices of things to do will appeal to diverse 

users and mixed ages. Sufficient convenient and 

accessible visitor amenities (rest areas, water, 

food service, gift shops, and stroller and locker 

rentals) should be sized and configured to meet 

the visitation levels on high-volume days. 

To reduce congestion, use during non-peak 

times can be encouraged through coordination 

with tour companies and by using incentives and 

programs such as pricing breaks, advanced 

reservation systems, timed ticketing, and the 

scheduling of special events and programs 

during non-peak times or at locations that can 

accommodate more use. 

Utilizing multiple types of food service, ranging 

from mobile carts, refreshment stands, food 

courts, order-ahead picnic or pick-up food, to 

full-service restaurants, will meet a variety of 

user needs. The recommended split is 80% fastfood to 20% full-service facilities. Mobile carts 

are generally around 5% of the 80%. 

Quality retail merchandise directly related to the 

experience should be available at all price ranges. 

Operations and Maintenance 

Building public support and encouraging 

positive visitor behavior can help achieve higher 

maintenance standards. Well-maintained and 

clean areas encourage a higher standard of behavior, along with prominently displayed visitor 

rules of behavior and visible management and 

staff presence. Taking time to help users understand regulations, limits, and maintenance goals 

will help gain their cooperation and support. 

Simple but visually unobtrusive systems, such as 

flags, can be used to identify areas closed for 

restoration. 

Through written standards all staff should 

understand desired conditions, along with their 

role in achieving them. All staff members should 

help achieve standards and set a visible example 

for the public to follow, such as picking up trash 

or thanking people for their help in maintaining 

clean areas. In addition, written standards and 

guidelines for all staff should be focused on 

creating memorable visitor experiences. 

Best practices for waste management include 

concentrating trash-generating activities at 

specific places, such as food service locations or 

refreshment stands. Trash and recycling containers should always be located together and 

have restricted openings so the containers are 

not misused. They should also have highly 

visible symbols and messages. 

Trash and recyclable pickups should be mechanized to promote efficiency and reduce the 

potential for staff injuries. Regular maintenance 

needs to be provided during open hours. Use 

levels in facilities such as restrooms need to be 

monitored so that facilities are cleaned in a 

timely fashion and the desired standard of care is 

achieved. Trash collection during the evening 

hours should be frequent enough to keep the 

trash receptacles tidy every night of the year. 

Electronic monitoring can be used to identify 

maintenance needs (burned out light bulbs) or 

to set regular maintenance schedules (such as 

self-cleaning restrooms). A public website can 

also help identify maintenance and repair needs, 

as well as respond to public concerns.

 55
CONSERVATION ZONES AND USER CAPACITIES

The National Park Service requires management 

plans to include descriptions of park management zones and user capacities (also known as 

carrying capacities) that are consistent with 

these management zones. (For this plan the term 

conservation zone is used rather than management zone to avoid confusion with city zoning 

requirements.) The National Park Service uses 

zoning to define the desired resource and visitor 

experience conditions, along with the appropriate uses and facilities that are proposed for 

each zone. Conservation zones are delineated 

for each alternative to illustrate intended resource conditions, visitor experiences, and 

management activities. No conservation zones 

have been defined for the no-action alternative. 

As defined in the NPS Management Policies 2006,

“Visitor carrying capacity is the type and level of 

visitor use that can be accommodated while sustaining the desired resource and visitor experience conditions in the park” (NPS 2006e, sec. 

8.2.1). Park superintendents are to identify and 

stay within user capacities so that resources and 

values for which the park was established are not 

unacceptably impacted. In addition, ways to 

monitor for and address unacceptable impacts 

on park resources and visitor experiences are to 

be identified. 

Conservation zones and user capacities are 

correlated because the zoning plan establishes 

the desired resource conditions and visitor 

experiences, which have implications for the 

kinds and levels of use that can be accommodated in an area. The intent of this section is to 

outline the criteria for desired park conditions, 

along with appropriate uses and facilities to 

support those conditions, and desired visitor 

experiences. Some desired conditions may apply 

throughout the National Mall, but the delineation of conservation zones will illustrate where 

there are differences in intended resource conditions, visitor experiences, and management 

activities (NPS 2006e, sec. 2.3.1.2). 

Four conservation zones have been defined to 

protect resource conditions and the quality of 

visitor experiences on the National Mall. They 

are 

• memorials 

• character protection areas 

• multipurpose areas 

• high-use areas 

Areas within each zone may have specific 

requirements or characteristics. Because each 

alternative has a difference emphasis, the 

delineation of conservation zones varies by 

alternative and is shown on a map for each 

alternative in the next chapter. 

Regulations at 36 CFR 7.96 apply to all conservation zones, and only authorized or permitted activities may occur. The use of some memorials 

for demonstrations or special events is restricted 

by federal regulations (36 CFR 7.96(g)(3)(ii)). 

Permits are generally required for special events 

and for demonstrations with more than 25 people. The permit process sets specific criteria for 

each event to ensure that soils, turf, walks, trees, 

and irrigation systems are not degraded or are 

restored to the desired standards. The National 

Mall and Memorial Parks Superintendent’s Compendium addresses additional public use limits to 

ensure safety, resource protection, and proper 

management, in accordance with 36 CFR Parts 

1-7 and authorized by 16 USC 3 (NPS 2006f). 

All areas of the National Mall are to remain free 

of commercial advertising. The regulations limit 

event sponsor and donor recognition to protect 

the sanctity of the National Mall. Commercial 

business services, such as food, retail, or recreation equipment rentals that have been determined to be necessary or appropriate are provided through contracts. 

CONSERVATION ZONES

Memorials 

The purpose of the conservation zone for memorials is to preserve the principal memorials 

and the character of their immediate surroundings, as well as to provide opportunities for contemplation, learning experiences, and appropriate activities. Many of the memorials are symbols of our nation and have taken on additional 

 

56 
Conservation Zones and User Capacities: Conservation Zones 

iconic meanings over time, such as the connection of the Lincoln Memorial with civil rights. 

Desired Cultural Resource Conditions 

Cultural resources (buildings, sites, structures, 

objects, districts, and cultural landscapes) and 

related commemorative works of art are and can 

be maintained to the highest standard according 

to scheduled maintenance and major restoration 

schedules. 

Desired Natural Resource Conditions 

Related landscapes and plant materials are in 

excellent condition and meet the highest standards. Any related designed water features and 

lighting operate continuously to desired standards during scheduled times of operation. 

Desired Visitor Experience / Allowable 

Activities 

Memorials are pedestrian-only zones* that provide opportunities for quiet contemplation, 

inspiration, enjoyment, and understanding of 

the values and ideals of our country. Many visitors take photographs, enjoy the art or architecture, or read the quotations at each memorial. 

Related events such as presidential birthday 

celebrations, Veterans Day ceremonies, state 

visits, or programs occur. 

The desired experience includes sufficient space 

so that each visitor can easily access the memorial, enjoy or photograph it, and look at the 

views and vistas without being overly affected by 

others. The desired capacity could occasionally 

be exceeded, yet the experience might still be 

acceptable if a special event serendipitously 

added to the visitor experience. 

The necessary space per person to achieve the 

desired conditions varies, depending on the 

memorial’s design, site conditions, time of day 

and year, visitor location within the memorial, or 

the attractiveness of views and vistas. At most 

memorials the optimal density for the desired 

experience would be 100–200 square feet per 

 

* A pedestrian is defined as anyone on foot or using an 

assistive device, such as a wheelchair, electric scooter, 

or Segway®HT. 

person, with more space desirable. At 100–200 

square feet per person visitors would have 

sufficient space for contemplation, reading 

quotations, or taking photos. At 50–100 square 

feet per person the social experience could be 

congested for many visitors. A density of 50 

square feet per person could be expected when 

high levels or pulses of visitation occur, such as 

when multiple tour buses arrive at the same time, 

with many people taking photographs or trying 

to see a memorial at once. 

More people can be accommodated and have a 

quality visitor experience in an open memorial 

(such as the Vietnam Veterans Memorial or the 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial) than in an 

enclosed memorial (such as the Washington 

Monument, or the Lincoln or Thomas Jefferson 

Memorial). The desired visitor experience at the 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial is focused on a 

linear experience along a narrow walkway, so a 

density in the range of 7–10 square feet per person may be acceptable during the peak season as 

people progress slowly along the wall, moving 

around those who have stopped to look at 

names or items left at the wall. Opportunities for 

contemplation may not be possible at this density, which could occur from midday to early 

evening from spring to early fall, as well as during events or holidays. (For example, it may be 

very hard for a visitor to have a quiet experience 

during the Memorial Day weekend when hundreds of people crowd the walkway.) Reflective 

or more emotionally powerful experiences may 

be possible during evenings or low-visitation 

times. 

The proximity of tour bus drop-off and pickup 

locations and tour bus parking spaces near 

major memorials or groups of memorials affects 

the desired visitor experience. Simultaneous use 

of these locations may result in frequent high 

concentrations or pulses of visitors. Tour bus 

drop-offs and pickups and nearby parking 

spaces are noted in Table 3. 

Demonstrations and special events are allowed 

in accordance with regulations at 36 CFR 7.96, 

and they are prohibited at certain memorials. 

These restrictions are included in Table 3. 

57
ALTERNATIVES

Allowable Facilities 

Some facilities are necessary to support visitor 

use. Memorials may have visitor seating to allow 

for contemplation, as well as unobtrusive facilities such as exhibits, visitor information, restrooms, bookstores, or retail in or near the 

memorial. Within the immediate area, a limited 

number of signs, compatible with the memorial 

design, may be provided to remind visitors about 

regulations or respectful behavior. 

Character Protection 

The character protection zone applies to components of the historic landscape that demarcate 

important designed vistas and that establish the 

character of the National Mall. This zone may 

serve as a pedestrian and vehicular entry to the 

National Mall, and it may contain necessary 

visitor orientation and directional information. 

The landscape character ranges from formal to 

informal and is generally comprised of simple 

components — landforms, tree plantings, lawn 

areas, and related park furniture or structures. 

Character-defining features that are to be protected are described for each area (see Table 3). 

The visual great cross axis of the National Mall is 

defined by the vegetation in this zone. This zone 

includes well-known landscapes such as the 

Tidal Basin, the Lincoln Reflecting Pool, the 

grounds of the Washington Monument and the 

Lincoln Memorial, and the D.C. War Memorial. 

Smaller scale memorials (such as the John Paul 

Jones or John Ericcson Memorial) or landscape 

memorials (the German-American Friendship 

Garden) may also be included. 

Desired Cultural Resource Conditions 

Historic structures, small-scale memorials, and 

other contributing features of the park’s cultural 

landscapes are preserved and protected. Cultural resources are in the desired condition as 

defined in cultural resource documents, and 

they are maintained in accordance with planned 

maintenance and major restoration schedules. 

Any lighting and water features operate 

continuously to desired standards during 

scheduled times of operation. 

Desired Natural Resource Conditions 

The landscape and its features are nourished and 

perpetuated in a sustainable manner to desired 

standards for each area. 

Desired Visitor Experience / Allowable 

Activities 

The desired visitor experience includes enjoyment of the character of the designed landscape 

with its vistas to and from iconic memorials, 

sightseeing, education and orientation, smallscale entertainment, and passive or individual 

recreational activities such as paddleboating, 

walking, bicycling, kayaking or other selfpropelled boating, picnicking, reading, children 

playing, and fishing. This zone may also accommodate spillover from extremely large First 

Amendment demonstrations that exceed the 

capacity of the adjacent multipurpose or highuse zones. Visitor service facilities are conveniently located outside vistas. 

Landscaped areas are used for general enjoyment; as a result, more separation between 

others is desired. The minimum desired space 

per person in this zone would be 200 square feet 

on a high-use holiday, with 1,000 square feet 

preferred for daily use during the peak season. 

For example, at 200 square feet per person, 

many people could sit informally on the grass to 

enjoy picnics, garden concerts, or small events, 

but the sights and sounds of other people and 

groups would be very evident. At 1,000 square 

feet per person the atmosphere would be more 

relaxed and enjoyable for most visitors. 

User densities on walks or at visitor facilities 

could be in the range of 10–50 square feet per 

person. Occasionally First Amendment gatherings or national celebrations could result in 

higher densities of short duration. A temporary 

density of 10 square feet per person would feel 

very crowded in this zone because landscape 

elements such as trees provide a sense of 

enclosure. 

The permit process for demonstrations and 

events sets specific criteria for each event to 

ensure that soils, turf, walk, trees, and irrigation 

systems are not degraded (36 CFR 7.96). 

 

58 
Conservation Zones and User Capacities: Conservation Zones 

Allowable Facilities 

Allowable facilities in this zone include pedestrian sidewalks and pathways; roads, parking, 

and multimodal transportation corridors and 

intermodal transportation stops; visitor facilities 

(food and related seating areas, retail, restrooms, 

information); park furnishings (seating, lighting, 

trash containers, etc.); outdoor educational 

wayside exhibits; directional, orientation, and 

transit-related signs; and gardens and reflective 

or active water features. 

Temporary facilities related to permitted special 

events are generally not allowed unless they are 

on paved surfaces. 

Multipurpose Areas 

Multipurpose areas provide for visitor access 

and services, and they accommodate programs, 

activities, events, recreation, and relevant entertainment in a high-quality parklike or historic 

setting. This zone is generally characterized by 

undulating landforms, with trees, walks, roads, 

and other features. Secondary and pleasant 

views of memorials and iconic features are maintained. This zone may serve as a pedestrian and 

vehicular entry to the National Mall, and it contains necessary visitor orientation and directional information. Areas in this zone include 

portions of Constitution Gardens, the Watergate 

area, and portions of the Washington Monument grounds and the Tidal Basin (see Table 3). 

Desired Cultural Resource Conditions 

Cultural resources, including small-scale 

resources, are preserved. 

Desired Natural Resource Conditions 

The landscape and its features are perpetuated 

in a sustainable manner to meet the desired 

standards for each area. 

Desired Visitor Experience / Allowable 

Activities 

Opportunities are provided for passive and active 

outdoor enjoyment in a pleasant atmosphere, 

with vistas to some of the National Mall’s icons. 

Visitor service facilities and transit stops are conveniently located and able to meet the needs of 

groups as well as individuals. While First Amendment activities are fully accommodated, they are 

an occasional short-term use, and areas are more 

likely to be used to provide support for such 

permitted activities. Opportunities are provided 

for small events, educational waysides, programs, 

and relevant entertainment. Passive recreation 

(picnicking, sunning, fishing, and relaxing) may 

take place, along with active recreation, such as 

volleyball games, ballfields, or impromptu sports. 

Because the purpose is to accommodate multiple 

uses, the space per person in visitor service portions of this zone ranges from 50 to 100 square 

feet, and the resulting social experience would 

mean that people would be very aware of the 

presence and sounds of others. In recreational 

areas a less dense experience of more than 1,000 

square feet per person is desirable. 

The permit process sets specific criteria for each 

event to ensure that soils, turf, walks, trees, and 

irrigation systems are not degraded or are restored to the desired standards. 

Allowable Facilities 

Facilities include pedestrian sidewalks and trails; 

roads, parking and multi-modal transportation 

corridors and stops; visitor facilities (food and 

related seating areas, retail, restrooms, information); limited athletic facilities (such as existing 

backstops and volleyball courts); park furnishings 

(seating, lighting, trash containers, etc.); outdoor 

wayside exhibits; directional, orientation, and 

transit-related signs and facilities; and gardens. 

High-Use Areas 

High-use area would accommodate various 

well-attended activities, including national 

celebrations, First Amendment demonstrations, 

and special events, as well as sightseeing, and 

spontaneous or sport league recreation. Flexible 

areas are generally characterized by open turf or 

hard surfaces. Areas in this zone include Union 

Square, the central panels on the Mall, and 

athletic fields (see Table 3). 

Desired Cultural Resource Conditions 

Cultural resources include primarily views and 

vistas or small-scale elements such as light 

fixtures or benches. These elements are 

perpetuated to achieve desired conditions. 

59
ALTERNATIVES

Desired Natural Resource Conditions 

Landscapes are preserved to the desired standard. Shade and ornamental trees may edge 

open spaces. 

Desired Visitor Experience / Allowable 

Activities 

The zone provides the primary space for First 

Amendment demonstrations, national celebrations, and special events. It also provides opportunities to enjoy views and vistas, along with 

passive and active outdoor enjoyment within a 

pleasant atmosphere that may be visually dominated by iconic American memorials. Opportunities for individual or spontaneous uses are 

generally accommodated. Picnicking, sunning, 

and relaxing may take place, depending on the 

location. Organized sports and recreation, such 

as softball, soccer, or even cricket and polo, may 

take place in designated and permitted locations. 

Participants supply needed equipment, activity 

marking, and cleanup. 

Wide ranging use densities are expected in this 

area. Higher levels of use in the range of 3–50 

square feet per person would occur during 

national celebrations, such as the recent presidential inauguration or a large First Amendment 

demonstration. Under these circumstances users 

would expect and tolerate extremely dense 

crowding. At 3 square feet per person, the experience would be extremely congested, with 

people standing shoulder-to-shoulder, and this 

level of use could not be safely sustained for any 

length of time. Space of 7–10 square feet per 

person would be typical during most demonstrations or special events and could be sustained 

for a day or the duration of an event. The desired experiences for sightseeing and general 

recreation would be in the range of 100 square 

feet or more per person; at lower densities this 

would allow for freedom of movement for active 

recreation or fewer people in viewsheds. 

Permits are required for group activities, recreational sport leagues, and special events, as well as 

First Amendment demonstrations of 25 people 

or more. The permit process sets specific criteria 

for each event to ensure that soils, turf, walks, 

trees, and irrigation systems are not degraded or 

are restored to the desired standards. 

Allowable Facilities 

Allowable facilities include paving, pedestrian 

sidewalks or trails, athletic fields, parking lots, 

and event infrastructure. Irrigation systems are 

protected from damage during events. 

Temporary facilities would be allowed. It is 

always preferable to locate temporary facilities 

on paved surfaces, convenient to access and 

civic event infrastructure. 

RESOURCE STANDARDS

Standards further define the desired conditions 

for areas within zones. Five levels of care have 

been defined to help the National Park Service 

evaluate whether desired conditions are being 

achieved within this area. 

1. Level 1 — This first level represents the 

highest level of care and excellence in 

maintenance. Grounds would be manicured. Level 1 is appropriate for high-traffic 

areas, such as public squares and gathering 

areas, as well as commemorative works or 

memorials. Based on public scoping for this 

planning effort, the American public thinks 

this is the level at which the National Mall 

should be maintained. 

2. Level 2 — This level represents a very high 

level of care for public spaces that are primarily vegetated and see a very high volume 

of use due to special events and demonstrations. This zone may contain lesser known 

memorials. 

3. Level 3 — Level 3 represents a high level of 

care associated with locations that have 

moderate use and that have some maintained turf or naturalized areas. Facilities 

consist primarily of circulation corridors 

and small visitor facilities. 

4. Level 4 — This level relates to naturalized or 

vegetated areas that see some local use along 

well-maintained paths. There are no memorials or buildings. 

5. Level 5 — The fifth level relates to areas that 

see little use and require minimal effort to 

maintain. There are no memorials or 

buildings. 

 

60 
Conservation Zones and User Capacities: User Capacity 

The first three levels of care will predominate on 

the National Mall. The levels of care set goals to 

help park staff assess whether desired conditions 

are being achieved. 

Park staff are developing more detailed standards for each level of care. The more detailed 

standards for the National Mall are based on the 

Operational Guidelines for Grounds Maintenance

(APPA et al. 2001), a set of professional standards used by many organizations across the 

country to identify various levels of desired conditions for turf, trees, shrub and tree borders, 

floral plantings, site furnishings, display fountains, and irrigation, as well as various maintenance approaches such as repairs, inspections, 

pruning, surfaces, litter control, and snow removal. In applying the standards to the National 

Mall, they have been broadened to include memorials, permanent and temporary facilities, 

utilities, and construction, as well as grounds 

maintenance. They incorporate ideas from best 

practices, past maintenance standards, and those 

used by other federal entities, such as the Smithsonian Institution, National Gallery of Art, and 

the Architect of the Capitol. 

USER CAPACITY

The foundations for making user capacity decisions in this plan are the park’s purpose, significance, special mandates, and conservation 

zones. The purpose, significance, and special 

mandates define why the park was established 

and identify the most important resources and 

values that will be protected and provided. The 

conservation zones describe the desired resource conditions and visitor experiences, 

including appropriate visitor activities, for 

different locations throughout the National 

Mall. As part of the National Park Service’s 

commitment to implementing user capacity, the 

park staff will abide by these directives for 

guiding the types and levels of visitor use that 

will be accommodated while sustaining the 

quality of park resources and visitor experiences 

consistent with the purposes of the park. 

In addition to these directives, this plan also 

includes indicators and standards, which are 

more specific guiding directives that will be used 

to direct the management of visitor use and can 

also be monitored to ensure that desired conditions are being achieved. The plan also includes 

a range of management strategies that would be 

used to achieve desired conditions. 

The appropriate kinds of use were described for 

each conservation zone and are based on the 

purposes of the memorials, the sensitivity of 

resources, and the site characteristics of each 

area, along with maintenance and programming 

standards. The appropriate levels of use were also 

described for each zone and are largely derived 

from estimates of appropriate use densities for 

each area. The density of people (the number of 

square feet per person) in various park settings is 

an indicator of quality that has been shown to 

affect perceptions of crowding and visitors’ ability to achieve desired intellectual, educational, 

and recreational outcomes. The standards for 

user density in this plan range from 3 square feet 

per person for a large demonstration or historic 

event like the 2009 inauguration to 10,000 square 

feet per person for recreational activities like 

Frisbee or kite flying. At 3 square feet per person 

people would be standing shoulder-to-shoulder 

in a highly congested situation that would not be 

sustainable for more than a few hours. At 10,000 

square feet per person the nearest person would 

be about 100 feet away, and the social experience 

would be very open, with visitors having ample 

opportunities for personal contemplative 

experiences or recreational activities. 

User capacities would vary somewhat by alternative because conservation zones would be 

applied differently depending on the emphasis 

of a particular alternative. For example, more 

people could be accommodated under the preferred alternative and alternative B because of 

flexible spaces that could handle more people 

and an improved ability to host national celebrations, First Amendment demonstrations, and 

special events. 

The capacity of various park areas was examined 

by applying several different square footage options per person. Physical capacities are most 

important for determining the capacities of 

specific venues for demonstrations, national 

celebrations, and special events, and these densities range from 3 square feet to 50 square feet 

per person. A few locations such as the D.C. War 

Memorial, the Sylvan Theater, or Room 4 in the 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial were 

61
ALTERNATIVES

planned to accommodate performances or 

programs, and these areas generally require 

more space per person because the audience 

would typically be seated on chairs or blankets. 

TABLE 3: NATIONAL MALL USER CAPACITIES

Area 

Resource 

Standard* 

Social 

Standard 

Management / 

Features 

Estimated Level 

of Use 

(at one time) Notes 

MEMORIAL AREAS

Ulysses S. Grant 

Memorial

1 50–200 sq. ft. / 

person 

Traditional Uses: Viewing the 

memorial, enjoying historic vistas, 

group photos. 

500–2,000 people 

Washington 

Monument 

(within the inner 

circle of flags)

1 200 sq. ft. / person

Higher use levels 

(e.g., 100 sq. ft / 

person) would 

result in feelings 

of congestion. 

Official Uses: Annual birthday commemorative ceremony (Feb. 22) 

Limitations: No demonstrations or 

special events in the inner circle 

surrounding the monument, except for the official annual birthday ceremony (36 CFR 7.96). 

500 people 

Monument 

interior: 80 

people at one 

time. 

Tour bus drop-off/ 

pickup and parking; 

parking for visitors 

with disabilities. 

World War II 

Memorial

1 200 sq. ft. per 

person

Traditional Uses: Veterans Day 

programs. 

Not more than 

1,800 people 

Tour bus drop-off/ 

pickup and parking; 

parking for visitors 

with disabilities. Also 

convenient to Constitution Gardens. 

Vietnam 

Veterans 

Memorial

1 Memorial wall:

10–50 sq. ft. / 

person 

Knoll east of the 

memorial: 1,000 

sq. ft. / person to 

retain an open 

character. 

Official Uses: Memorial Day and 

Veterans Day commemorative 

ceremonies. 

Limitations: No demonstrations or 

special events within the memorial boundaries except for official 

annual Memorial Day and 

Veterans Day ceremonies (36 CFR 

7.96 (g)(3)(ii) (D)). No stages or 

sound amplification closer than 

100 feet from the memorial’s 

boundaries; sound systems to be 

directed away from the memorial 

at all times. 

Memorial wall: 

50–250 people 

Knoll east of the 

memorial: 150 

people 

The lawn south of 

the wall is used for 

ceremonies and has 

the capacity for 

several thousand, 

but it is typically set 

up for only several 

hundred. 

Lincoln 

Memorial

1 Chamber: 50–200 

sq. ft. / person 

Staircase to lower 

approachway: 10 

sq. ft. / person, 

allowing aisles.

Official Uses: Annual birthday commemorative ceremony (Feb. 12) 

Traditional Uses: The staircase may 

serve as seating for national 

celebrations, park programs, and 

events taking place near the reflecting pool. The stairs may also 

occasionally host small ceremonies and events related to civil 

rights and the First Amendment. 

Limitations: No demonstrations or 

special events at or above the 

large marble columns surrounding 

the memorial except for the 

official birthday ceremony (36 CFR 

7.96(g)(3)(ii)(B)). 

Chamber: 35–150 

people 

Staircase to lower 

approachway:

4,000 people 

Tour bus drop-off/ 

pickup and parking; 

parking for visitors 

with disabilities. Also 

serves the Vietnam 

and Korean War 

veterans memorials. 

Korean War 

Veterans 

Memorial

1 Walkways: 50–200 

sq. ft. / person 

Traditional Uses: Armistice Day 

ceremonies, wreath-laying 

ceremonies. 

Walkways: 80–

300 people 

Use has never exceeded several hundred. Parking for 

visitors with disabilities. 

Martin Luther 

King, Jr. 

Memorial 

1 To be determined. To be determined. To be determined. 

Franklin Delano 

Roosevelt 

Memorial

1 10–200 sq. ft. / 

person 

The memorial is a series of large 

paved “rooms” that can accommodate higher levels of use 

because adjacent visual open 

400–8,000 people Tour bus drop-off/ 

pickup and parking; 

parking for visitors 

with disabilities. Will 

 

62 
Conservation Zones and User Capacities: User Capacity 

Area 

Resource 

Standard* 

Social 

Standard 

Management / 

Features 

Estimated Level 

of Use 

(at one time) Notes 

space creates a more open 

feeling. 

also serve the Martin 

Luther King, Jr. 

Memorial. 

George Mason 

Memorial

1 50–200 sq. ft. / 

person 

Sightseeing and understanding of 

American history. 

25–100 people Sidewalks and plaza 

can accommodate 

higher levels of use 

because adjacent 

visual open space 

creates a more open 

feeling. 

Thomas 

Jefferson 

Memorial

1 Chamber: 50–100 

sq. ft. / person 

Stairs / plaza: 10–

50 sq. ft. / person

Official Uses: Annual birthday commemorative ceremony (Apr. 13). 

Traditional Uses: The staircase may 

serve as seating for events on the 

plaza. 

Limitations: No demonstration or 

special events at or above the 

circular portion of the memorial 

enclosed by the outermost series 

of columns except for the official 

birthday ceremony (36 CFR 

7.96(g)(3)(ii)(C)). 

Chamber: 60–120 

people 

Stairs / plaza: 

800–4,000 

people 

The plaza is used for 

performances and 

viewing and can 

accommodate 

higher use levels. 

Tour bus drop-off/ 

pickup and parking; 

parking for visitors 

with disabilities. Also 

serves the George 

Mason Memorial. 

CHARACTER PROTECTION

Mall Elm Tree 

Panels 

1 or 2 For demonstrations (all alternatives) and special 

events (no-action 

alternative only) 7 

sq. ft. / person. 

For general enjoyment, 200–1,000 

sq. ft. / person. 

Crisp formal design characterized 

by rows of mature elm trees 

planted every 50 feet in turf to 

define the primary east-west view 

corridor (U.S. Capitol to the 

Washington Monument). Other 

cultural landscape characteristics 

include historic site furnishings 

(seating, lighting). 

For demonstrations (all alternatives) and special 

events (no-action 

alternative only) 

— 80,000 

people. For 

general enjoyment, 1,000–

7,000 people 

Washington 

Monument 

Grounds (above 

the retaining 

wall) 

1 or 2 7–50 sq. ft. / 

person 

Simple symmetrical layout of 

walkway circulation and turf 

emphasizing the monument. Flags

and flagpoles characterize this 

visible orientation point, providing 

a 360 degree view of the city. 

Other components include the 

north-south vista from the White 

House to the Thomas Jefferson 

Memorial, the historic adaptively 

reused Monument Lodge, and the 

boulevard, along with informal 

tree plantings.

650–4,000 people 

Constitution 

Gardens

3 Walks: 10–100 sq. 

ft. / person. 

Hillsides: 200–

1,000 sq. ft. / 

person

Informal character with undulating 

tree-covered enclosed terrain and 

meandering walkways. Direct 

views of the Washington Monument from around the lake; 

secondary views from various 

locations within the site, including 

the 56 Signers of the Declaration 

of Independence Memorial. 

Walks: 200–2,000 

people 

Hillsides: 800–

4,000 people 

Because of many 

trees, a density of 

50 sq. ft. / person 

would feel very 

crowded. Walks can 

absorb higher use 

levels with 100 sq. 

ft. / person still retaining the informal 

garden character. 

Lincoln Memorial Grounds

• Inside Lincoln 

Circle 

1 or 2 NA The elevated memorial dominates 

viewsheds east to the Washington 

Monument and the U.S. Capitol 

and southwest to Arlington 

National Cemetery. 

Little use occurs in 

area. 

• Reflecting Pool 1 or 2 3–200 sq. ft. / 

person 

Symmetrically laid out shady elm 

walkways flank the reflecting pool 

and frame vistas both to the east 

(the World War II Memorial) and 

2,000–90,000 

people 

63
ALTERNATIVES

Area 

Resource 

Standard* 

Social 

Standard 

Management / 

Features 

Estimated Level 

of Use 

(at one time) Notes 

the west (the Lincoln Memorial) 

and emphasize the most direct 

circulation pattern. Formal layout 

contrasts with the informal tree 

plantings north and south of the 

walkways. 

• Watergate Area 2 200 sq. ft. / person The setting of the Watergate steps 

provides a formal western foreground to the Lincoln Memorial, 

as well as a formal entrance to 

the city, with the Arts of Peace

and the Arts of War sculptures. 

Informal tree plantings on a 

grassy hillside provide glimpses to 

the Potomac River and Arlington 

National Cemetery. The riverfront 

has a formal atmosphere characterized by high-quality construction and the stone river walls and 

the Constitution Avenue belvedere, as well as the Watergate 

Steps. 

20 people 

D.C. War 

Memorial

Memorial: 1 

Surrounding 

landscape: 2 

Memorial: 10 sq. 

ft. / person 

Paved areas: 10 

sq. ft. / person 

The small, classical marble 

memorial set within a heavily 

wooded area may host small 

performances and special events 

(including weddings). 

Memorial: 100 

people 

Paved areas: 375 

people 

Ash Woods 3 10,000 sq. ft. / 

person

Generally level terrain characterized by naturalized dense 

woods that provide separation 

from traffic on Independence 

Avenue. The woods enclose the 

central east-west vistas and 

border secondary views along the 

JFK hockey fields. 

50 people While the woods 

could absorb higher 

levels of use, more 

than 50 people at 

one time would alter 

the naturalized 

dense wood 

character. 

West Potomac 

Park Riverfront 

2 or 3 100–1,000 sq. ft. / 

person

River views dominated by a serene, 

parklike setting and the recreational and pleasurable nature of 

most boating. The south end has 

an informal atmosphere characterized by the gentle slope to the 

Potomac River, with informally 

planted flowering trees closer to 

the river bordered by taller shade 

trees. 

60–600 people

Tidal Basin and 

Walkways 

1 or 2 Walks: 3–50 sq. ft. 

/ person 

Informal, undulating naturalistic 

water edge bordered by flowering 

cherry trees that sometimes overhang walks and water. The dominating visual element is the 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial. 

Other views from land, bridges, 

and water include the Washington Monument and glimpses into 

the Franklin Delano Roosevelt 

Memorial. 

Walks: 1,800–

25,000 people If 

walks doubled in 

width, 3,600–

50,000 people 

Thomas 

Jefferson 

Memorial

1 Stairs / plaza: 10–

50 sq. ft. / person 

The primary planned view is the 

north-south view between the 

White House and the Thomas 

Jefferson Memorial. From the 

plaza north of the memorial, the 

U.S. Capitol can also be seen. 

Stairs / plaza: 

800–4,000 

people

MULTIPURPOSE AREAS

Washington 

Monument 

Grounds (below 

2 10–50 sq. ft. / person 

Sylvan Theater:

Tree canopies; north-south vista 

between the White House and 

the Thomas Jefferson Memorial, 

500–2,500 people 

Sylvan Theater: 

4,000–15,000 

 

64 
Conservation Zones and User Capacities: User Capacity 

Area 

Resource 

Standard* 

Social 

Standard 

Management / 

Features 

Estimated Level 

of Use 

(at one time) Notes 

the retaining 

wall) 

10–50 sq. ft. / 

person

historic Survey Lodge, and Sylvan 

Theater. 

people

Constitution 

Gardens 

2 10–50 sq. ft. / person Informal, undulating tree-covered 

terrain and curving walkways, 

views focused to and from lake 

that is in a bowl; 56 Signer of the 

Declaration of Independence 

Memorial. Secondary views of the 

Washington Monument and 

glimpses to the World War II 

Memorial, the Vietnam Veterans 

Memorial, and Constitution 

Avenue. 

600–1,200 people 

20,000 people if 

the lake area was 

reconstructed to 

be drainable 

(alternative B). 

Lincoln Circle 

and Radial 

Roads / Watergate Area 

3 50 sq. ft. / person Tree canopy. Sloping terrain bisected by roadways make use of 

the area impractical for large 

events. 

4,400 Recreation fields 

(volleyball courts, 

baseball/softball 

fields) 

Tidal Basin 2 10–100 sq. ft. / 

person

Parking and food services areas. 

Flowering trees and perennial 

gardens, secondary views. 

500–5,000 people 

HIGH-USE AREAS

Union Square 1 Paved areas: 3–10 

sq. ft. / person

No traditional or required 

ceremonies. Hard-surface area 

can absorb higher levels of use. 

Paved areas: 

30,000–100,000 

people (or 

50,000–290,000 

if pool was drainable) 

Mall Center 

Panels 

2 3–50 sq. ft. / 

person 

No recreational league sport fields 

identified. 

Additional regulation to provide 

fair use of a limited resource; 

possible incentives to relocate 

events. 

Equitable use among events, 

restoration, open recreational use, 

and general visitation. 

Strong events monitoring program 

of indicators and standards. 

30,000–500,000 

people 

Washington Monument Grounds

• North of Independence Avenue and west of 

15th Street

2 3–50 sq. ft. / 

person 

Fields identified for permitted 

recreation sport league use. 

Strong events monitoring program 

of indicators and standards 

43,000–700,000 

people 

• South of Independence 

Avenue 

3 100–1,000 sq. ft. / 

person 

Goal posts provided; area primarily 

used for recreation. 

60–600 people 

JFK Hockey 

Fields

3 7–100 sq. ft. / 

person 

Fields identified for permitted 

recreation league use. Infrequent 

use for permitted events. 

4,500–60,000 

people 

FDR Ballfields / 

Polo Grounds

3 FDR ballfields: 7–

100 sq. ft. / 

person 

Polo grounds: 7–

100 sq. ft. / 

person 

Permanent backstops provided in 

some locations. Regularly used as 

a staging area and for starting 

footraces and charity walks. 

Polo grounds sometimes used for 

special events and a staging area 

for commercial filming 

FDR ballfields used primarily for 

local recreational league sports. 

FDR ballfields: 

10,000–120,000 

people 

Polo grounds: 

7,000–100,000 

people 

NOTE: The social standard is based on the highest number of people that would be acceptable in terms of maintaining the desired visitor experience. 

* Level 1 — the highest level of care and excellence in maintenance. 

 Level 2 — a very high level of care for public spaces that are primarily vegetated and see a very high volume of use due to special events and 

demonstrations. 

 Level 3 — a high level of care associated with locations that have moderate levels of use and that have some maintained turf or naturalized areas.

65
ALTERNATIVES

MONITORING AND ADAPTIVE 

MANAGEMENT

Monitoring use is critical to determining if and 

when standards are not being met. Different 

monitoring programs would be developed for 

normal visitation and permitted activities. Additionally, the National Park Service would 

continue to improve visitation counting methodologies. NPS staff would continue regularly 

gathering information in annual visitor surveys 

and authorized surveys, and undertaking 

assessments of various activities to determine if 

improvements could be made to either visitor 

experiences or resource conditions. 

Social monitoring at memorials would track 

normal visitation and would examine whether 

desired conditions were being met or exceeded. 

When it was evident over an extended period 

(weeks, months, or seasons) that the desired 

memorial experiences could not be achieved and 

that general use levels were being consistently 

exceeded, the National Park Service would 

identify adaptive management techniques to 

mitigate adverse effects on visitor experiences. 

Elements of visitor experiences that would be 

desirable to maintain include ease of access, 

along with opportunities for contemplation, 

education, photography, seeing or reading 

memorial elements, and enjoying a memorial. 

The monitoring of permitted activities would 

track and compile use and impact data related to 

First Amendment gatherings, national celebrations, special events, and commercial filming. 

Monitoring would include tracking events, event 

days, and locations; estimated sizes of events and 

general accuracy of estimates; weather conditions and temperatures; related planning documents; and fees, bonds, and permit compliance. 

Monitoring would also use pre- and post-permitted activity checklists, photo records, and 

pre- and post-permitted activity testing of 

equipment, such as irrigation systems and other 

utilities, or soil conditions and compaction as 

needed, depending on location, season, and size 

of an event. In addition the National Park 

Service would use incentive programs and 

acknowledgments to encourage shorter, lowimpact, green, and sustainable permitted 

activities. 

When standards were not being met because of 

permitted activities, the following types of steps 

could be taken to mitigate impacts: 

• revise the required recovery periods after 

permitted activities to shorten the permitted 

activity or its setup and takedown time 

• require longer recovery periods between 

special events and national celebrations 

• track and enforce compliance with permit 

conditions 

• modify regulations for national celebrations, special events, and commercial 

filming (not First Amendment gatherings) 

• increase bonding and cost recovery 

If measures such as these were not effective, 

more stringent restoration measures could be 

recommended or required. 

The National Park Service would also undertake 

more detailed implementation plans to lay out 

how to achieve desired resource conditions. 

Progress in meeting these conditions would be 

monitored as part of annual work plans. Plans 

would include the following: 

• a soils management and restoration plan to 

rebuild healthy soils and describe appropriate soil treatment programs and schedules 

for areas within the National Mall 

• a plan to preserve and restore special status 

vegetation, such as trees, turf, and other vegetation that is part of the historic landscape, 

including methods to increase onsite plant 

biomass and to reduce the carbon footprint 

• a sustainable water management plan to address onsite water quality, irrigation, water 

cleansing, minimized use of potable water, 

ornamental water features, graywater use, 

and stormwater management 

 

66 
ACTIONS COMMON TO ALL ALTERNATIVES 

A Vision for the National Mall — Enriching Your American Experience 

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. This historic open space 

with its planned vistas provides an inspiring setting for national memorials, many of them symbols of our 

democracy. It also provides a visual connection between the branches of government, and a backdrop for 

government buildings and the great cultural institutions of our nation. 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 demonstrate our rights and celebrate our freedoms, our history and culture, our unity and 

diversity, and our way of life.

Actions related to historic and natural resources 

of the National Mall, as well as current conditions and uses for First Amendment demonstrations, national celebrations, special events, 

and recreation, are described in this section. 

Actions that will be taken under all alternatives, 

such as visitor activities, access and circulation, 

public health and safety, and park operations, 

are also described. 

After the plan is completed and approved, other, 

more detailed studies and plans might be needed 

to implement specific actions. The National Park 

Service will carry out additional compliance as 

required with the National Environmental 

Policy Act, the National Historic Preservation 

Act, and other relevant laws and policies, as well 

as consultation and public involvement. The 

additional studies and consultation that may be 

needed are listed in the “Consultation and 

Coordination” portion of the document. 

To comply with its mandate to manage the lands 

under its stewardship “in such manner and by 

such means as will leave them unimpaired for 

the enjoyment of future generations” (16 USC 

1), the National Park Service routinely evaluates 

and applies mitigating measures whenever conditions could adversely affect the sustainability 

of national park system resources. 

The National Park Service would conduct appropriate environmental review as required by 

the National Environmental Policy Act, the 

National Historic Preservation Act, and other 

relevant legislation for any future actions. As 

part of the environmental review, the National 

Park Service would avoid, minimize, and mitigate adverse impacts when possible. 

Mitigating measures and best management practices would be used to avoid or minimize potential impacts on cultural and natural resources 

from construction activities, use by visitors, and 

NPS operations. These measures are described 

below under “Cultural Resources” and “Natural 

Resources” and would apply to all alternatives. 

NATIONAL MALL ACTIONS

Cultural Resources 

Common Actions 

Cultural resources would continue to be preserved and would be managed in accordance 

with The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for 

the Treatment of Historic Properties for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings (NPS 1995) and The

Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, with Guidelines for the 

Treatment of Cultural Landscapes (NPS 1996c). 

The D.C. Historic Preservation Office would be 

consulted in the preservation, restoration, adaptive reuse, or rehabilitation of any cultural resource. 

Current laws and policies require that the National Park Service take the following actions to 

meet its legal and policy requirements: 

• Complete and regularly update cultural 

landscape inventories.

• Regularly update/certify the list of classified 

structures. 

• Periodically update the National Register of 

Historic Places nominations for all national 

register properties. 

67
ALTERNATIVES

• Treat all structures as eligible for listing on 

the National Register of Historic Places 

pending a formal determination by the National Park Service and the D.C. Historic 

Preservation Office, as appropriate, as to 

their eligibility. 

• Determine, implement, and maintain the 

appropriate level of preservation for each 

historic property formally determined or 

considered eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (subject to 

The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards).

• Before modifying any historic property 

found eligible for the National Register of 

Historic Places, consult with the D.C. 

Historic Preservation Office and the 

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, 

as required. 

Mitigating Measures 

To the greatest extent possible, the National 

Park Service would preserve and protect resources that reflect human occupation of the 

National Mall. Specific mitigating measures 

would include the following: 

• Continue to inventory and research archeological, historic, and ethnographic 

resources, as well as cultural landscapes, to 

better understand and manage the resources. Continue to follow federal regulations and NPS guidelines in managing 

cultural resources and collections. 

• Avoid adverse impacts by applying The 

Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for 

Archeology and Historic Preservation. If 

adverse impacts were unavoidable, mitigate 

them through consultation with all 

interested parties. 

• Document structures to be adaptively 

reused according to the standards of the 

Historic American Buildings Survey / 

Historic American Engineering Record as 

defined in the Re-engineering Proposal

(October 1, 1997). 

• Wherever possible, place pathways and 

sidewalks, parking areas, and other facilities 

in previously disturbed areas or in existing 

developed areas. Design facilities to avoid 

known or suspected archeological 

resources. 

• Complete project-specific archeological 

inventories before final decisions on project 

location and before finalizing construction 

designs. 

• Conduct archeological site monitoring 

during construction. If protection or site 

avoidance during design and construction 

was infeasible, conduct data recovery excavations at archeological sites threatened 

with destruction. Should archeological resources be discovered, all work in the immediate vicinity of the discovery would be 

halted until the resources could be identified and documented and an appropriate 

mitigation strategy developed in consultation with the D.C. Historic Preservation 

Office. 

Natural Resources 

Common Actions 

Water quality problems in designed water features would continue to be addressed. Soils and 

vegetation health would be managed to improve 

appearance. Technologies supported by scientifically sound research will be included for consideration to improve turf conditions and determine best management practices. Regional coordination on urban wildlife issues, such as 

Canada geese, would be continued with other 

national park system units, other federal agencies, and the city. Threatened or endangered 

species would be protected. 

No additional management actions would be 

taken by the National Park Service to improve 

air quality. 

Mitigating Measures 

The National Park Service would preserve and 

protect, to the greatest extent possible, the 

natural resources of the National Mall. Mitigating measures intended to reduce or eliminate 

adverse effects on natural resources could include the following. Additional mitigating 

measures for natural resources are listed in 

appendix B: 

 

68 
Actions Common to All Alternatives: National Mall Actions 

• Air Quality — A dust abatement program 

would be implemented. Standard dust 

abatement measures could include the 

following elements: water or otherwise 

stabilize soil, cover haul trucks, employ 

speed limits on unpaved roads, minimize 

vegetation clearing, and revegetate after 

construction. Vegetation and the tree 

canopy would be increased to reduce the 

carbon footprint. Sustainable management, 

planting, and rehabilitation of existing vegetation would be implemented to increase 

carbon sequestration capability. 

• Water Resources — To prevent water pollution during construction, best management practices would be used, such as 

erosion control measures, minimized discharge to water bodies, and regular inspection of construction equipment for leaks of 

petroleum and other chemicals. The use of 

heavy equipment would be minimized in a 

waterway. 

 A runoff filtration system would be designed and installed to minimize water 

pollution from larger parking areas. Both 

structural and bioremediation (fungi, 

microorganisms, higher plants) options 

would be considered. 

• Wetlands — Wetlands would be delineated 

by qualified NPS staff or certified wetlands 

specialists, and they would be clearly 

marked before construction work. Construction activities would be performed in a 

cautious manner to prevent damage caused 

by equipment, erosion, siltation, etc. 

• Soils — New facilities would be built on soil 

suitable for development. Soil erosion 

would be minimized by limiting the time 

that soil is left exposed and by applying 

other erosion control measures such as erosion matting, silt fencing, and sedimentation basins in construction areas to reduce 

erosion, surface scouring, and discharge to 

water bodies. Once work is completed, 

construction areas would be revegetated in 

a timely period. 

• Vegetation — Areas used by visitors (e.g., 

trails) would be monitored for signs of 

vegetation disturbance. Public education, 

revegetation of disturbed areas, erosion 

control measures, and barriers would be 

used to control potential impacts on plants 

from trail erosion or social paths. 

• Wildlife — Techniques would be used 

where necessary to reduce impacts on wildlife, including visitor education programs, 

restrictions on visitor activities, and park 

ranger patrols. 

 A natural resource protection program 

would be implemented. Standard measures 

would include construction scheduling, 

biological monitoring, erosion and sediment control, the use of fencing or other 

means to protect sensitive resources adjacent to construction, the removal of all 

food-related items or rubbish, topsoil salvage, and revegetation. This could include 

specific construction monitoring by resource specialists as well as treatment and 

reporting procedures. 

• Threatened and Endangered Species and 

Species of Concern — Mitigation actions 

would occur during normal park operations as well as before, during, and after 

construction to minimize immediate and 

long-term impacts on rare, threatened, or 

endangered species. These actions would 

vary by specific project and area affected, 

and additional mitigation would be added 

depending on the specific action and location. Many of the measures listed above for 

vegetation and wildlife would also benefit 

rare, threatened, or endangered species by 

helping preserve habitat. Mitigation actions 

specific to these species would include the 

following: 

◦ Conduct surveys for rare, threatened, or 

endangered species as warranted. 

◦ Locate and design facilities and actions 

to avoid adverse effects on rare, threatened, or endangered species. If avoidance was infeasible, minimize and compensate for adverse effects as appropriate 

and in consultation with the appropriate 

resource agencies. Conduct work outside 

of critical periods for specific species. 

◦ Develop and implement restoration 

and/or monitoring plans as warranted. 

Plans should include methods for implementation, performance standards, mon69
ALTERNATIVES

itoring criteria, and adaptive management techniques. 

◦ Implement measures to reduce the adverse impacts of nonnative plants and 

wildlife on rare, threatened, or endangered species. 

The Civic Stage: Demonstrations, 

Special Events, and National 

Celebrations 

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution 

provides for freedom of expression as a right of 

citizens. The National Mall is the most prominent space in our country for the demonstration 

of these rights, and that is an essential purpose of 

the National Mall. Areas where national symbols 

are prominent backdrops are especially popular 

locations for demonstrations. Consistent with 

the First Amendment and federal regulations, 

demonstrations will continue to be fully accommodated on a first-come, first-served basis 

throughout the National Mall. Federal regulations (36 CFR 7.96) define allowable areas and 

activities at the Lincoln Memorial, Washington 

Monument, Jefferson Memorial, and Vietnam 

Veterans Memorial. 

Demonstrations, special events, and national 

celebrations are defined differently (see page 

16), and proposed alternative actions related to 

special events and national celebrations may not 

apply to demonstrations. 

The National Park Service would seek to improve permit procedures for special events and 

First Amendment demonstrations. Also, monitoring procedures would be enhanced to ensure 

that resources are better protected and that soil, 

turf, and vegetation impacts were reduced. The 

Park Service would continue to work with the 

Environmental Protection Agency on guidelines 

for ensuring sustainable, low-impact events. 

Access and Circulation 

Access and circulation through the National 

Mall and surrounding downtown areas is part of 

the urban experience in Washington, D.C. There 

is a large regional bicycle-riding population that 

commutes and engages in recreational riding. 

Bicyclists commute through the park from 

Virginia and Maryland. Within the park they use 

multipurpose walks, which are also used by 

pedestrians and recreational bicycle riders. The 

city’s Bicycle Master Plan identifies improved 

bicycle access and facilities. The National Park 

Service has also instituted a work-related 

employee bike-sharing program that would 

continue. 

Existing tour bus drop-off and pickup locations 

would remain and would be improved where 

possible, including provisions for waste management. The National Park Service would continue 

to work with the D.C. Department of Transportation and other city agencies to address tour 

bus parking. No changes are planned for taxi 

stands. 

Visitor Information, Education, 

and Enjoyment 

Visitor information is currently provided by the 

National Park Service online and in brochures. 

Maps would continue to be upgraded, and park 

websites would be improved. Park staff would 

work with professional tour guide groups and 

others to disseminate accurate, engaging information. NPS educational programs would be 

focused on the memorials as symbols of democracy and the history of the national capital. 

Living history programs and other special programs would continue to be offered by the park 

in some locations. Opportunities for entertainment at venues such as at the Sylvan Theater, the 

D.C. War Memorial, the lower approachway to 

the Lincoln Memorial, and the Thomas Jefferson Memorial plaza would continue. 

The National Park Service and others would 

continue to offer guided walking and bicycling 

tours. Efforts would be made to incorporate 

technological advances to further diversify 

educational offerings, including programs and 

handouts related to national celebrations, 

anniversaries, and special events. 

Recreational activities such as walking, picnicking, reading, sunning, kite flying, Frisbee, volleyball, softball, kickball, and playing would 

continue throughout the National Mall. 

Seasonal ice-skating occurs on natural ice when 

conditions permit. Permitted league sports 

would continue where authorized. Current 

 

70 
Actions Common to All Alternatives: The Mall 

commercial activities, such as seasonal paddleboat rentals at the Tidal Basin, would continue. 

Visitor Amenities 

The park would assess the economic feasibility, 

necessity, and appropriateness of additional 

food service, retail, and recreation equipment 

rentals. Based on this assessment, the park 

would determine the service types and levels 

that would be offered. Commercial service 

would be offered using available authorities. 

Currently authorized visitor services would be 

continued. 

Health, Public Safety, and Security 

Existing law enforcement patrols would be continued. Law enforcement presence is currently 

increased during large events. 

The National Park Service would work with the 

General Services Administration to permanently 

resolve public safety and health issues related to 

the steam tunnel and vent system that crosses 

under the National Mall. 

Park Operations 

The National Mall has a significant backlog of 

deferred maintenance projects (repairs) and 

related capital improvements. Projects would be 

undertaken to reduce the backlog. A visual 

quality team would be continued to identify 

high-profile problems and concerns that would 

be addressed promptly by a quick response 

team. 

In addition to ongoing maintenance and repairs, 

restrooms would be cleaned and trash 

containers emptied at least twice daily. In-park 

communication systems would be upgraded. 

The National Park Service would develop a solid 

waste and recycling plan to incorporate best 

practices for collection, retrieval, storage, and 

hauling in order to expand recycling, reduce 

waste hauled to landfills, compost green waste, 

and reuse materials as much as possible. Key 

criteria for a suite of equipment and containers 

would be identified, along with the best locations for containers, routes for mechanized and 

manual retrieval, appropriate collection vehicles, 

schedule options, and implementation phasing. 

A public educational component would also be 

included. 

To help meet NPS energy goals, energy-efficient 

bulbs that are compatible with the historic scene 

would be used in the more than 20,000 light fixtures on the National Mall. In addition, sustainable forms of transportation (such as electric 

cars) would be increasingly used for park operations. Water features would be designed or 

retrofitted to be sustainable, and durable, easyto-use, standardized pumping systems would be 

installed. 

The National Park Service has several agreements to facilitate park management. The purpose of these arrangements with authorized 

private and public partners, nonprofit organizations, and volunteers is to support park goals, 

provide service, supplement park staff, or undertake specific projects. These partnerships and 

agreements would continue. 

THE MALL

Union Square (1st to 3rd Streets) 

The 11.4-acre Union Square, with its presidential memorial to Ulysses S. Grant, will remain an 

essential civic space in the immediate vicinity of 

the legislative branch of government, and it will 

continue to provide opportunities for demonstrations and events. Consistent with the First 

Amendment and federal regulations, demonstrations will continue to be fully accommodated on 

a first-come, first-served basis. Special events 

and national celebrations will be accommodated 

in accordance with federal regulations and coFIGURE 13: ULYSSES S. GRANT MEMORIAL 

Looking southeast toward the Grant Memorial. 

71
ALTERNATIVES

ordinated with the Architect of the Capitol as 

necessary. 

FIGURE 14: THE MALL

Looking east on the Mall to the United States Capitol. 

The Mall (3rd to 14th Streets) 

The Mall will remain the designed promenade 

west of the U. S. Capitol, featuring expansive 

green lawns (the formal French tapis verte or 

green carpet) bordered by formal rows of 

American elm trees that frame vistas to and from 

the Capitol, a fundamental concept of the 

L’Enfant and McMillan plans. Consistent with 

the First Amendment and federal regulations, 

demonstrations will continue to be fully 

accommodated on a first-come, first-served 

basis. Special events will also be accommodated, 

consistent with federal regulations. 

The most popular transit entrance to the National Mall is the Smithsonian Metro station. 

The National Park Service would work with the 

Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority to add the National Mall to the station name. 

WASHINGTON MONUMENT AND 

GROUNDS

Washington Monument 

One of the five presidential memorials on the 

National Mall, the Washington Monument will 

continue to be a historic character-defining feature and the visual orientation point for Washington, D.C. Hours at the monument would be 

extended until 10 p.m. to allow more people to 

visit. 

FIGURE 15: THE WASHINGTON MONUMENT

The Washington Monument from near the Sylvan Theater. 

Washington Monument Grounds 

The grounds of the Washington Monument 

extend from Constitution Avenue on the north 

to Maine Avenue on the south, and from 14th 

Street on the east to 17th Street on the west. The 

German-American Friendship Garden is at the 

north edge of grounds on Constitution Avenue, 

across from the Ellipse. Consistent with the First 

Amendment and federal regulations, demonstrations will continue to be fully accommodated 

on a first-come, first-served basis on the Washington Monument grounds north of Independence Avenue. Special events and national celebrations will also be accommodated, consistent 

with federal regulations, and recreational activities will be allowed. Roadways bisect the south 

grounds, separating the monument and the Tidal 

Basin. 

 

72 
Actions Common to All Alternatives: West Potomac Park (North of Independence Avenue) 

FIGURE 16: WORLD WAR II MEMORIAL 

Looking south across the Rainbow Pool at the World War II Memorial. 

WEST POTOMAC PARK (NORTH OF 

INDEPENDENCE AVENUE) 

World War II Memorial 

The World War II Memorial commemorates the 

sacrifices, achievements, and activities of a major 

event of the mid-20th century, both at home and 

in the Atlantic and Pacific theaters. It was constructed around the historic Rainbow Pool. 

Living history is occasionally provided, along 

with programs on Veterans Day and Memorial 

Day. Wreaths are not permitted in front of the 

Freedom Wall, which encompasses the Field of 

Gold Stars (NPS 2006f). The memorial provides 

parking and drop-off for visitors with disabilities, and wheelchairs are provided. No major 

actions are planned for this memorial. 

Constitution Gardens 

Constitution Gardens was developed for the 

Bicentennial and was intended for event use. It is 

the site of the Memorial to the 56 Signers of the 

Declaration of Independence, which is located 

on an island in the lake, and it provides a pastoral setting for passive recreation and a respite 

as visitors travel between memorials. Consistent 

with the First Amendment and federal regulations, demonstrations will continue to be fully 

accommodated on a first-come, first-served 

basis. Special events will also be allowed, consistent with federal regulations. 

Present public access and parking would remain 

on Constitution Avenue, including tour bus 

drop-off and parking spaces. Ice-skating is 

allowed on natural ice when conditions are safe. 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial 

The 5.8-acre Vietnam Veterans Memorial 

honors those who served during this conflict. As 

previously noted, an underground memorial 

center will be constructed by others west of 

Henry Bacon Drive. Rangers and volunteers 

would continue to lead living history and educational programs. Catalogs listing the names on 

the wall are provided in several locations. Wayside exhibits provide additional information. 

FIGURE 18: VIETNAM VETERANS MEMORIAL 

Looking west toward the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. 

FIGURE 17: CONSTITUTION GARDENS

Looking from the island in Constitution Gardens Lake with 

the Memorial to the 56 Signers of the Declaration of 

Independence to the left. 

73
ALTERNATIVES

Except for official annual Memorial Day and 

Veterans Day commemorative ceremonies, 

federal regulations prohibit demonstrations and 

special events in certain areas of the memorial. 

First Amendment demonstration sites related to 

the Vietnam Veterans Memorial (small structures with displays) are present along the sidewalk of the Lincoln Memorial. 

Under all alternatives circulation patterns and 

related pedestrian amenities (lighting, name 

catalogs, post-and-chain fencing) would be 

examined once the new Vietnam Veterans 

Memorial Center has been constructed. 

Lincoln Memorial and Grounds 

One of the five presidential memorials on the 

National Mall, the Lincoln Memorial will continue to be a historic, character-defining feature 

and the visual western terminus of the National 

Mall. The presidential memorial will remain a 

highly visited area also associated with civil 

rights history as well as the contributions of our 

16th president. Consistent with the First 

Amendment, federal regulations, and the 2009 

Guidelines for Special Events and Demonstrations,

demonstrations will continue to be fully accommodated on a first-come, first-served basis. Special events and national celebrations will also 

continue to be allowed, consistent with federal 

regulations. 

The memorial exhibit area and restrooms, which 

are on the lower level, would be renovated. The 

bookstore would be relocated from the chamber 

level to the lower level. 

The historic landscape design retains a great deal 

of integrity with existing plant materials, the elm 

walkways, and radial plantings around the base 

of the memorial and at the Watergate steps. The 

recommendations of the Lincoln Memorial 

Cultural Landscape Report, which seek to protect the historic design, would be implemented 

under all alternatives. 

The Lincoln Memorial grounds include three 

component cultural landscapes: the reflecting 

pool, the memorial circle and roads, and the 

Watergate area. The reflecting pool area also 

contains the north and south elm walkways and 

the lower approachway (staircase to the reflecting pool). 

The historic landscape associated with the memorial circle and radial roads would be rehabilitated. Existing public access and parking would 

be maintained, including tour bus drop-offs, 

parking for visitors with disabilities, and taxi 

stands. 

The Watergate area is on the west edge of the 

National Mall and includes historic features and 

recreation areas (volleyball and softball). Adjacent to and north of Constitution Avenue is 

Braddock’s Memorial Rock Well, which is 

within intertwined nonhistoric access roads for 

Rock Creek Parkway, the Kennedy Center 

parking area, U.S. Highways 50 and 66, and the 

Theodore Roosevelt Memorial Bridge. 

The historic features of the Watergate steps, the 

Constitution Avenue belvedere, the John Ericcson Memorial, and the Arts of Peace statues 

would be maintained. In cooperation with other 

national park system units, Arlington Memorial 

Bridge and the Arts of War statues will be 

maintained. Portions of the area, which are 

outside the Reserve that was designated by 

Congress, have been identified in the NCPC 

Memorials and Museums Master Plan for future 

national commemorative sites. The National 

Park Service would accommodate future 

national memorials authorized by Congress, 

reinforcing that this is a commemorative 

landscape. The condition of volleyball courts 

and softball fields would be improved. 

FIGURE 19: LINCOLN MEMORIAL 

The Lincoln Memorial and steps. 

This area also serves as a major vehicular gateway to the city and the National Mall from 

Virginia and Maryland. Road projects and 

 

74 
Actions Common to All Alternatives: West Potomac Park (South of Independence Avenue) 

FIGURE 20: KOREAN WAR VETERANS MEMORIAL 

Looking west at the Korean War Veterans Memorial. 

circulation improvements by others would be 

accommodated to simplify traffic patterns and to 

improve pedestrian connections from the 

Kennedy Center and adjacent neighborhoods. 

Korean War Veterans Memorial 

The Korean War Veterans Memorial commemorates the veterans and international coalition 

that fought the Korean War in the 1950s. Living 

history programs and annual special events at 

the memorial would continue. 

D.C. War Memorial 

The D.C. War Memorial primarily commemorates city residents’ involvement in World War I. 

It is in a pleasant wooded setting with flowering 

trees and shrubs, and it was also designed to 

serve as a bandstand. Current use for small 

events would continue. 

Ash Woods 

Ash Woods, which is between Independence 

Avenue and Ash Road, was planned to be a naturalized, thickly wooded area with little understory vegetation, and this appearance would be 

maintained. The area contains the U.S. Park 

Police stables, a restroom, and recreation fields. 

WEST POTOMAC PARK (SOUTH OF 

INDEPENDENCE AVENUE) 

Tidal Basin Area 

The Tidal Basin area, a designed water area of a 

little more than 100 acres, is the beautiful setting 

for several memorials, cherry trees that were a 

gift from Japan, historic monuments, and visitor 

amenities. It provides spectacular views, as well 

as reflected views, of the Thomas Jefferson 

Memorial and the Washington Monument. 

Consistent with the First Amendment and 

federal regulations, demonstrations will continue to be fully accommodated on a first-come, 

first-served basis. National celebrations and 

special events will also be allowed, consistent 

with federal regulations. 

Measures would be taken to reduce trampling, 

compaction, and erosion near the cherry trees, 

including the installation of post-and-chain 

fencing in some areas. Visitors would be 

educated about how they can help reduce 

damage to the trees. 

Visitor enjoyment is primarily informal recreation, such as enjoying views, picnicking, and 

strolling along the Tidal Basin walks. Seasonal 

paddleboat rentals are provided on the east side 

of the Tidal Basin. These activities would 

continue under all alternatives. 

FIGURE 21: THE D.C. WAR MEMORIAL 

The D.C. War Memorial is within Ash Woods. 

75
ALTERNATIVES

FIGURE 22: FRANKLIN DELANO ROOSEVELT MEMORIAL 

Room 4 at the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial. 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt 

Memorial 

One of five presidential memorials on the National Mall, this memorial tells important stories 

of mid-20th century history — the Great Depression, the Roosevelt presidential legacy, and 

World War II. Based on Roosevelt’s four terms 

as president, the memorial is subtly divided into 

four outdoor rooms; Room 4 was designed for 

programs. Existing public access and parking 

will continue. West Basin Drive will be realigned 

when the Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial is 

built to the north. Visitor amenities, including an 

information station, bookstore, and two 

restroom facilities, would be maintained and 

updated as needed. 

West Potomac Park Riverfront 

Stretching south from the John Ericcson Memorial to the I-395 corridor, the Potomac Riverfront includes the First Air Mail Flight plaque, 

cherry trees, walks, views, and parking. This is 

primarily an informal area. Athletic fields are 

east of Ohio Drive. The riverfront trail system 

connects to Georgetown and East Potomac 

Park, as well as to the National Mall. 

Informal or passive recreation, such as picnicking, play, and walking, would continue. Ballfields 

west of the Tidal Basin are highly sought after 

for league and recreational games. The fields are 

occasionally used for special events, as well as a 

staging area for events and commercial filming, 

and these uses would continue. 

George Mason Memorial 

The memorial to this founding father emphasizes the rights of citizens in a democracy and is 

built around an existing historic fountain. It contains perennial gardens. The historic fountain 

would be rehabilitated to improve water quality. 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial 

One of the five presidential memorials on the 

National Mall, the Thomas Jefferson Memorial 

will continue to be a historic, character-defining 

feature and the visual southern terminus for the 

National Mall. This memorial to our third president includes the terrace wall and related plantings, the circular terrace roadway, and the north 

plaza. Exhibits, a bookstore, information, and 

restrooms would continue inside the memorial. 

Educational information about Thomas 

Jefferson would continue to be provided. 

FIGURE 23: THOMAS JEFFERSON MEMORIAL 

The south side of the Thomas Jefferson Memorial. 

Consistent with the First Amendment and 

federal regulations, demonstrations will continue to be fully accommodated on a first-come, 

first-served basis. National celebrations and 

special events will also be allowed, consistent 

with federal regulations. 

The memorial grounds include 19.2 acres 

immediately south of the Tidal Basin, with tall 

shade trees and cherry trees. Historic plantings 

would be preserved. A refreshment stand is 

located south of the memorial near the tour bus 

parking area. 

 

76 
THE ALTERNATIVES

THE NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE —

CONTINUE CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

Actions Common to All Alternatives

As previously described, the following summarized 

actions are common to all alternatives: 

• Cultural Resources — Preserve and protect cultural resources; manage in accordance with The

Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and with the

general recommendations of cultural landscape 

reports and inventories. 

• Natural Resources — Continue to manage and 

protect natural resources. Address water quality 

problems in water features. 

• Demonstrations and Special Events — Consistent 

with the First Amendment and federal regulations, fully accommodate demonstrations on a 

first-come, first-served basis. Consistent with federal regulations, accommodate special events. 

Improve permit procedures for special events and 

First Amendment demonstrations. Enhance monitoring procedures to ensure that resources are 

better protected and that soil, turf, and vegetation impacts are reduced. 

• Access and Circulation — Continue working with 

the city and other agencies to address tour bus 

parking. 

• Visitor Information, Education, and Enjoyment —

Continue to offer visitor information, educational 

programs, venues for entertainment, guided 

walking and bicycle tours, and a mix of recreational activities. 

• Visitor Amenities — Assess the economic feasibility, necessity, and appropriateness of changes 

to commercial visitors services and facilities. 

• Health, Public Safety, and Security — Continue 

law enforcement patrols and increase a law 

enforcement presence during large events. 

• Park Operations — Make waste management 

more efficient; expand recycling at events; continue a visual quality team to improve conditions 

and the appearance of park facilities; and meet 

NPS energy efficiency goals. 

The no-action alternative describes how current 

management would be continued, and it identifies those plans and actions already moving 

forward. Park staff would continue standard 

maintenance activities and undertake deferred 

maintenance projects as funding permits. The 

following is a summary of actions that would 

occur under this alternative. All actions that 

would be taken under this alternative are listed 

in Table 7. Because this alternative outlines 

existing conditions, it serves as a baseline to 

compare the action alternatives. 

All actions described below would be in addition 

to those under “Actions Common to All Alternatives” and highlighted in the accompanying text 

box. Only areas where actions would be taken 

are included in the following discussion. 

National Mall Actions 

Cultural Resources 

In addition to the actions common to all alternatives, views and vistas within the historic landscape would be recognized, including large areas 

of unprogrammed open space. 

Natural Resources 

No actions beyond those described in “Actions 

Common to All Alternatives” would be taken. 

Demonstrations, Special Events, and 

National Celebrations 

No actions beyond those described in “Actions 

Common to All Alternatives” would be taken. 

Access and Circulation 

Various means of circulation within the National 

Mall would continue for different users (public 

transit, tour buses, taxis, commuters, pedestrians, and bicycle riders). The NPS visitor 

transportation system would be replaced when 

the current contract expires. No changes would 

be made to visitor parking or public access. 

Visitor Information, Education, and 

Enjoyment 

No actions beyond those described in “Actions 

Common to All Alternatives” would be taken. 

 77
ALTERNATIVES

Visitor Amenities 

The present variety of architectural styles for 

visitor amenities and site furnishings on the 

National Mall would continue. Various types of 

paving (including gravel, asphalt, concrete, 

brick, stone, and concrete pavers) would be 

maintained, repaired, and replaced as budgets 

allow. The National Park Service would work 

with the Commission of Fine Arts to retain the 

existing character of lighting. Present restroom, 

drinking fountains, and seating would remain. 

Health, Public Safety, and Security 

Highly used areas with many different activities 

(such as bicycle use on sidewalks or softball 

games near areas where people are picnicking) 

would continue. 

Present street crossing times would remain, as 

would existing pathway lighting, furnishings, 

and paving materials. U.S. Park Police and 

ranger staff would continue to notify visitors of 

emergency situations, including severe weather 

conditions. 

The National Park Service would continue to 

reduce opportunities for illegal camping and the 

misuse of public facilities through staff oversight 

(law enforcement rangers as well as maintenance 

personnel). 

Public information and emergency announcements would continue to be made by park police 

and ranger staff. Improved mass notification 

methods would be researched. 

Park Operations 

Deferred maintenance would be addressed as 

budgets and staffing allow. Park standards, 

which are dated and limited in scope, would 

continue to be used. Current programs to make 

facilities sustainable would be continued, including designing any new facilities to incorporate sustainable systems. Operational access 

for vehicles would remain limited in some areas. 

In accordance with the turf management record 

of decision, half of the Mall (3rd to 14th streets) 

would continue to be closed every other winter 

for restoration. Efforts would be made to reduce 

the use of snow fencing to restrict access to areas 

for security or resource rehabilitation. 

For events, temporary communication systems 

would be installed as needed. 

The Mall 

Union Square (1st to 3rd Streets) 

The Grant Memorial and the Capitol Reflecting 

Pool would continue to be the focal point of the 

east end of the National Mall, the foreground of 

the U.S. Capitol. Union Square would remain a 

popular location for demonstrations and special 

events. 

The Grant Memorial would be maintained, and 

the historic features of the landscape would be 

preserved. Existing facilities would be maintained, but no additional facilities (such as seating, restrooms, or food service), infrastructure 

for demonstrations or special events, or 

information would be provided. 

The Mall (3rd to 14th Streets) 

The Mall would continue to serve as an extremely popular venue for demonstrations, 

special events, cultural activities, and other civic 

events. 

The components of the historic landscape from 

the L’Enfant and McMillan plans that still have 

integrity would be preserved. Soils compacted 

by repeated events would remain. Half of the 

Mall would be rested every other winter for 

restoration, and new management techniques 

for lawn areas would be studied. American elm 

trees would be replaced as needed. Nonhistoric 

plantings of other trees (elms, bald cypress, 

cedar, and oak) would be maintained. 

A temporary visitor contact station would 

continue to be provided, and orientation maps 

and information would be improved near the 

Metro stop and elsewhere on the Mall. No 

additional educational waysides would be 

provided. Designated drop-off and pickup sites 

for visitor transportation and commercial tour 

buses would remain. Free public and permit 

parking would continue on Madison Drive NW 

and Jefferson Drive SW. Gravel walkways, 

which are frequently difficult for people with 

disabilities to maneuver, would be maintained, 

and maintenance issues related to gravel (mi-

 

78 
The No-Action Alternative — Continue Current Management 

gration onto adjacent lawns, uneven surfaces, 

dust) would be dealt with as budgets allow. 

Four stands for refreshments and souvenir sales, 

along with adjacent tables and seating, and a 

small information station, would be maintained. 

Tourmobile ticket booths, which are no longer 

used, would remain. 

The following action for the Mall is common to 

all alternatives: 

• Work with the Washington Metropolitan 

Area Transit Authority to change the name 

of the Smithsonian Metro station to include 

the National Mall. 

Washington Monument and 

Grounds 

The Washington Monument grounds would 

continue to be a popular location for demonstrations and special events. Food and retail, now in 

a temporary tent, would be relocated to a 

permanent location to be determined in this 

plan. The highly used circular restroom near 

15th Street and Independence Avenue SW 

would be maintained, along with benches, 

drinking fountains, and other facilities. The 

newly renovated Monument Lodge offers a 

bookstore, ticketing, and restrooms. The Sylvan 

Theater would continue to be used as a performance venue for an audience of several thousand people. Survey Lodge would continue to 

serve as the main visitor contact station, even 

though it is off the main circulation routes, not 

easily identifiable, and hidden by overgrown 

vegetation. 

Informal games and recreational activities, along 

with league ball games, would continue. 

Present public access and parking, including 

tour bus drop-offs, as well as parking for NPS 

staff, would remain. 

West Potomac Park (North of 

Independence Avenue) 

Lincoln Memorial and Grounds 

The Lincoln Memorial would continue to be 

highly visited and would remain a popular location for demonstrations and special events. 

Maintenance activities would continue for the 

reflecting pool area, the historic features of the 

Watergate steps, the Constitution Avenue 

belvedere, the Arts of Peace statues, and the John 

Ericcson Memorial, as well as the circle and 

radial roads. The social trail created by heavy 

foot traffic along the length of the pool would be 

addressed. The north and south concession / 

refreshment stands would be retained, but no 

restrooms would be provided in those locations. 

The following actions for the Lincoln Memorial 

and grounds are common to all alternatives: 

• Renovate and expand the exhibit area, 

renovate the restrooms at the memorial, 

and relocate the bookstore to the lower 

level. 

• Implement recommendations of the Lincoln Memorial Cultural Landscape Report.

• Rehabilitate the historic landscape associated with the memorial circle and radial 

roads. 

• Accommodate future national memorials 

authorized by Congress in the area north of 

the Watergate steps. 

• Accommodate road projects and circulation improvements by others to simplify 

traffic patterns and to improve pedestrian 

connections from the Kennedy Center and 

adjacent neighborhoods. 

Ash Woods 

The Ash Woods restroom would be upgraded as 

funds became available. The U.S. Park Police 

stables would be maintained in their current 

location, with access from the Ash Woods road. 

West Potomac Park (South of 

Independence Avenue) 

Tidal Basin Area 

The Tidal Basin area would continue to offer a 

pleasant strolling and viewing experience. 

Historic features within a naturalistic environment would be maintained. Engineering studies 

would be undertaken to improve Tidal Basin 

flushing and to ensure seawall stability. The 

basin walls would be maintained and repaired as 

necessary, and walks would be relocated outside 

high-tide areas. Compacted soils and social 

79
ALTERNATIVES

trails, as well as adverse effects on cherry tree 

health, would be addressed as budgets and 

staffing allow. Walks would be maintained as 

budgets and staffing allow. 

Public parking in the lot accessed from Maine 

Avenue would remain except during large events 

such as the National Cherry Blossom Festival, 

when it could be closed for event use and 

temporary facilities. 

The refreshment stand would be retained, but 

no restrooms would be provided. 

West Potomac Park Riverfront 

The deteriorating dry-laid stone river walls 

south of Arlington Memorial Bridge would be 

stabilized with riprap. Recreational and 

commuter bicycle traffic would continue along 

the riverfront, along with parking on Ohio 

Drive. 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial and Grounds 

The memorial grounds would continue to be a 

popular destination for visitors and a venue for 

special events. Plantings on the grounds (deciduous trees, including cherry trees) have historic 

integrity and would be preserved. The present 

tour bus drop-off and parking lots A, B, and C 

would be retained, as would existing visitor 

amenities (bookstore, retail, refreshment stand, 

and restrooms). 

No-Action Alternative — 

Current Use Map 

 

80 
The No-Action Alternative — Continue Current Management 

No-Action Alternative — 

Existing Conditions 

81
This page has been left blank intentionally. 
The Preferred Alternative 

THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE Actions Common to All Alternatives

As previously described, the following summarized 

actions are common to all alternatives: 

• Cultural Resources — Preserve and protect cultural resources; manage in accordance with The

Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and with the

general recommendations of cultural landscape 

reports and inventories. 

• Natural Resources — Continue to manage and 

protect natural resources. Address water quality 

problems in water features. 

• Demonstrations and Special Events — Consistent 

with the First Amendment and federal regulations, fully accommodate demonstrations on a 

first-come, first-served basis. Consistent with federal regulations, accommodate special events. 

Improve permit procedures for special events and 

First Amendment demonstrations. Enhance monitoring procedures to ensure that resources are 

better protected and that soil, turf, and vegetation impacts are reduced. 

• Access and Circulation — Continue working with 

the city and other agencies to address tour bus 

parking. 

• Visitor Information, Education, and Enjoyment —

Continue to offer visitor information, educational 

programs, venues for entertainment, guided 

walking and bicycle tours, and a mix of recreational activities. 

• Visitor Amenities — Assess the economic feasibility, necessity, and appropriateness of changes 

to commercial visitors services and facilities. 

• Health, Public Safety, and Security — Continue 

law enforcement patrols and increase a law 

enforcement presence during large events. 

• Park Operations — Make waste management 

more efficient; expand recycling at events; continue a visual quality team to improve conditions 

and the appearance of park facilities; and meet 

NPS energy efficiency goals. 

The National Mall, as the premier civic space for 

our nation, would be refurbished so that very 

high levels of use could be perpetuated and the 

needs of visitors could be met in an energyefficient and sustainable manner. Its memorials 

and landscapes would be protected, with large 

areas of unprogrammed open space as defining 

features of the historic landscape. The designed 

historic landscape would evolve, and its value 

over time would change, reflecting significant 

national events. Contemporary uses would be 

accommodated while respecting the planned 

historic character and visions of the L’Enfant 

and McMillan plans. The intent would be to 

establish an overall identity and character for the 

National Mall, creating a coherent pedestrian 

environment that would complement and 

balance the natural environment, the combination of formal and informal features, and 

national commemorative works. The National 

Mall would be emphasized as a year-round 

destination where the beauty and variety of 

every season would enhance visitor experiences. 

Uses for First Amendment demonstrations, 

commemorations, and national ceremonies and 

celebrations would be emphasized. Visitors 

would be made to feel welcome through helpful 

wayfinding signs, knowledgeable staff, and highquality and accessible facilities. Diverse opportunities would be offered for public enjoyment, 

including educational, cultural, and musical 

programs, as well as active and passive recreational activities. 

Professionals would be engaged to design highquality solutions to unify the National Mall and 

to articulate the visions for specific sites. The 

National Park Service would ensure compatible 

and enduring high-quality design, as well as the 

highest facility maintenance standards, to create 

a sense of place that would reinforce the civic, 

historic, and symbolic role of the National Mall 

to our nation. 

All actions described below would be in addition 

to those under “Actions Common to All Alternatives” and highlighted in the accompanying text 

box. Only areas where actions would be taken 

are included in the following discussion. 

National Mall Actions 

Cultural Resources 

The public’s use of the designed historic landscape and the memorials, historic structures, and 

other landscape features would continue to 

evolve, and its value over time would change, reflecting significant national events. The health 

and appearance of the historic landscape would 

be improved. Planned vistas would be protected 

83
ALTERNATIVES

and preserved, including large open spaces that 

define the historic landscape. 

Natural Resources 

Natural resource conditions would be improved 

for tree and turf areas, soil conditions would be 

enhanced or reengineered to reduce or reverse 

the effects of compaction, and rehabilitation and 

recovery periods would be revised so that 

smaller areas could be set aside more frequently 

and broader public access maintained. To 

ensure optimal turf conditions and the enhancement of natural resources, irrigation systems 

would be installed or replaced in a manner that 

would protect them from damage during events. 

Means would be developed to conserve water, 

reduce the use of potable water, and reuse water 

(for example, collecting and storing water from 

subsurface drainage / dewatering activities and 

using for irrigation purposes). Nonpotable water 

sources would be sought for water features. Sustainable water strategies would be developed in 

partnership with the General Services Administration, the Army Corps of Engineers, the National Capital Planning Commission, the D.C. 

Department of the Environment, the D.C. Water 

and Sewer Authority, and others to address 

flooding and stormwater management. Fountains or interactive water features would be 

designed so the sound of water would mask 

traffic noise and help create a more contemplative and enjoyable atmosphere. 

Gravel would be eliminated as a paving material 

to improve air quality for pedestrians. A comprehensive approach would be taken with others 

to address the impacts of climate change, such as 

rising sea levels. 

Demonstrations, Special Events, and 

National Celebrations 

Highly visible venues throughout the National 

Mall would be improved and better designed to 

facilitate high levels of use for First Amendment 

demonstrations, events, and entertainment. 

Infrastructure support would be provided, 

including utilities and communication systems. 

Organizers of large events would be encouraged 

to schedule their functions during non-peak 

seasons and to provide bicycle parking. 

A new computer-mapping-based reservation 

system would be developed to provide venue 

and permit information, as well as to schedule 

events, maintenance, and recovery periods or to 

schedule park projects. The National Park Service would seek to provide more balance in the 

scheduling and distribution of special events 

(not First Amendment demonstrations) in order 

to more equitably accommodate open space for 

recreation, general visitation, and natural resource restoration. 

Sufficient staff would be provided to support national celebrations, events, and demonstrations. 

The National Park Service would continue to collect data on best practices for managing events, 

success rates, and standards to achieve, and where 

feasible procedures would be incorporated into 

park standards. Onsite staging and logistical areas 

for special events would be limited. 

Permanent infrastructure and space would be 

planned for temporary facilities (such as portable restrooms, trash, recycling, logistical or 

operational space, media activities, access, and 

law enforcement). Participation in events could 

be expanded through simulcasts of programs. 

The intent would be to protect resources, reduce 

the impact of annual events, and make setup and 

takedown operations for event organizers more 

efficient. Product types and standards to be used 

during events would be defined, including acceptable locations and seasonal time limits for 

temporary facilities. Better cost recovery procedures would be developed. 

Intense post-event recovery procedures would 

be developed to improve resource conditions, 

but smaller areas would be set aside more frequently for rehabilitation so that broader public 

access could be maintained. 

Access and Circulation 

A coordinated pedestrian environment would be 

implemented and would accommodate various 

types of uses and needs, including a high-quality, 

enjoyable walking and bicycling environment, 

while providing a positive urban experience and 

coordinated urban connections within a parklike setting. All areas of the National Mall would 

be connected, and better transitions would be 

provided into adjacent areas, such as walkways 

to the National Mall from Constitution and In-

 

84 
The Preferred Alternative 

dependence avenues and along 7th, 12th, and 

14th streets. 

The pedestrian experience would be improved 

by upgrading walking surfaces, developing consistent and identifiable crosswalks, as part of a 

coordinated National Mall paving system, creating bigger intersections and adjacent waiting 

areas to accommodate large numbers of people, 

programming automatic and extended pedestrian crossing times into signal phasing, and 

considering traffic-calming measures. Access for 

people with disabilities would be improved.

Bicycling would be facilitated through improved 

facilities such as separate bicycle lanes or routes 

and additional facilities for bicyclists. Park 

managers would also work with the city to 

implement compatible sections of its Bicycle 

Master Plan and bicycle rental program. 

A coordinated strategy to limit visitor vehicle 

traffic and emphasize alternative modes of transportation would be developed with the city and 

other governmental agencies. Valet or shuttle 

service could be provided to and from parking 

garages to designated drop-off and pickup 

locations on the National Mall. Some parking 

areas would be redesigned for more efficient 

traffic flows, and additional visitor parking for 

people with disabilities would be provided. 

Tour bus drop-offs would be redesigned as 

needed. Supplementary transportation could be 

provided. Roving health and safety courtesy 

shuttles could provide service for the elderly, 

families with small children, and others as 

needed. The National Park Service could offer 

wheelchairs or rental electric scooters for seniors, the disabled, or those for whom walking 

long distances is difficult. 

Visitor Information, Education, and 

Enjoyment 

All people would be welcomed through improved orientation, wayfinding, and information 

services. Orientation / map areas would be provided near key pedestrian entries and intersections or corridors linking to the National 

Mall, and they would be readable at night. Sign 

and information systems would be flexible 

enough to incorporate changes in cutting edge 

technology. Signs and brochures would be welcoming and would be offered in multiple languages. In addition, roving rangers would welcome visitors and answer questions, and all park 

staff, including maintenance staff, would be able 

to direct visitors to destinations and provide 

park maps. 

Communication networks, mass notification 

systems, program and activity listings, coordinated information about adjacent museums and 

visitor destinations, and links to tourist websites 

would create a seamless visitor experience. 

Educational programs would be developed to 

inspire visitors so that they would leave with a 

new or renewed appreciation of their inalienable 

rights, the American experience, and our diverse 

culture. Programs would be flexible and adaptable to technological innovations, such as digital 

electronic displays, phone tours, and interpretive boards and activity listings that could be 

programmed by computer and would allow 

visits to the National Mall to be personalized. 

Mobile information stations and roving staff 

would supplement dispersed visitor contact 

stations rather than having a single visitor center 

to provide visitor orientation, information, and 

education. Self-guided thematic walking tour 

brochures would be available. The variety of 

NPS guided tours would be increased, such as 

multi-season touring opportunities, thematic 

walking tours, and multilingual tours. 

Educational themes would include civic space 

and First Amendment demonstrations, history, 

commemorative works, historic plans and the 

city’s development, healthy life styles, and 

sustainability (including the importance of 

recycling, reducing waste, and reusing items as a 

stewardship message). All visitor amenities, including restrooms, would have educational, 

stewardship, or informational components. 

Opportunities for entertainment would be increased through improved or additional venues 

with the necessary infrastructure. Performances, 

thematically appropriate entertainment, and 

educational programs could be provided at new 

visitor food service destinations. Small-scale 

programs or entertainment could be used as a 

way to enhance the pedestrian experience. 

An on-line permitting system for athletic fields 

would be developed. 

85
ALTERNATIVES

Commercial recreational activities could be 

expanded and diversified, including possible 

recreation equipment rentals (for example, bicycles, kayaks, rowboats, model boats, kites, and 

ice skates). Offsite bicycle rentals would continue, and connections to other nearby recreation 

facilities in East Potomac Park, along with trail 

connections to the waterfront and the Potomac 

and Anacostia rivers, would be improved. 

Visitor Amenities 

Coordinated, high-quality, year-round and 

seasonal furnishings would be provided, 

including seasonal tables and chairs, as well as 

trash/ recycling containers, curbs, signs, drinking fountains, and restrooms. Designs would be 

sensitive to the character of the historic landscape and would visually connect different areas 

of the National Mall to establish a sense of place 

and an overall identity. Sustainable designs 

would be incorporated into all new visitor 

amenities for ease of maintenance and use. 

Visitor facilities would be designed to withstand 

vandalism, forced entry, and skateboarding. 

More seating opportunities and locations for 

visitors to enjoy views or summer shade would 

be provided, along with seating for groups. 

Seating options would include benches, the use 

of site components such as walls, and portable 

lawn chairs. Seating could be added at some 

memorials. Seating would be designed to meet 

the needs of people with disabilities. 

The following character-defining components 

for furnishings would be incorporated into the 

overall design: 

• historic benches, including the NPS 

standard Washington bench 

• historic lighting (Olmsted, Twin twenties, 

Washington globe, Saratoga lights) 

• furnishings specifically designed for memorials (seating, trash receptacles, signs, 

drinking fountains, light fixtures, etc.) 

New walks would be developed to be low-maintenance, sustainable, and universally accessible. 

Along streets the walks would also conform to 

the design appearance of the Streetscape Manual

(Interagency Initiative for National Mall Road 

Improvement Program 1992) and any updates. 

Paving would be suitable for pedestrian access 

and recreational activities, as well as durable 

enough for event access, operations, and maintenance. The use of porous or other sustainable 

approaches would be encouraged. 

The National Park Service would work closely 

with the Commission of Fine Arts, the National 

Capital Planning Commission, the Architect of 

the Capitol, the Smithsonian Institution, and 

D.C. city agencies to reestablish the lighting task 

force to develop a comprehensive lighting 

guideline for the monumental core that addresses at a minimum: 

• protection of the dominant lighting of the 

five symbolic icons (the Capitol, the White 

House, the Washington Monument, the 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial, and the 

Lincoln Memorial) 

• desired lighting character for urban and 

park areas, character-defining elements 

such as statuary and building facades, pedestrian and vehicular areas, and transitions 

between different light levels 

• appropriate light levels (foot-candles or 

lumens) and light color (color rendition) 

for different areas 

• energy efficiency and sustainable lighting 

practices 

• light pollution / protection of night sky 

from excessive, horizontal light pollution 

(temporarily blinding light) 

• security lighting 

All new and rehabilitated visitor facilities would 

be designed to be compatible with the character 

of the National Mall (e.g., the refreshment 

stands on the Mall and at the Lincoln Memorial 

could be used as the quality standard). The intent would be to make them easily identifiable, 

strengthening the NPS identity and denoting 

that they are secondary to national memorials. 

If feasible, several well-located, convenient, 

attractive, and architecturally significant multipurpose facilities could be developed in certain 

locations (e.g., Union Square, the Washington 

Monument grounds, Constitution Gardens, and 

the Tidal Basin area). These facilities would provide pleasant places for visitors to sit and relax, 

and infrastructure would be provided for programs, performances, and entertainment. Food 

service could be offered, with more variety in 

 

86 
The Preferred Alternative 

types of food, along with indoor/outdoor seating. High-quality designs and pleasant surroundings would encourage visitors to linger. Also, 

trash and recycling would be concentrated at 

these locations to protect memorials. No indoor 

auditoriums or museum collections, which 

typify NPS visitor centers, would be proposed. 

Well-designed and clearly identifiable mobile 

food carts and refreshment stands, coordinated 

with signs and site furnishings, would be available during high use seasons and special events. 

In addition, more variety would be provided in 

types of food, such as sit-down restaurants in 

addition to mobile carts and refreshment stands, 

and longer service hours. Refreshment stands 

would be pleasant places to pause for food or 

drink during daytime and evening hours, but the 

larger multipurpose visitor facilities (such as 

proposed for the Washington Monument 

grounds or Constitution Gardens) would be 

destinations where visitors could linger. 

Reflecting pools and ornamental water features 

would be retained. Some new water features 

would be added for visitor enjoyment as well as 

for health and safety, including interactive water 

features, such as those at the German-American 

Friendship Garden. 

Drinking fountains would be concentrated near 

restrooms. Water stations would be designed to 

make it easier to fill reusable water bottles or 

take care of pet water needs, and they would 

also be designed to be vandal proof. Additional 

conveniently located visitor restrooms would be 

constructed, cleanliness monitored, and more 

frequent servicing provided, including at new or 

renovated food service areas. In high use areas 

some restrooms would be located and sized to 

flexibly accommodate increased demand generated by events, tour buses, or peak-season visitation. The capacity of some existing restrooms 

would be increased. In some areas automated, 

self-cleaning public restrooms would be provided to extend operating hours of facilities. 

Health, Public Safety, and Security 

Areas would be redesigned to safely differentiate 

multiple uses (e.g., bicycle lanes to separate 

riders from vehicles). Measures such as programming automatic and extended pedestrian 

crossing times into signal phasing, trafficcalming measures (such as raised crosswalks), 

special crosswalk paving, midblock crossing 

points, larger waiting areas, better walkway 

lighting to emphasize surface conditions and the 

pedestrian environment, and emergency call 

stations would all enhance pedestrian safety. 

Visitor contact with uniformed staff, including 

horse and bike patrols, would be maximized. 

Mass notification capability to keep visitors and 

staff informed of what to do in case of weather 

or other emergencies would be provided. This 

system would be coordinated with an upgraded 

communication network. 

Seating would be increased in shaded areas, and 

shade would be added in some areas. Automated, self-cleaning public restrooms (which sanitize surfaces after use) would be provided in 

some areas. 

Tall shrub beds and areas allowing cover and 

storage would be reduced or eliminated, in keeping with the original landscape design intent. 

Park Operations 

Deferred maintenance would be addressed. 

Some projects would be redefined to allow more 

use, to better protect resources, and to better 

provide visitor amenities. Park standards would 

be developed to clearly define desired qualities 

for different areas of the National Mall. Activities such as inspections, monitoring, maintenance (grounds, memorials, and other facilities), 

and education and interpretation, as well as 

activities by other park divisions, would be addressed. Best practices and approaches would be 

used for maintenance and operations to improve 

the National Mall’s visual appearance and 

operational efficiency. Sustainable practices 

would be maximized. 

New, high-quality facilities would be designed 

and constructed to achieve the highest maintenance standards and to be vandal-resistant. 

Cutting edge sustainable facility and site design 

measures and recycling would be incorporated 

in all facilities. Durable, easy-to-maintain, and 

standardized recirculation systems would be 

installed in water features. 

Operational access would be provided as circulation systems were upgraded. Walkways would 

87
ALTERNATIVES

be wide enough to accommodate maintenance, 

staff, and operational vehicles, as well as the public, and they would be able to withstand the 

weight of vehicles used for park operations and 

event deliveries. Trash removal and restroom 

cleaning would be increased during visitor hours. 

Turf management would be altered to close 

smaller areas more frequently and to provide 

more equitable opportunities for all uses — 

events, demonstrations, recreation, and general 

visitation, as well as restoration/rehabilitation. 

To protect areas during rehabilitation and 

restoration, an attractive, durable, temporary 

fence system (in lieu of snow fencing) would be 

developed. It should be lightweight, not easily 

scaled, and easy to store, transport, and install. 

Alternatively, a marking system would identify 

areas to be closed to use. 

Renewable energy sources would be sought for 

lighting and pumping systems for water features 

(e.g., a large-scale photovoltaic system on the 

roof of the Interior Building). Advances in 

monitoring, such as locating burned out light 

bulbs, would be used to improve maintenance. 

The required core operations planning would be 

used to match staffing needs to the core mission 

of the park. Staffing needs would be examined 

and correlated with park standards, particularly 

in the areas of resource management, communications, maintenance, events, special project 

teams, and law enforcement. Multiple contract 

opportunities would be offered to provide visitor services that have been determined to be 

necessary and appropriate. 

To advance the principles of sustainability and 

to educate the public about sustainable projects, 

the National Park Service would undertake the 

following: 

• Participate in the EPA “Climate Friendly 

Parks” program. 

• Reduce solid waste; increase recycling and 

use of biodegradable products. 

• Reduce water use; retain stormwater for 

irrigation. 

• Reduce energy consumption, greenhouse 

gas emissions, and air pollutants; use renewable energy sources; maximize energy 

efficiency. 

• Increase educational information about 

green practices. 

• Maximize public transportation; increase 

use of alternative fuels. 

• Ensure that new or replacement facilities 

meet the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) silver rating. 

The National Park Service would strive to 

achieve the highest LEED standard practicable, 

would determine the park’s carbon footprint 

(estimated through the Climate Leadership in 

Parks program), and reduce greenhouse gases by 

18% by 2012. 

A state-of-the-art communications system 

would be provided, with dedicated lines for NPS 

operations, law enforcement, emergency communications, media, and event sponsor use. 

The Mall 

Union Square (1st to 3rd Streets) 

Union Square would fulfill its McMillan plan 

purpose of connecting the U.S. Capitol grounds 

with the National Mall, as well as providing 

more convenient and flexible land use at the foot 

of the Capitol. The Ulysses S. Grant Memorial 

would be the focal point of a symmetrical and 

formally laid out civic square based on historic 

precedents. It would be a popular, active, and 

dignified day and evening destination, and it 

could be easily transformed into a larger venue 

for First Amendment demonstrations and 

events. Grade changes would be addressed, and 

circulation patterns would be improved for all 

visitors. The area would be visually and 

physically connected to the Botanic Garden to 

the south and the U.S. Senate Youth Park and 

U.S. Botanic Garden Education and Outreach 

Center to the north. Floral plantings would add 

color. 

The Ulysses S. Grant Memorial would be restored. The condition of historic landscape components would be improved and incorporated 

into a new design, including historic or “witness” trees (trees that were present when the 

area was originally developed). The historic eastwest vista between the U.S. Capitol and the 

Washington Monument would be improved and 

perpetuated. Turf areas would be minimized, 

 

88 
The Preferred Alternative 

eliminated, or redesigned, but low plantings 

would retain a sense of continuity with the 

historic landscape that was once home to the 

Botanic Garden. 

Union Square would highlight sustainable water 

management practices and include reflective and 

interactive water features (such as jets to frame 

vistas of the Capitol, and provide play opportunities). Designs would be environmentally 

friendly to highlight sustainable water management practices, and the sound of water would be 

used to create a more enjoyable atmosphere by 

muffling the noise of urban traffic. A smaller 

reflecting pool or water features would be considered to make the space more suited to various 

uses and reduce water use. A nonpotable water 

source would be sought. To increase enjoyment, 

the pool could also be redesigned as a shallow 

sheet of interactive water that could be drained 

for demonstration and events or frozen for 

seasonal ice skating. 

Pedestrian circulation would be improved, along 

with visual and physical connections and access 

to the Mall, the U.S. Capitol, and areas north and 

south of Union Square. Social trails would be 

eliminated. Crosswalks on 3rd Street would be 

designed to highlight and continue pedestrian 

connections and circulation patterns on the 

Mall. 

Educational media would address First Amendment demonstrations, the Grant Memorial, the 

city’s history, and the U.S. Capitol. 

Redesigning this area as a paved square would 

accommodate more use, including demonstrations and events. The size and character of visitor facilities and amenities would be determined 

during design. Infrastructure for events would 

be provided. The square would incorporate 

shade structures for visitor comfort, and pleasant places to rest and relax. Facilities would be 

located outside vistas. A flexible, indoor/outdoor, multipurpose destination would provide a 

site to enjoy views of the Grant Memorial and 

the Capitol, with space for seating, educational 

exhibits, and small exhibitions or displays. 

High-capacity restrooms would be designed so 

that more stalls could be opened during high 

use, and nearby drinking water and recreation 

equipment rentals would be provided. 

The Mall (3rd to 14th Streets) 

The Mall would remain a highly visible landscape that would be renovated to improve conditions and to sustainably accommodate very 

high levels of use for First Amendment demonstrations, public gatherings, national celebrations, cultural programs, and special events, as 

well as passive recreation and informal play. The 

National Park Service would encourage partnerships between all visitor destinations along the 

Mall to serve visitor needs. 

Critical elements of the historic landscape, such 

as lawns and elm trees, would be improved and 

protected. The planting plan for all vegetation 

on the Mall would be updated and would be 

compatible with contributing features of historic 

plans. Compacted soils in turf areas would be removed and replaced with engineered soils that 

could better withstand intense use, or other 

sustainable technologies would be implemented. 

Drainage and irrigation would be provided, and 

the irrigation system would be designed so that it 

would not be damaged by event facilities. More 

frequent restoration of smaller areas would be 

undertaken. A combination of design elements, 

paving, and stewardship messages would be 

used to reduce social trails. Park furniture and 

cooling interactive water features would be 

added outside historic vistas. 

Rows of American and European elm trees flank 

the pedestrian promenades and frame vistas of 

major memorials and government buildings. 

While individuals would still be able to enjoy the 

shade these trees provide, along with low-intensity recreational activities, the elm tree panels 

would no longer be available for temporary 

event facilities, such as tents, stages, or vehicles. 

The pedestrian circulation system would be improved and would better connect Union Square, 

the Washington Monument, and museums and 

other areas adjacent to the Mall. As part of a coordinated paving plan for the National Mall, 

gravel on pathways and former roadbeds (with 

paving underneath) would be removed. Walks 

and other areas would be paved with lowmaintenance, sustainable, and universally accessible materials to improve circulation, facilitate 

events, and maintain improved landscape conditions. Some walks would be widened to enhance 

the visitor experience by providing room for 

89
ALTERNATIVES

orientation and space for rest and enjoyment, to 

facilitate First Amendment demonstrations and 

special events, and to allow for more efficient 

park operations. 

To improve growing conditions for trees, gravel 

between the street and paved walkways along 

Madison Drive NW and Jefferson Drive SW 

would be removed and replaced by turf panels 

edged with low curbs. Shaded seating and paved 

pathways would remain. 

Event utility infrastructure would be developed 

to protect resources, to reduce setup and takedown times, and to accommodate media communications. Narrow strips of turf along 3rd, 

4th, 7th, and 14th streets would be removed and 

paved to accommodate event facilities. Locations would be identified for temporary restrooms so that these facilities would be convenient, easy to service, and not block views. A 

paved area for events would be added south of 

the National Gallery of Art Sculpture Garden 

and north of the center grass panels, and visitor 

sidewalk amenities would be provided. 

The 12th Street axis would be redesigned to 

accommodate high levels of use, and the placement of tents, stages, and special events logistical 

and operational areas. Flexible office space and a 

public restroom facility would be constructed to 

support demonstrations and special events. 

Additional special events staging space would be 

created over the 12th Street tunnel entry north 

of Madison Drive NW to reduce the impact of 

truck parking on the historic landscape. 

Like the other alternatives, the National Park 

Service would work with the Washington 

Metropolitan Area Transit Authority to add the 

name of the National Mall to the Metro station, 

which would remain the primary pedestrian 

entrance for the National Mall. A paved welcome plaza would be developed at 12th Street 

and Jefferson Drive SW that would include a 

visitor contact station, high-capacity public restrooms, multiple orientation maps, and a large 

tactile model or pavement map of the National 

Mall, along with shaded and group seating. 

Electronic information and a listing of events 

and activities would be provided. 

Additional pleasantly shaded seating could be 

provided along north-south sidewalks within the 

elm tree panels. This could include some seating 

areas for groups. Containers with horticultural 

plantings could add seasonal color and enjoyment. To further enhance the Mall as well as 

public safety, pedestrian lighting levels along 

walkways could be increased to supplement the 

historic Olmsted lights. 

Visitor transportation, commercial tour bus 

drop-offs, bicycles, and other wheeled vehicles 

would be accommodated on Madison and 

Jefferson drives over the short- to mid-term (10–

15 years). Occasionally access would be restricted to accommodate events and national 

celebrations (such as the Fourth of July). A longterm goal for Madison and Jefferson drives 

would be to improve traffic flow by removing 

private vehicle parking to better accommodate 

bicycling, visitor transit, and pedestrians. Tour 

bus drop-offs on the Mall would be increased. 

Educational themes would address First Amendment demonstrations, the Mall as the nation’s 

premier civic space, and development of the 

federal city around the Mall. The coordination 

of visitor information would be increased with 

museums surrounding the Mall. Existing recreational opportunities would be continued, and 

the agreement with the Smithsonian Institution 

for the carousel would be updated. Small-scale 

entertainment would be encouraged, along with 

programs, educational entertainment, and 

celebrations at events. 

To create a pleasant ambience near all refreshment stands elements such as additional seating 

at tables, umbrellas, flower boxes, or display 

fountains could be added, encouraging visitors 

to stay and relax. The center grass panels near 

the 8th Street cross axis would be reconfigured 

to provide larger spaces for informal recreation 

(e.g., pickup games). A small visitor restroom 

near the refreshment stand by the Air and Space 

Museum would have two to four potentially selfcleaning stalls. It would have a similar architectural character to the refreshment stand so that 

it would appear to have always been there. An 

additional higher capacity restroom would be 

located north of the central grass panel near 

12th Street. NPS staff would also work with the 

National Gallery of Art and the Smithsonian 

Institution to improve access to food service and 

restrooms for National Mall visitors. 

 

90 
The Preferred Alternative 

Washington Monument and 

Grounds 

Views of the Washington Monument and the 

north-south vista between the Thomas Jefferson 

Memorial and the White House would be 

protected and improved. The condition of the 

grounds, trees, and the German-American 

Friendship Garden would also be improved. 

The north grounds of the Washington Monument would continue to see high volume of use, 

including large demonstrations and special 

events, but infrastructure would be provided to 

make them more sustainable. Specifically, electrical and communication connections, along 

with space for operations and the media, would 

be provided in the northeast, northwest, and 

southwest corners of the north grounds to make 

these areas more sustainable for demonstrations 

and special events. 

Roads and parking, along with bicycle and pedestrian circulation, would be redesigned on the 

south grounds (south of Independence Avenue) 

to reconnect park areas, to enhance safety and 

recreational opportunities, and to improve 

pedestrian connections between the Washington Monument grounds and the Tidal Basin, as 

well as to the southwest waterfront and East 

Potomac Park. A system of separate dedicated 

bike trails would be constructed to improve 

bicycling throughout the National Mall. The 

pedestrian environment would be improved by 

programming automatic and extended crossing 

times into signal phasing, special crosswalk 

paving, and improved signs. 

Educational themes would address George 

Washington, the Washington Monument, the 

history of the National Mall, and the GermanAmerican Friendship Garden. Recreational 

activities would continue and could be expanded. Educational waysides and integrated 

exhibits would be provided at a new multipurpose facility. 

A new indoor/outdoor, high-quality, multipurpose facility and performance space would be 

constructed on the northwest corner of 15th 

Street and Independence Avenue to replace the 

temporary tent. This facility would consolidate 

visitor services and take the place the Sylvan 

Theater. The facility would provide information, 

education, integrated exhibits, food service, 

retail, and restrooms (sized for high use volumes). It would be a pleasant destination and 

would be constructed below the level of roads 

and oriented to muffle noise and provide views of 

the monument. Various programs, events, performances, and entertainment would be offered. For 

performances audiences of up to 3,000 people 

could be accommodated on the hillside. The 

facility would also include operations space and 

ranger offices. It would be open from early 

morning, when visitors queue for monument 

tickets, until evening. Additional parking would 

be available for visitors with disabilities. 

Survey Lodge would be adaptively reused for 

services and parking for visitors with disabilities 

(an additional 10–20 spaces), information, exhibits about the building’s history, and possibly 

recreation equipment rentals (such as bicycles 

and kites). The lodge’s access and visibility 

would be improved. Monument Lodge would 

continue to provide ticketing, a bookstore, and 

restrooms. Park ranger offices would be provided at the new multipurpose facility, while 

primary ranger office space would be relocated 

to another facility off the National Mall. 

West Potomac Park (North of 

Independence Avenue) 

Constitution Gardens 

Constitution Gardens would be a pleasant place 

for pedestrians to relax as they tour the National 

Mall. It would be a restful, high-quality, multipurpose visitor destination that would provide 

food service and opportunities for entertainment, enjoyment, and recreation. 

Landscape conditions would be improved in 

accordance with the “Cultural Landscape Inventory” (NPS 2008a), and the pedestrian circulation system would be upgraded with coordinated paving and improved operational access. 

The lake would be rebuilt to be self-sustaining, 

and circulating pumps and a filtration system 

would be installed. A nonpotable, sustainable 

water source would be explored. 

To accommodate demonstrations and special 

events, circulation patterns would be redesigned. Walks would be repaved, and some 

walkways and intersections would be widened 

91
ALTERNATIVES

to create venues for smaller events (exhibits, 

tents, and performances), and others would be 

reconfigured to accommodate the Potomac Park 

levee and provide accessible routes. Infrastructure (e.g., utilities and communication systems) 

to facilitate demonstrations and events would be 

incorporated into the new design. 

Educational themes would address the history of 

the area (the Washington Canal and the Lockkeeper’s House), land reclamation, flood control, and the role and importance of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution in 

our country’s history. 

Urban recreational activities, such as fishing or 

model boating, would be increased but would 

not conflict with commemorative experiences at 

nearby memorials. Children’s play opportunities 

would make use of natural elements, boulders, 

sculpture or interactive water features, and 

pavement patterns or educational activities and 

programs to encourage exploration. 

Multipurpose, coordinated visitor facilities 

would be located near the east end of the lake 

(17th and Constitution Avenue), and the historic 

canal Lockkeeper’s House could potentially be 

adaptively reused. The new food service facility 

would be a destination for visitors to linger and 

would include food service, restrooms, and 

potentially programs or entertainment. It would 

provide a unique indoor/outdoor garden character. A decision about the Lockkeeper’s House 

would be coordinated with the Potomac Park 

levee, and the structure could be relocated away 

from the corner of 17th and Constitution Avenue to provide better protection. Coordinated 

functions could include visitor services, education, exhibits, information, a bookstore, retail, 

recreation equipment rentals (model boats, 

portable lawn chairs), and space for partner 

activities. 

A flexible program or performance space, stage, 

or gazebo would be located in or near the east 

end of the lake, making it convenient to the 

multipurpose facility and taking advantage of the 

nearby rolling terrain to accommodate an 

audience of several thousand. Utilities would be 

provided. Sound levels from programs would be 

controlled so as to respect the ambience at 

nearby memorials. 

Existing restrooms would be replaced with a 

facility more sensitive to the surroundings. The 

existing refreshment stand could be rehabilitated and adaptively reused or removed. 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial 

Space would be provided in the vicinity of the 

memorial for seating and contemplation. In 

addition to volunteer interpretation, educational 

themes would address the history of the 

memorial and its role on the National Mall. 

Lincoln Memorial and Grounds 

For demonstrations and special events on the 

memorial grounds, the Lincoln Memorial Guidelines would be expanded to address the availability and use of infrastructure (e.g., utilities, 

communication systems) to facilitate events. 

Educational themes would address Abraham 

Lincoln, the memorial’s development, and the 

role of the memorial in civil rights and First 

Amendment demonstrations, as well as the 

history of the National Mall and Washington, 

D.C. Educational information would also enhance public understanding of the Watergate 

steps and the Constitution Avenue belvedere. 

The historic landscape associated with the memorial circle and radial roads would be rehabilitated. A ceremonial use would be developed for 

the Watergate steps. The areas within the memorial circle and the radial roads would continue to 

provide visitor amenities such as food services 

and information stations for the Korean War 

Veterans Memorial and the Vietnam Veterans 

Memorial; the latter station would be removed 

once the memorial center has been completed, 

and the Korean War information station could 

be replaced. Pedestrian crossings would be 

better defined. An architecturally compatible 

restroom would be added in the vicinity of the 

south refreshment stand, while respecting the 

historic planting patterns. Recreation fields for 

volleyball and softball would continue to be 

provided. 

The following actions for the Lincoln Memorial 

and grounds are common to all alternatives: 

• Renovate and expand the exhibit area, renovate the restrooms at the memorial, and 

relocate the bookstore to the lower level. In 

 

92 
The Preferred Alternative 

addition, expand the restroom within the 

building footprint. 

• Implement recommendations of the Lincoln Memorial Cultural Landscape Report. 

• Restore the historic landscape associated 

with the memorial circle and radial roads. 

• Accommodate future national memorials 

authorized by Congress in the area north of 

the Watergate steps. 

• Accommodate road projects and circulation improvements by others to simplify 

traffic patterns and to improve pedestrian 

connections from the Kennedy Center and 

adjacent neighborhoods. 

Korean War Veterans Memorial 

On the west side of the Korean War Veterans 

Memorial the walks would be widened to accommodate changing circulation patterns and 

group visitation. Pedestrian connections between the memorial, the Lincoln Reflecting 

Pool, and Independence Avenue would be 

improved. Educational themes would address 

the Korean War, commemoration, and the 

history of the National Mall. 

Ash Woods 

The U.S. Park Police stables would be rebuilt to 

be compatible with the historic character and 

quality of the National Mall. Operational functions would remain fairly inconspicuous on the 

south side. The paddocks would be made part of 

the visitor experience, and educational exhibits 

about the U.S. Park Police and horse patrols 

would be offered. A new stables parking area 

and vehicle access road from Independence 

Avenue would be constructed. The present Ash 

Woods road would become primarily a walkway 

with a secondary function as a service road. 

Seating and inconspicuous pedestrian lighting 

would be provided. The recreational fields 

would remain. 

The Ash Woods restrooms would be demolished. A new restroom would be provided 

nearer the U.S. Park Police stables to better 

distribute restrooms. It would be designed using 

the visitor services architectural style. Food 

service could be provided near the new restroom if warranted by increased visitation. 

West Potomac Park (South of 

Independence Avenue) 

Tidal Basin Area 

A sense of arrival at the Tidal Basin would be 

created by redesigning pedestrian circulation. 

Around the Tidal Basin high-quality recreational 

experiences would be provided for strolling / 

sightseeing, bicycling, and boating. Improved 

circulation patterns, high-quality paving, additional seating, and more pedestrian stopping 

points would enhance visitor experiences. Pedestrian lighting would be installed in a manner 

that would not impact the evening lighting ambience of memorials. 

Based on engineering recommendations, the 

Tidal Basin seawalls would be rebuilt above tidewater. The historic appearance would be retained while accommodating wider walks and 

improving bicycling/vehicular circulation and 

safety, slightly reducing the size of the basin. 

Educational themes would address the history of 

the cherry trees and the Tidal Basin, the development of the Potomac parks, as well as the 

history of the National Mall. Rowboat, canoe, 

and kayak rentals could offer additional recreational boating opportunities. A Tidal Basin recreational boat service could provide access to 

the Thomas Jefferson, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and Martin Luther King, Jr. memorials, as 

well as the Tidal Basin parking lot. 

A system of separate bicycle lanes or trails would 

be developed. Walks for pedestrians and bicyclists would be widened and separated near 

Inlet, Outlet, and Kutz bridges. The recreation 

equipment rental facilities would be replaced. 

The recreation equipment rental facility and 

refreshment stand would be replaced by a new 

structure in the same general location. Restrooms and seating would be added. 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial 

A comprehensive condition assessment of the 

memorial, including visitor use patterns, would 

be undertaken. Educational programs would be 

increased, and Room 4 would be used for this 

purpose, as intended. Information, a bookstore, 

and restrooms are provided at the Franklin 

Delano Roosevelt Memorial and would also be 

93
ALTERNATIVES

provided at the Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial. A small food service and restroom facility 

could be provided if warranted by demand. 

West Potomac Park Riverfront 

Where feasible, a sustainable, vegetated shoreline would be established along the Potomac 

River. In other areas stone-faced walls would 

provide space for seating, fishing, and enjoyment, or perhaps nodes for water taxi service or 

the launching of small, hand-carried watercraft 

(such as canoes or kayaks). Walks would be 

improved, and additional seating would be 

provided. Separate bicycle lanes or trails would 

be developed along Ohio Drive and the river 

walks. Visitor parking would be provided but 

areas might be reconfigured for more efficient 

parking. Athletic fields would remain. 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial and Grounds 

No special event stage, roof, or walls would be 

allowed to obstruct the view to the White House 

from the north plaza. Educational themes would 

address Thomas Jefferson, the memorial’s 

development, and the history of the Tidal Basin, 

as well as the history of the National Mall. 

The former parking area south of the memorial 

would be redesigned to accommodate demonstrations and special events. Utilities would be 

provided. 

The tour bus drop off would be redesigned to 

improve pedestrian circulation. Bicycle lanes or 

trails would be provided for safer or improved 

access near the memorial and to the I-395 

bridges. 

The refrshment stand along East Basin Drive 

would be replaced with a new facility providing 

food, restrooms, and retail. Siting would need to 

consider traffic and circulation patterns, as well 

as protecting views to and from the memorial. 

Preferred Alternative — 

Conservation Zoning 

 

94 
The Preferred Alternative 

Map 

Preferred Alternative 

95
This page has been left blank intentionally. 
Alternative A — Focus on the Historic Landscape and Education 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION

Actions Common to All Alternatives

As previously described, the following summarized 

actions are common to all alternatives: 

• Cultural Resources — Preserve and protect cultural resources; manage in accordance with The

Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and with the

general recommendations of cultural landscape 

reports and inventories. 

• Natural Resources — Continue to manage and 

protect natural resources. Address water quality 

problems in water features. 

• Demonstrations and Special Events — Consistent 

with the First Amendment and federal regulations, fully accommodate demonstrations on a 

first-come, first-served basis. Consistent with federal regulations, accommodate special events. 

Improve permit procedures for special events and 

First Amendment demonstrations. Enhance monitoring procedures to ensure that resources are 

better protected and that soil, turf, and vegetation impacts are reduced. 

• Access and Circulation — Continue working with 

the city and other agencies to address tour bus 

parking. 

• Visitor Information, Education, and Enjoyment —

Continue to offer visitor information, educational 

programs, venues for entertainment, guided 

walking and bicycle tours, and a mix of recreational activities. 

• Visitor Amenities — Assess the economic feasibility, necessity, and appropriateness of changes 

to commercial visitors services and facilities. 

• Health, Public Safety, and Security — Continue 

law enforcement patrols and increase a law 

enforcement presence during large events. 

• Park Operations — Make waste management 

more efficient; expand recycling at events; continue a visual quality team to improve conditions 

and the appearance of park facilities; and meet 

NPS energy efficiency goals. 

Alternative A would restore and maintain the resources of the National Mall as a historic landscape. Under this concept the designed historic 

landscape would evolve and its value over time 

would change, reflecting significant national 

events. Contemporary uses would be accommodated while respecting the planned historic 

character and visions of the L’Enfant and 

McMillan plans. 

The National Park Service would ensure compatible and enduring high-quality design, as well 

as the highest facility maintenance standards, to 

create a sense of place that would reinforce the 

civic, historic, and symbolic role of the National 

Mall to our nation. 

The following actions would be in addition to 

those described under “Actions Common to All 

Alternatives” and highlighted in the accompanying text box. Only areas where actions would be 

taken are included in the following discussion. 

National Mall Actions 

Cultural Resources 

Under alternative A memorials and historic 

structures would be preserved and protected 

and the health and appearance of historic landscapes would be improved. Historic views and 

vistas would be improved and perpetuated to 

ensure that they are not obscured, even during 

events. 

Natural Resources 

To improve water quality in water features, 

circulation and filtration systems would be 

installed. Current technology, maintenance 

techniques, and upgraded equipment would be 

used. 

Soil conditions would be improved, and soils in 

some areas would be replaced and reengineered 

to reduce effects from compaction. The most 

successful turf management practices would be 

implemented. Trees and plants would be protected from social trails. 

Demonstrations, Special Events, and 

National Celebrations 

A new computer mapping-based reservation 

system would be developed to provide venue 

and permit information, as well as to schedule 

events, maintenance, and recovery periods or to 

schedule park projects. 

Product types and standards to be used during 

events would be defined, including acceptable 

locations for temporary facilities (e.g., portable 

97
ALTERNATIVES

restrooms, incident command centers, and event 

staging areas). Better cost recovery procedures 

would be developed. 

Under alternative A events would be required to 

have a meaningful association with the National 

Mall venues, as required by NPS Management 

Policies 2006 (NPS 2006e, sec. 8.6.2.1). 

Permanent infrastructure and space for temporary facilities such as portable restrooms would 

be planned to reduce the impact of annual 

events. Standards would address location, 

installation, temporary surfacing materials, tent 

installation methods for various areas, generator 

decibel levels, use of waterless hand cleaners, 

need for supplementary drinking water, and 

locations that must remain free of event 

facilities. 

Sufficient staff would be provided to monitor 

resource impacts during demonstrations and 

special events. Intense post-event recovery 

procedures would be developed to improve resource conditions and to minimize rest periods 

between events. 

Visitor Information, Education, and 

Enjoyment 

Website information would be improved by 

offering downloadable information for visitors 

planning trips. Visitors would be educated about 

the planned open space of the nation’s capital as 

developed in the L’Enfant, McMillan, and other 

historic plans. Additional living history programs would be offered, as well as multilingual 

programs. An on-line permitting system for 

athletic fields. 

Access and Circulation 

Pedestrian circulation improvements, such as 

signs, wayfinding and orientation maps, and 

transit stops within the National Mall, would be 

coordinated. Tour bus drop-offs would be 

redesigned as needed. 

Visitor Amenities 

All new facilities would be designed to be 

compatible with the character of the National 

Mall (e.g., the design of the Mall and Lincoln 

Memorial refreshment stands). The goal would 

be to make visitor facilities more identifiable for 

visitors, to strengthen the NPS identity, and to 

denote that they are secondary to memorials. 

Visitor facilities would be designed to withstand 

vandalism, forced entry, and skateboarding. 

A coordinated approach would be developed for 

furnishings, incorporating the following 

character-defining components: 

• historic benches, including the NPS 

standard Washington bench 

• historic lighting (Olmsted, Twin twenties, 

Washington globe, Saratoga lights) 

• furnishings specifically designed for 

memorials (seating, trash receptacles, signs, 

drinking fountains, light fixtures, etc.) 

New, coordinated, high-quality furnishings 

would be provided, for example trash/recycling 

containers, curbs, signs, and drinking fountains. 

New areas of paving would be coordinated with 

the most common and visible adjacent paving. 

The National Park Service would work closely 

with the Commission of Fine Arts, the National 

Capital Planning Commission, the Architect of 

the Capitol, the Smithsonian Institution, and 

D.C. city agencies to reestablish the lighting task 

force to develop a comprehensive lighting 

guideline for the monumental core that addresses at a minimum: 

• protection of the dominant lighting of the 

five symbolic icons (the Capitol, the White 

House, the Washington Monument, the 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial, and the 

Lincoln Memorial) 

• desired lighting character for urban and 

park areas, character-defining elements 

such as statuary and building facades, 

pedestrian and vehicular areas, and 

transitions between different light levels 

• appropriate light levels (foot-candles or 

lumens) and light color (color rendition) 

for different areas 

• energy efficiency and sustainable lighting 

practices 

• light pollution / protection of night sky 

from excessive, horizontal light pollution 

(temporarily blinding light) 

• security lighting 

 

98 
Alternative A — Focus on the Historic Landscape and Education 

Food service facilities would be replaced or 

upgraded. Efforts would be made to diversify 

food service, which would still be offered 

primarily at refreshment stands. 

New restrooms would be provided near food 

service facilities, and outdated restrooms would 

be replaced. 

More benches would be provided for seating to 

take advantage of views. Seating would be 

designed to accommodate the needs of people 

with disabilities. 

Health, Public Safety, and Security 

The National Park Service would work with the 

city to increase pedestrian street-crossing 

countdowns and add midblock crossings to 

enhance pedestrian safety. A mass notification 

system would be provided for emergency 

situations and would be coordinated with an 

upgraded communication network. 

To deal with problems and concerns caused by 

homeless and transient populations, the National Park Service would work with city agencies, business improvement districts, and 

Congress to address the causes and impacts of 

homelessness. 

The National Park Service would work with the 

General Services Administration to permanently 

resolve public safety and health issues as well as 

resource issues related to the steam system 

crossing through the park. 

Park Operations 

Deferred maintenance would be addressed as 

budgets and staffing allow. Staffing would be 

increased for resource management and communications (web, technology, media, and 

public information). Park standards would be 

developed to define desired conditions for 

different areas of the National Mall and covering 

all park operations. 

The National Park Service would advance the 

principles of sustainability, as described in the 

preferred alternative. Existing facilities would be 

rehabilitated to be sustainable and to reduce 

maintenance, and new facilities would be 

designed for sustainable operations and efficient 

maintenance. Commercial business services 

would also be required to improve recycling 

efforts and reduce waste. 

Any upgrades to circulation systems would ensure that operational access for maintenance 

vehicles would be available and would not cause 

damage to resources. A state-of-the-art communication network would be provided, with 

dedicated lines for NPS operations (phones/ 

computers), law enforcement, media, and event 

sponsor use. An attractive, durable, temporary 

fence system (in lieu of snow fencing) would be 

developed to protect areas during rehabilitation 

and restoration. 

The Mall 

Union Square (1st to 3rd Streets) 

The Ulysses S. Grant Memorial would be the 

focal point of a redesigned civic square and 

reflecting pool that would incorporate interpretation of the former Washington City Canal and 

the history of the U.S. Botanic Garden site. 

The Grant Memorial would be restored, and the 

condition of historic landscape components 

would be improved and incorporated into a new 

design based on historic precedents. The 

reflecting pool would be redesigned to be much 

smaller to facilitate pedestrian circulation. 

All viewing screens, stages, and large video 

screens would have to be located so as to not 

block the primary east-west vista for people on 

site. (This might require that video screens be 

located at angles.) 

Additional educational information about the 

site would be provided for visitors. Walks would 

be widened to facilitate public access and 

maintenance. Seating would be added. 

The Mall (3rd to 14th Streets) 

The Mall would be rehabilitated to improve 

conditions. Soils would be augmented or replaced for better turf and tree growing conditions, and other sustainable technologies would 

be implemented. The gravel walkways would be 

refurbished, and edging or curbs would be 

installed to limit gravel migration. Post-andchain fencing would be used to prevent social 

trails. A new irrigation system would be installed 

in a way that it could not be damaged during 

99
ALTERNATIVES

events. American elms would be replaced as 

needed in accordance with the historic planting 

plan. Other trees that are noncontributing 

elements of historic plans would not be 

replanted. 

For demonstrations and events, infrastructure 

would be provided. No temporary event facilities, such as tents, stages, or vehicles, would be 

allowed in the elm tree panels. Open, eye-level 

views between the U.S. Capitol and the Washington Monument would be protected. Event 

organizers would be encouraged not to install 

temporary event facilities, such as tents, directly 

in the center of the major view corridor between 

the U.S. Capitol and the Washington 

Monument. 

A visitor contact station would continue to be 

provided near the Metro stop, and orientation 

maps and information would be improved here 

and elsewhere on the Mall. Educational panels 

would be provided about the history of the Mall 

and the development of the federal city. To 

restore the historic scene, the carousel would be 

removed. 

The National Park Service would work with the 

city to remove vehicle parking on the northsouth cross streets through the Mall (3rd, 4th, 

and 7th streets) within the east-west viewshed. 

Small restroom facilities would be constructed 

near existing refreshment stands and would have 

a similar architectural style. Paving at refreshment stand areas would be redesigned to better 

accommodate use. 

The following action for the Mall is common to 

all alternatives: 

• Work with the Washington Metropolitan 

Area Transit Authority to change the name 

of the Smithsonian Metro station to include 

the National Mall. 

Washington Monument and 

Grounds 

The Washington Monument and grounds would 

continue to be highly used. The condition of the 

German-American Friendship Garden would be 

improved. 

A high-quality indoor facility for visitor services 

and food service would be provided on the 

monument grounds between 14th and 15th 

streets. This facility would be partially underground and would have a grass roof so as to 

blend into the landscape. 

The circular restroom would be replaced with a 

larger facility that would also contain a ranger 

information station. 

West Potomac Park (North of 

Independence Avenue) 

Constitution Gardens 

Constitution Gardens would continue to be an 

informal area providing limited visitor services. 

The Lockkeeper’s House would be kept in its 

current location, but it would be preserved and 

its visibility and appearance would be improved 

to reduce safety hazards for turning vehicles and 

pedestrians. 

Soils and vegetation would be rejuvenated. The 

lake would be reconstructed to be self-sustaining for plants, but fish would be removed. 

Walks would be repaved, and the refreshment 

stand and restrooms would be replaced. 

Lincoln Memorial and Grounds 

The Lincoln Memorial would continue to be a 

very popular destination and location for 

demonstrations and species events. 

On the grounds of the memorial the recommendations of the Cultural Landscape Report would 

be implemented. 

Educational exhibits would be provided in the 

Watergate area to enhance public understanding 

of the steps and the Constitution Avenue belvedere. The information stations for the Korean 

War Veterans and Vietnam Veterans memorials 

would be rehabilitated. 

To help restore a more historic scene, the south 

ramp cloverleaf from Arlington Memorial 

Bridge to Rock Creek Parkway would be 

removed, and traffic would be redirected to 23rd 

Street NW. Jurisdictional adjustments would be 

made to correspond to new road and circulation 

improvements. Storage and maintenance areas 

 

100
Alternative A — Focus on the Historic Landscape and Education 

associated with the roads would be addressed 

with the realignment of the roads. 

The following actions for the Lincoln Memorial 

and grounds are common to all alternatives: 

• Renovate and expand the exhibit area, 

renovate the restrooms at the memorial, 

and relocate the bookstore to the lower 

level. 

• Implement recommendations of the Lincoln Memorial Cultural Landscape Report.

• Restore the historic landscape associated 

with the memorial circle and radial roads. 

• Accommodate future national memorials 

authorized by Congress in the area north of 

the Watergate steps. 

• Accommodate road projects and circulation improvements by others to simplify 

traffic patterns and to improve pedestrian 

connections from the Kennedy Center and 

adjacent neighborhoods. 

Ash Woods 

The Ash Woods restroom would be replaced, 

and the U.S. Park Police stables would be 

renovated. 

West Potomac Park (South of 

Independence Avenue) 

Tidal Basin Area 

The Tidal Basin area under alternative A would 

be upgraded with paved walks and facilities to 

enhance strolling and viewing experiences. 

The recommendations of engineering studies 

about how the Tidal Basin is to function would 

be implemented, and the basin walls would be 

rebuilt in the current location to be above 

tidewater. 

Soil conditions would be improved, social trail 

development thwarted, and erosion and soil 

compaction under trees would be addressed. 

The effectiveness of tree protection measures 

would be assessed, and the most effective 

measures would be implemented. 

Walkways would be rebuilt and upgraded. 

Traffic lanes on the historic Kutz Bridge would 

be reconfigured to widen pedestrian walks on 

the south side. 

Visitor facilities would be redesigned to reduce 

congestion and to blend with the historic character of the National Mall. New recreation 

rental and refreshment facilities would be 

provided, and restrooms would be added. 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial 

The Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial would 

remain a popular destination. A comprehensive 

condition assessment of the memorial, including 

visitor use patterns, would be undertaken 

periodically. Educational programs would be 

increased.

West Potomac Park Riverfront 

The dry-laid stone river walls would be restored. 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial and Grounds 

The Thomas Jefferson Memorial would continue to be a popular destination that is also used 

for special events. No special event stage, roof, 

or walls would be allowed to obstruct the view 

to the White House. Cell phone tours would be 

developed. 

On the grounds the tour bus drop-off would be 

redesigned to facilitate pedestrian circulation.

101
ALTERNATIVES

Alternative A — Conservation Zoning 

 

102
Alternative A — Focus on the Historic Landscape and Education 

Map 

Alternative A 

103
This page has been left blank intentionally. 
Alternative B — Focus on a Welcoming National Civic Space for Public Gatherings, Events, and High-Use Levels 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC SPACE 

FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, EVENTS,

AND HIGH-USE LEVELS

Actions Common to All Alternatives

As previously described, the following summarized 

actions are common to all alternatives: 

• Cultural Resources — Preserve and protect cultural resources; manage in accordance with The

Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and with the

general recommendations of cultural landscape 

reports and inventories. 

• Natural Resources — Continue to manage and 

protect natural resources. Address water quality 

problems in water features. 

• Demonstrations and Special Events — Consistent 

with the First Amendment and federal regulations, fully accommodate demonstrations on a 

first-come, first-served basis. Consistent with federal regulations, accommodate special events. 

Improve permit procedures for special events and 

First Amendment demonstrations. Enhance monitoring procedures to ensure that resources are 

better protected and that soil, turf, and vegetation impacts are reduced. 

• Access and Circulation — Continue working with 

the city and other agencies to address tour bus 

parking. 

• Visitor Information, Education, and Enjoyment —

Continue to offer visitor information, educational 

programs, venues for entertainment, guided 

walking and bicycle tours, and a mix of recreational activities. 

• Visitor Amenities — Assess the economic feasibility, necessity, and appropriateness of changes 

to commercial visitors services and facilities. 

• Health, Public Safety, and Security — Continue 

law enforcement patrols and increase a law 

enforcement presence during large events. 

• Park Operations — Make waste management 

more efficient; expand recycling at events; continue a visual quality team to improve conditions 

and the appearance of park facilities; and meet 

NPS energy efficiency goals. 

Alternative B would improve the National Mall 

as the premier civic space for our nation and 

would support very high use levels. The evolving 

ceremonial, celebratory, cultural, and visitor 

uses at this national civic space would be emphasized. Diverse peoples would be welcomed 

through multilingual educational opportunities, 

and the needs of large groups (including those 

arriving by tour bus), demonstrators, and event 

participants would be met. 

Some areas would be redesigned to provide a 

more sustainable civic forum and a stage for 

First Amendment demonstrations and other 

events. 

The National Park Service would ensure compatible and enduring high-quality design, as well 

as the highest facility maintenance standards, to 

create a sense of place that would reinforce the 

civic, historic, and symbolic role of the National 

Mall to our nation. 

The following actions would be in addition to 

those described under “Actions Common to All 

Alternatives” and highlighted in the accompanying text box. Only areas where actions would be 

taken are included in the following discussion. 

National Mall Actions 

Cultural Resources 

Cultural resources would be protected, and 

planned vistas within the historic landscape 

would be improved and perpetuated. 

Natural Resources 

The National Park Service would seek a longterm solution to flooding in the monumental 

core, based on the results of engineering studies. 

This would be done in cooperation with the 

Army Corps of Engineers, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the National 

Capital Planning Commission, and city agencies. 

In addition to actions under alternative A 

(improving soil conditions, protecting trees and 

plants from social trails, implementing turf management practices, and developing a fencing 

system for use during rehabilitation and restoration), park managers would seek ways to reduce 

the physical impacts of events, such as soil compaction and erosion in the Mall elm tree panels 

and around the Tidal Basin cherry trees. As one 

of the measures to deal with the effects of climate change, raising the height of the seawalls at 

105
ALTERNATIVES

the Tidal Basin and along the Potomac River 

would be considered. 

Demonstrations, Special Events, and 

National Celebrations 

Highly visible venues throughout the National 

Mall would be redeveloped to better accommodate and in some cases increase space available 

for demonstrations and special events. These 

spaces would be better designed for intense 

levels of use. Multiple, desirable, hard-surface 

venues, staging areas, and utilities (water, electrical, Internet, and media connections) would 

be provided. 

Permit brochures and handouts would be rewritten to better inform potential demonstration 

and event organizers about how to promote 

sustainable, low-impact activities. 

In addition to the regulation changes proposed 

under alternative A to reduce resource impacts 

and to implement post-event recovery procedures, the standard permit requirements would 

be revised to recommend that special event 

organizers consider placement of all structures 

so that they do not block eye-level views between national symbols (such as the U.S. Capitol, the Washington Monument, the Lincoln 

Memorial, the Thomas Jefferson Memorial, or 

the White House). Event organizers would be 

encouraged to use supplementary (hired) transit 

services to facilitate large-scale events based on 

estimated size and location of events. 

Access and Circulation 

For public access the intent would be to coordinate visitor circulation systems that would be 

focused on a high-quality, enjoyable pedestrian 

environment while providing a positive urban 

experience and coordinated urban connections 

within a parklike setting. 

Some roads and crosswalks would be redesigned 

to improve and facilitate pedestrian movements 

while accommodating urban traffic, and trafficcalming measures would be considered. Additional parking would be provided for people 

with disabilities; parking areas would be redesigned for more efficient operation; and if 

determined feasible by engineering, security, 

geotechnical, and economic studies, underground paid public parking garages would be 

developed. Tour bus drop-offs would be 

redesigned as needed. 

Pedestrian experiences would be improved with 

upgraded walking surfaces and programming 

automatic and extended pedestrian crossing 

times into signal phasing. Pedestrian bridges or 

tunnels would be added. 

Visitor Information, Education, and 

Enjoyment 

Park information and orientation would continue to be improved. In addition, an on-line events 

calendar would be provided on glare-free variable message signs that would also be capable of 

providing emergency information. Onsite orientation maps would be lit for readability and 

viewing during evening hours. Roving rangers 

would welcome visitors and answer questions, 

and all park staff, including maintenance staff, 

would be able to direct visitors to destinations 

and provide park maps. Greetings, welcoming 

information, publications, and tours would be 

offered in foreign languages, and the use of 

large-print publications would be increased. 

Park staff would work with adjacent museums 

and managers of visitor destinations to provide 

park information. 

In addition to educational programs focused on 

the memorials and the history of the city, visitors 

would be educated about how the National Mall 

is the nation’s civic stage and gathering place. 

The purpose and history of our nation’s preeminent civic space would be discussed as the location for First Amendment demonstrations, 

special events, and national celebrations. 

Multiple thematic walking tour brochures or cell 

phone tours would be offered, in addition to 

current bicycle and walking tours. Examples of 

topics include development of the federal city, 

the civic stage and First Amendment demonstrations, presidential memorials, tree guides, 

seasonal guides, and exploring with children. 

Entertainment would be facilitated through 

improved or additional venues that would be 

designed with the necessary infrastructure, 

including new food service destinations (if 

feasible). Performances, educational programs, 

 

106
Alternative B — Focus on a Welcoming National Civic Space for Public Gatherings, Events, and High-Use Levels 

and thematically appropriate entertainment 

would be encouraged. 

A mix of recreational activities would be continued. Surface materials would be improved 

under alternative B to better accommodate some 

activities. Curbs and steps would be designed to 

discourage skateboarding. As described under 

the no-action alternative, the park would assess 

the economic feasibility, necessity, and appropriateness of additional food service. If feasible, 

existing facilities would be replaced or upgraded 

in some locations. Well-located, convenient, and 

attractive multipurpose facilities with indoor/ 

outdoor seating and potential for performance 

venues would be provided. Longer service hours 

would be considered. An on-line permitting 

system for athletic fields. 

Visitor Amenities 

Like alternative A, all new facilities would be 

designed to be compatible with the character of 

the National Mall. They would also be more 

identifiable for visitors, would strengthen the 

NPS identity, and would denote that they are 

secondary to memorials. A limited number of 

architecturally significant destination visitor 

facilities could be developed in certain locations 

(e.g., the Washington Monument, Constitution 

Gardens, Union Square, and the Tidal Basin 

area). 

A coordinated approach for furnishings would 

be developed, incorporating character-defining 

components (similar to alternative A): 

• historic benches, including the NPS 

standard Washington bench 

• historic lighting (Olmsted, Twin twenties, 

Washington globe, Saratoga lights) 

• replacement furnishings at memorials 

(seating, trash receptacles, signs) to unify 

the National Mall except for custom 

furnishings such as seating specifically 

designed for memorials 

New, coordinated, high-quality furnishings 

would be provided, including but not limited to 

trash/recycling containers, curbs, and fencing 

(including post-and-chain and temporary 

fencing). 

New walks would be developed to be low-maintenance, sustainable, and universally accessible. 

Along streets the walks would also conform to 

the design appearance of the Streetscape Manual

(Interagency Initiative for National Mall Road 

Improvement Program 1992) and any updates. 

Paving could simulate the appearance of gravel. 

In addition to adopting lighting guidelines as 

described under alternative A, pedestrian lighting would be supplemented in some areas, but 

lighting sources would not contribute to light 

pollution. 

Public restrooms would be provided approximately every quarter mile, and they would be 

kept open longer. New restrooms would include 

some sized to meet high use levels, and the capacity of some existing restrooms would be increased. Cleanliness would be frequently monitored. 

Drinking fountains would be concentrated near 

staffed and monitored restrooms. Convenient 

locations would be designed for portable 

restrooms. 

As described under the no-action alternative, the 

park would assess the economic feasibility, necessity, and appropriateness of additional commercial services, plus would determine the service types and levels that would be offered. 

Commercial service would be offered using 

available authorities. Currently authorized 

visitor services would be continued. If feasible, 

existing facilities would be replaced or upgraded 

in some locations. Well-located, convenient, and 

attractive multipurpose facilities with indoor/ 

outdoor seating and potential for performance 

venues would be provided. Longer service hours 

would be considered. 

Seating would be increased by using site components such as walls, and more seating would be 

provided at some memorials, including seating 

for groups. 

Health, Public Safety, and Security 

Areas would be redesigned to safely accommodate multiple uses, for example, separate bicycle 

lanes in some areas. In addition to pedestrian 

access improvements (programming automatic 

and extended pedestrian crossing times into 

107
ALTERNATIVES

signal phasing, midblock crossings, wider waiting areas, special paving, in-pavement lighting, 

pedestrian tunnels or bridges), walkways would 

be lit for pedestrian safety, and emergency call 

stations would be provided near orientation 

signs. Paving materials would be universally 

accessible, and additional facilities would be 

provided for people with disabilities. 

Park managers would work with the U.S. Park 

Police to expand horse patrols, and a law 

enforcement presence would be emphasized. 

To help visitors cool off during hot weather, 

permanent or temporary water misters would be 

provided in paved areas, along with interactive 

water features. 

Tall shrub beds and areas allowing cover and 

storage would be reduced or eliminated, which 

would be keeping with the original landscape 

design intent. 

Park Operations 

Deferred maintenance or repairs would be 

addressed as budgets and staffing allow, but 

some project areas would be redesigned to allow 

more use, to better protect resources, and to 

upgrade and provide sufficient visitor amenities. 

In addition to the actions under alternative A for 

operations and sustainability, staffing would be 

increased for maintenance, events, special 

project teams, and law enforcement to manage 

high volumes of use, events, and recovery/rehabilitation. Electronic facility monitoring would 

be used to schedule the opening/closing of 

restrooms and cleaning. A temporary fence 

system would be developed that is attractive, 

durable, not easily scaled, and lightweight so that 

it is easy to store, transport, and install. As 

described for alternative A, recycling programs 

would be improved, and facilities would be 

designed to withstand vandalism and forced 

entry. 

Walkways would be wide enough to accommodate maintenance, staff, and operational 

vehicles, as well as the public, and they would be 

able to withstand the weight of vehicles used for 

park operations and event deliveries. 

The Mall 

Union Square (1st to 3rd Streets) 

The Ulysses S. Grant Memorial would be the 

focal point of a dignified, paved urban civic 

square that is redesigned to highlight views, meet 

event needs, be a visitor destination, and offer 

comfort, convenience, and entertainment. It 

would also be a venue for demonstrations and 

special events. 

Under alternative B the reflecting pool would be 

removed, and the square would be redesigned to 

increase space for demonstrations, civic engagement, and special events. Infrastructure such as 

utilities and communication system networks, 

including media connections, would be provided for demonstrations and events. A multipurpose visitor destination facility with food 

service, restrooms, retail, and entertainment or 

performance space would be developed. 

The Mall (3rd to 14th Streets) 

The Mall would be rehabilitated and redesigned 

as a highly visible, sustainable venue with more 

hard surfaces for very high levels of use (demonstrations, public gatherings, cultural programs, 

and other civic events). Its critical historic features would be maintained. 

The condition of the historic landscape would 

be improved, and a decorative and interactive 

water feature would be added at the 8th Street 

cross axis, a site identified in the McMillan plan. 

Soils, turf, and tree growing conditions would be 

improved, similar to alternative A, except gravel 

on the walkways would be eliminated. Ways 

would be sought to reduce soil compaction and 

erosion within the elm tree panels, and American elms would be replaced as needed. The use 

of post-and-chain fencing to control resource 

damage would be minimized. The planting plan 

for all vegetation on the Mall would be updated 

to ensure that any changes would be compatible 

with contributing features of historic plans. 

For demonstrations and special events, actions 

would be similar to the no-action alternative and 

alternative A. However, some temporary event 

facilities (such as tents, stages, and vehicles) 

could be located in the elm tree panels if turf/ 

root zones and soils were protected through an 

 

108
Alternative B — Focus on a Welcoming National Civic Space for Public Gatherings, Events, and High-Use Levels 

acceptable and authorized method. In addition, 

Madison Drive NW and Jefferson Drive SW 

could be used during large special events or 

demonstrations (more than 250,000 people), and 

non-emergency / law enforcement vehicular 

traffic would be rerouted. 

A welcome area would be developed near the 

Metro stop, with a large tactile model of the 

National Mall. Electronic information would be 

provided, along with a listing of events and 

activities. Educational panels would be provided 

about First Amendment demonstrations and the 

Mall as the nation’s premier civic space. 

Existing recreational opportunities would 

continue, and interactive water features would 

be provided in some locations. Regularly 

scheduled ranger programs or walks would be 

offered, and entertainment would be encouraged. The coordination of visitor information 

with museums surrounding the Mall would be 

increased. 

Visitor transportation, commercial tour bus 

drop-offs, bicycles, and other wheeled vehicles 

would be accommodated on Madison and 

Jefferson drives, with access occasionally 

restricted to accommodate events and national 

celebrations (such as the Fourth of July). If 

determined feasible by engineering, security, 

geotechnical, and economic studies, an underground facility for paid visitor parking would be 

constructed between 15th and 12th streets, 

which would be entered from 15th Street. Tour 

bus drop-offs on the Mall would be increased. 

For paving and pedestrian circulation, new 

walks would be developed to be low-maintenance, sustainable, and universally accessible. 

Along streets the walks would also conform to 

the design appearance of the Streetscape Manual

(Interagency Initiative for National Mall Road 

Improvement Program 1992) and any updates. 

Surfaces in other areas would be provided to 

facilitate events and to maintain improved 

landscape conditions. Some walks would be 

widened, and some turf areas would be paved 

for event venues. 

Small restroom facilities near existing refreshment stands would be constructed in a similar 

architectural style. A larger multi-agency restroom would be provided at the Smithsonian 

Metro station, and a custom-designed, covered 

entry would be constructed over the Metro 

entrance. 

New public space for seating, pedestrian amenities, and event staging would be created over the 

12th Street tunnel portals at Madison Drive NW 

and Jefferson Drive SW. 

The following action for the Mall is common to 

all alternatives: 

• Work with the Washington Metropolitan 

Area Transit Authority to change the name 

of the Smithsonian Metro station to include 

the National Mall. 

Washington Monument and 

Grounds 

A high-quality, convenient indoor/outdoor 

visitor service facility (food service, retail, information, entertainment, restrooms, and views of 

the monument) would be provided on the 

northwest corner of 15th Street and Independence Avenue, near the current location of the 

Sylvan Theater. The facility would be a pleasant 

destination and a model of adaptable, 

convenient space capable of meeting the needs 

of early morning ticket queues (ticketing and a 

contact station would still be provided in the 

Monument Lodge). Space would also be provided for food and retail, educational programs, 

and entertainment (events, performances, and 

evening entertainment), as well as office space. 

This facility would replace the Sylvan Theater 

and the circular restroom. 

Infrastructure (utility connections, space for 

portable restrooms) would be developed to 

support demonstrations, events, performances, 

and staging in the northeast and northwest 

corners of the monument’s north grounds. 

To improve public access under alternative B, 

pedestrian underpasses or bridges would be 

constructed between 14th and 15th streets near 

Madison Drive NW and Jefferson Drive SW. 

Paving would be expanded near major crosswalks. Additional parking for people with 

disabilities would be provided near the new 

multipurpose visitor facility. If determined 

feasible by engineering, security, geotechnical, 

and economic studies, an underground visitor 

109
ALTERNATIVES

parking facility would be built below the multipurpose recreation fields on the south grounds, 

with pedestrian access under Independence 

Avenue to the monument’s visitor service areas. 

Survey Lodge would be rehabilitated to provide 

services for people with disabilities. 

West Potomac Park (North of 

Independence Avenue) 

Constitution Gardens 

Constitution Gardens would be a restful, highquality visitor destination, with food service and 

opportunities for entertainment and enjoyment. 

Soils and vegetation would be rejuvenated. 

The Lockkeeper’s House would be preserved, 

but it would be relocated slightly away from the 

intersection for safety reasons. The interior 

would be rehabilitated, and the building would 

be staffed for visitor information. Pedestrian and 

vehicular movements at the intersection would 

be improved. 

To accommodate demonstrations and special 

events, the lake and circulation patterns would 

be redesigned to increase available space. Walks 

would be repaved, and some walkways would be 

widened to create venues for smaller events 

(exhibits, tents, and performances). The lake 

would be reconstructed as a very shallow pool 

that could be drained for demonstrations and 

special events. Infrastructure (e.g., utilities and 

communication systems) would be incorporated 

into the new design. 

A multipurpose facility would be developed in 

the paved asphalt area as previously designed, 

with a unique indoor/outdoor character that 

could accommodate approximately 130 people 

indoors and 200 outside. A flexible, multi-use 

outdoor stage would be provided in the lake 

near this facility, with informal seating around 

the lake for several thousand people. Performances of thematic entertainment could be 

offered (e.g., World War II era music, Latin 

American music). The existing restrooms would 

be replaced. 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial 

Space would be provided near the memorial to 

allow for seating and contemplation. 

Lincoln Memorial and Grounds 

For demonstrations and special events on the 

memorial grounds, the Lincoln Memorial Guidelines would be expanded to address the availability and use of infrastructure (e.g., utilities, 

communication systems) to facilitate events. 

Additional restrooms would be provided near 

the north and south concession / refreshment 

stands on the grounds. The integrity of the historic planting plan would be respected when 

adding restrooms. 

Better pedestrian crossings of the memorial 

circle and radial roads would be provided. 

Under alternative B the Vietnam Veterans Memorial information station would be removed 

once the memorial center was open, and the 

Korean War information station could be 

replaced. 

A ceremonial use would be developed for the 

Watergate steps. Also, pedestrian crossings and 

access to Arlington Memorial Bridge would be 

improved. 

The following actions for the Lincoln Memorial 

and grounds are common to all alternatives: 

• Renovate and expand the exhibit area, 

renovate the restrooms at the memorial, 

and relocate the bookstore to the lower 

level. In addition under alternative B the 

restroom would be expanded within the 

building footprint. 

• Implement recommendations of the Lincoln Memorial Cultural Landscape Report. 

• Restore the historic landscape associated 

with the memorial circle and radial roads. 

• Accommodate future national memorials 

authorized by Congress in the area north of 

the Watergate steps. 

• Accommodate road projects and circulation improvements by others to simplify 

traffic patterns and to improve pedestrian 

 

110
Alternative B — Focus on a Welcoming National Civic Space for Public Gatherings, Events, and High-Use Levels 

connections from the Kennedy Center and 

adjacent neighborhoods. 

Korean War Veterans Memorial 

Changes in visitor use patterns at the Korean 

War Veterans Memorial since the development 

of new memorials would be assessed. Additional 

east-side entry walks would be provided to 

accommodate changing circulation patterns. 

Ash Woods 

Ash Road would become primarily a pedestrian 

walk and secondarily a service road for emergency, law enforcement, and maintenance 

access. The restroom would be replaced with a 

new facility between the World War II and 

Lincoln memorials. The U.S. Park Police stables 

would be screened from view with a wall or 

fence appropriate for the historic design of the 

National Mall. A new parking area and vehicle 

access would be provided from Independence 

Avenue. 

West Potomac Park (South of 

Independence Avenue) 

Tidal Basin Area 

The Tidal Basin area would be upgraded with 

high-quality, paved walks, improved circulation, 

furniture, facilities, and services to provide 

opportunities for more visitors to enjoy strolling 

and viewing experiences. 

The recommendations of engineering studies of 

the basin function would be implemented, and 

the walls would be rebuilt to allow wider walkways to protect the cherry trees. Additional 

locations would be provided for visitors to enjoy 

views or take photographs, and walks would be 

widened to reduce trampling of tree roots. 

Three pedestrian bridges would be added near 

Inlet, Outlet, and Kutz bridges to reduce congestion, and pedestrian lighting would be added 

for visitor safety and enjoyment. 

The parking lot would be removed if and when a 

new underground garage was provided on the 

south grounds of the Washington Monument. 

Seating would be added, and facilities would be 

redesigned to reduce congestion and to complement the historic character of the National Mall. 

The refreshment stand would be replaced with a 

destination multipurpose facility, which would 

be a small-scale, year-round facility with a 

unique character, indoor/outdoor seating, and 

open views. Restrooms would be provided, and 

the recreation equipment rental facilities would 

be upgraded. 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial 

Under alternative B educational programs 

would be increased, and Room 4 would be used 

for this purpose, as intended. A comprehensive 

condition assessment of the memorial, including 

visitor use patterns, would be undertaken. Food 

service would be provided in a location that 

would also be convenient to the future Martin 

Luther King, Jr. Memorial. 

West Potomac Riverfront Park 

The river walls would be reconstructed as 

higher, stone-faced structural walls so they 

would not be overtopped by water and floating 

debris. A small staging area for demonstrations 

and events would be developed south of 23rd 

Street and Independence Avenue SW. Grass 

pavement and utilities would be provided. 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial and Grounds 

Proposals for the Thomas Jefferson Memorial 

would generally be similar to the no-action 

alternative and alternative A. Utilities and infrastructure for demonstrations and special events 

would be installed on the plaza. 

On the grounds historic plantings would be 

preserved. The refreshment stand along East 

Basin Drive would be replaced. 

111
ALTERNATIVES

Alternative B — Conservation Zoning 

 

112
Alternative B — Focus on a Welcoming National Civic Space for Public Gatherings, Events, and High-Use Levels 

Map 

Alternative B 

113
This page has been left blank intentionally. 
Alternative C — Focus on Urban Open Space, Urban Ecology, Recreation, and Healthy Lifestyles 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES

Actions Common to All Alternatives

As previously described, the following summarized 

actions are common to all alternatives: 

• Cultural Resources — Preserve and protect cultural resources; manage in accordance with The

Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and with the

general recommendations of cultural landscape 

reports and inventories. 

• Natural Resources — Continue to manage and 

protect natural resources. Address water quality 

problems in water features. 

• Demonstrations and Special Events — Consistent 

with the First Amendment and federal regulations, fully accommodate demonstrations on a 

first-come, first-served basis. Consistent with federal regulations, accommodate special events. 

Improve permit procedures for special events and 

First Amendment demonstrations. Enhance monitoring procedures to ensure that resources are 

better protected and that soil, turf, and vegetation impacts are reduced. 

• Access and Circulation — Continue working with 

the city and other agencies to address tour bus 

parking. 

• Visitor Information, Education, and Enjoyment —

Continue to offer visitor information, educational 

programs, venues for entertainment, guided 

walking and bicycle tours, and a mix of recreational activities. 

• Visitor Amenities — Assess the economic feasibility, necessity, and appropriateness of changes 

to commercial visitors services and facilities. 

• Health, Public Safety, and Security — Continue 

law enforcement patrols and increase a law 

enforcement presence during large events. 

• Park Operations — Make waste management 

more efficient; expand recycling at events; continue a visual quality team to improve conditions 

and the appearance of park facilities; and meet 

NPS energy efficiency goals. 

The vision for alternative C is to meet evolving 

recreational needs in the nation’s capital by 

providing beautiful, enjoyable, and ecologically 

sustainable open spaces that could be adapted to 

changing recreational patterns of diverse local 

and national users. This concept would contribute to healthy lifestyles, healthy parks, and 

healthy, more sustainable cities. 

Recreational activities would be expanded by 

redesigning some areas, increasing recreation 

equipment rentals (such as boats, skates, and 

bicycles), adding playgrounds, and emphasizing 

connections to the recreational and enjoyment 

opportunities in East Potomac Park, the 

Georgetown Waterfront, and Rock Creek Park, 

as well as the southwest waterfront. 

The National Park Service would ensure compatible and enduring high-quality design, as well 

as the highest facility maintenance standards, to 

create a sense of place that would reinforce the 

civic, historic, and symbolic role of the National 

Mall to our nation. 

The following actions would be in addition to 

those described under “Actions Common to All 

Alternatives” and highlighted in the accompanying text box. Only areas where actions would be 

taken are included in the following discussion. 

National Mall Actions 

Cultural Resources 

As described for alternative A, landscape health 

and appearance would be improved. Vistas 

within the historic landscape would be 

protected and preserved. 

Natural Resources 

Environmentally sound ways to improve water 

quality would be sought. Means would be 

developed to conserve water, reduce the use of 

potable water, and reuse water. Nonpotable 

water sources would be sought for water features. In cooperation with other federal and city 

agencies, the National Park Service would seek 

to develop sustainable approaches to address 

urban drainage flooding. 

Stormwater management structures would be 

developed to mitigate urban drainage flooding. 

The potential for collecting and storing water 

from subsurface drainage / dewatering activities 

and reusing it for irrigation purposes would be 

explored, as would stormwater retention to 

reduce flooding from urban drainage (e.g., Constitution Gardens Lake) and rain gardens. 

115
ALTERNATIVES

To improve soil and vegetation conditions, rehabilitation and recovery periods would be revised 

so that smaller areas could be set aside more 

frequently and broader public access maintained. Practices would be implemented to 

protect and improve conditions for special 

vegetation populations. Soils would be managed 

according to the Sustainable Sites InitiativeTM

approach. 

To help address the effects of climate change, 

the park would coordinate with others to undertake a comprehensive approach to address the 

impacts of climate change. In addition, the park 

would seek to reduce greenhouse gases by 18% 

by 2012. 

Demonstrations, Special Events, and 

National Celebrations 

As described for alternative B, highly visible 

venues would be provided for demonstration 

and special events that would be better designed 

for high levels of use and with support infrastructure (electrical power, Internet and media 

connections) and durable surfacing. 

In addition to the regulation changes proposed 

under alternative A for event permitting and 

monitoring, as well as post-event recovery 

procedures, the turf management program 

would be revised so that smaller areas would be 

set aside more frequently, thus allowing broader 

public access. Events — not First Amendment 

demonstrations — would be scheduled to equalize use of the National Mall at any time. Part of 

the Mall’s grass panels would be open at all 

times for public recreation, part would be available for events, and part would be available for 

landscape recovery and restoration. Also, other 

means to expand participation in demonstrations and special events would be considered, 

e.g., opportunities for large viewing screens to 

simulcast offsite demonstrations. 

Operational improvements would be the same as 

alternative A, including a new reservation system, infrastructure, and space for temporary 

facilities and law enforcement to reduce 

resource impacts. 

Access and Circulation 

Circulation systems would offer a high-quality, 

enjoyable environment for both pedestrians and 

bicyclists, while accommodating urban traffic 

within a park environment. 

Some roads and crosswalks would be redesigned 

to improve and facilitate pedestrian movements, 

and some roads would be tunneled to improve 

vehicular circulation. Parking areas would be 

redesigned to be more efficient. 

Pedestrian experiences would be improved with 

upgraded walking surfaces and longer pedestrian countdowns; low-maintenance, sustainable, and universally accessible paving (same as 

alternative B), and pedestrian bridges or pedestrian/vehicular underpasses. Nonmotorized 

access would be facilitated by providing separate 

circulation routes for pedestrians and bicyclists 

or personal transit users, and by providing 

additional facilities geared to pedestrians and 

bicyclists. Bicycle lanes or markings on roads 

would be coordinated with the city. Tour bus 

drop-offs would be redesigned as needed. 

Visitor Information, Education, and 

Enjoyment 

Visitors would be educated about healthy 

lifestyles, plant materials and gardens, natural 

resources, sustainable practices and ecosystems, 

and stewardship activities through brochures, 

exhibits, and tours. More guided walking/ 

bicycling tours would be offered. Multi-season 

touring opportunities (spring cherry blossoms, 

fall colors) would be emphasized. Entertainment 

would be facilitated by providing better infrastructure at performance venues. 

Consistent with this alternative’s emphasis on 

healthy lifestyles, opportunities would be 

expanded to meet evolving recreational needs. 

Sport field conditions would be improved and 

additional fields created. Connections to other 

nearby recreation facilities would be improved, 

and information about recreational opportunities in East Potomac Park would be provided 

through brochures and web-based information. 

Trail connections along the Washington Waterfront, as well as along the Potomac and Anacostia rivers, would be improved. An on-line 

 

116
Alternative C — Focus on Urban Open Space, Urban Ecology, Recreation, and Healthy Lifestyles 

permitting system for athletic fields would be 

developed. 

If determined to be feasible in a commercial 

service plan, additional seasonal rentals of 

recreation equipment would be provided, as 

discussed below for each area. 

Visitor Amenities 

The architectural character of all facilities would 

be similar to alternative B, with the development 

of architecturally significant destination visitor 

facilities in certain locations. Under alternative C 

there would be a focus on cutting-edge, sustainable design solutions, exceeding the silver 

rating under the LEED program. Visible but 

subtle renewable energy components, such as 

photovoltaic solar energy systems, would be 

incorporated in designs. As described for alternative B, coordinated, high-quality, compatible 

site furnishings would be developed, but they 

would also be sustainable. 

In addition to adopting lighting guidelines as 

described under alternative A, pedestrian lighting would be supplemented in some areas, but 

lighting sources would not contribute to light 

pollution. 

Porous paving surfaces would be used if feasible, 

plus soft surfaces for jogging and smooth surfaces for in-line skating or wheeled recreation. 

Seating, including rental portable lawn chairs, 

would be increased in areas used for active 

recreation, such as ballfields. 

For food service, facilities would be replaced or 

upgraded in some locations, but refreshment 

stands would be the primary venue. More food 

variety would be offered. New drinking fountains or water stations would be designed to 

reduce possible misuse and to facilitate the 

filling of reusable water bottles. Restrooms, 

including some that would be automated and 

self-cleaning, would be added near food service 

locations. 

Health, Public Safety, and Security 

Circulation systems would be redesigned and 

separated to improve safety and reduce use 

conflicts. As described for alternative B, pedestrian safety would be increased by programming 

automatic and extended pedestrian crossing 

times into signal phasing, adding midblock 

crossings, improving crosswalks, providing 

pedestrian tunnels or bridges, and redesigning 

roadways to connect park areas. Walkways 

would be lit so as to emphasize surface 

conditions but not be intrusive (hidden or low 

profile light sources). Universally accessible 

paving materials would be provided. 

For law enforcement, bike patrols would be expanded. A mass notification system would be 

provided for emergency situations, as well as 

emergency call stations. Water misters and interactive water features would be provided to allow 

visitors to cool off. 

Park Operations 

Deferred maintenance would be addressed as 

budgets and staffing allow, but some project 

areas would be redesigned to allow more use, to 

better protect resources, and to upgrade and 

provide sufficient visitor amenities. Maintenance activities and operations would be increased, as described for alternatives A and B. 

Under alternative C staff increases for recreational and educational programs would be 

sought. Technological advances such as selfcleaning, automated public restrooms would be 

used in some areas to reduce maintenance. 

Means other than snow fencing would be developed to protect areas during rest and rehabilitation periods. 

The park would take the lead in demonstration 

and interactive programs for efficient energy 

use. Renewable energy sources would be sought 

for lighting and pumping systems for water 

features. The National Park Service would advance the principles of sustainability, as described in the preferred alternative, and would 

strive to achieve the highest LEED standard 

practicable, determine the park’s carbon footprint, and reduce greenhouse gases by 18% by 

2012. 

The Mall 

Union Square (1st to 3rd Streets) 

The Ulysses S. Grant Memorial would be the 

focal point of an active, paved urban civic square 

that would be a visitor destination and that 

117
ALTERNATIVES

would showcase reflective and interactive water 

features with an environmentally friendly design 

to highlight sustainable water management practices. The area would be visually and physically 

connected to the U.S. Botanic Garden and U.S. 

Senate Youth Park and U.S. Botanic Garden 

Education and Outreach Center to the north. 

As described for alternative A, the condition of 

historic landscape components would be improved. The Capitol Reflecting Pool would be 

redesigned as a shallow pool that could be 

drained for demonstrations and events or frozen 

for ice skating. Interactive water features would 

be provided to help visitors cool off during hot 

weather and to enliven the space. 

Infrastructure would be provided for demonstrations and events. Food and retail sales would 

be provided, plus automated, self-cleaning 

public restrooms. 

The Mall (3rd to 14th Streets) 

The Mall would be redesigned to better accommodate high levels of use for demonstrations 

and special events. It would provide additional, 

sustainable areas for recreational enjoyment 

(gardens, fountains) and improved lawn conditions (for informal pickup games and play). A 

children’s play area would be provided, as well 

as interactive water features at some locations. 

The center grass panels would be reconfigured 

to provide larger spaces for informal recreation. 

Soil, turf, and tree growing conditions would be 

improved, and a new irrigation system would be 

installed, similar to alternatives A and B. American elms would be replaced as needed, and postand-chain fencing would be used to prevent 

social trails. Like alternative B, the planting plan 

for nonhistoric elements would be updated to 

ensure that any changes would be compatible 

with historic plans. 

Infrastructure would be provided for demonstrations and events, but no temporary event 

facilities, such as tents, stages, or vehicles, would 

be allowed in the elm tree panels. 

A visitor contact station would continue to be 

provided near the Metro stop, and orientation 

maps and information would be provided here 

and elsewhere on the Mall. Information would 

also be provided about recreational opportunities and ecologically sustainable management of 

designed landscapes. 

Additional lighting and floral displays would 

enhance the Mall. Park furniture and interactive 

water features would be provided outside the 

primary viewshed to protect the historic landscape. Paving near refreshment stands would be 

redesigned to allow for expanded service areas 

as needed. Small restroom facilities would be 

provided near the refreshment stands. 

A 14th Street vehicular tunnel would be constructed to create a larger pedestrian-only area. 

Free public parking would continue to be allowed on Madison and Jefferson drives. Gravel 

would be replaced with sustainable, universally 

accessible surface materials. Some north-south 

walks would be eliminated between 7th and 9th 

streets to increase recreation space on center 

lawn panels. 

The following action for the Mall is common to 

all alternatives: 

• Work with the Washington Metropolitan 

Area Transit Authority to change the name 

of the Smithsonian Metro station to include 

the National Mall. 

Washington Monument and 

Grounds 

High-quality indoor/outdoor visitor services 

(food service, retail, restrooms) would be provided on the Washington Monument grounds 

between 14th and 15th streets. The circular 

restroom would be replaced, and automated, 

self-cleaning restrooms would also be installed 

near Constitution Avenue between 16th and 

17th streets. The Sylvan Theater would be reconstructed and reoriented to provide a new 

entertainment venue with improved viewing. 

A 14th Street vehicular tunnel would be constructed to improve pedestrian movement and 

safety, along with enhanced pedestrian crosswalks to increase their visibility to drivers, 

widened pedestrian waiting areas, and programming automatic and extended pedestrian crossing times into signal phasing, on 15th Street. 

Roads, parking, bicycle, and pedestrian circulation would be redesigned to reconnect park 

 

118
Alternative C — Focus on Urban Open Space, Urban Ecology, Recreation, and Healthy Lifestyles 

areas, to improve safety and recreational opportunities, and to connect to the southwest waterfront and East Potomac Park. Separate, dedicated bike trails would be constructed. A turfed 

surface would be provided over Maine Avenue 

to connect the monument grounds with the 

Tidal Basin. 

West Potomac Park (North of 

Independence Avenue) 

Constitution Gardens 

The Constitution Gardens would be a restful, 

quality visitor destination, with a garden café. As 

described for alternative B, the Lockkeeper’s 

House would be preserved and moved to an 

adjacent location slightly away from the intersection for safety reasons. The interior would be 

rehabilitated, and the building would be staffed 

for visitor information. Vehicular and pedestrian 

movements would be improved at the intersection. 

Soils and vegetation would be rejuvenated. The 

lake would be reconstructed to be self-sustaining for fish and plants. The lake would also be 

incorporated into the urban stormwater 

retention systems to control flooding, and a 

nonpotable water source would be found. 

For visitor enjoyment recreation rentals, such as 

model boats and lawn chairs, would be provided. A children’s play area would be added, 

along with an informal interactive water feature. 

Walks would be repaved and widened in some 

areas to create venues for small events (exhibits, 

tents, performances). Space would be provided 

for refreshment carts. Visitor facilities would be 

similar to alternative B, with a smaller food 

service facility. 

Lincoln Memorial and Grounds 

The historic landscape on the memorial grounds 

would be preserved and protected. As described 

for alternative B, the Lincoln Memorial Guidelines would be expanded to address the availability and use of infrastructure (e.g., utilities, 

communication systems) to facilitate events. 

Educational information would enhance public 

understanding of the Watergate steps and the 

Constitution Avenue belvedere. In addition 

under alternative C water taxi stops could be 

accommodated at the steps, with a redesign of 

Ohio Drive for safe pedestrian access. 

A north ramp and access to Constitution Avenue 

would be reestablished, in conjunction with the 

Framework Plan. Jurisdictional agreements and 

storage / maintenance facilities would be 

addressed as described under alternative A. 

The addition of visitor restrooms at the south 

concession stand would respect the integrity of 

the historic planting plan. (Restrooms on the 

north side would be available at the planned 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial Center.) Facilities 

at volleyball courts would be improved. 

The following actions for the Lincoln Memorial 

and grounds are common to all alternatives: 

• Renovate and expand the exhibit area, 

renovate the restrooms at the memorial, 

and relocate the bookstore to the lower 

level. 

• Implement recommendations of the Lincoln Memorial Cultural Landscape Report.

• Restore the historic landscape associated 

with the memorial circle and radial roads. 

• Accommodate future national memorials 

authorized by Congress in the area north of 

the Watergate steps. 

• Accommodate road projects and circulation improvements by others to simplify 

traffic patterns and to improve pedestrian 

connections from the Kennedy Center and 

adjacent neighborhoods. 

Korean War Veterans Memorial 

Screens for interactive computer displays would 

be replaced and upgraded as technology improves. As described for alternative B, visitor use 

patterns would be assessed, and additional eastside entry walks would be provided. 

Ash Woods 

Recreation fields in the Ash Woods area would 

be upgraded with backstops, etc., to avoid 

leagues leaving their equipment on the fields. 

The restroom would be replaced with a new 

facility between the World War II and Lincoln 

119
ALTERNATIVES

memorials (the same as alternative B). The U.S. 

Park Police stables would be reconstructed and 

would be designed to be compatible with the 

historic character and quality of the National 

Mall. The horse paddocks would become part of 

the visitor experience, with information about 

the U.S. Park Police and horse patrols. A new 

parking area and vehicle access road from Independence Avenue would be constructed. 

West Potomac Park (South of 

Independence Avenue) 

Tidal Basin Area 

The Tidal Basin area would be upgraded with 

high-quality paved walks, improved circulation, 

and facilities, as well as additional recreational 

opportunities, to allow more visitors to enjoy 

strolling and viewing experiences. 

A sustainable solution would be sought to comprehensively address hydrology and flooding in 

the Tidal Basin area. The recommendations of 

engineering studies would be implemented, and 

the ability of the basin to flush and absorb tidal 

surges would be maximized. The basin walls 

would be rebuilt to allow wider walkways. Soil 

and vegetation conditions would be improved. 

During demonstrations and special events more 

roving educational ambassadors and more 

educational signs would help prevent resource 

damage. 

Recreation equipment rentals would be expanded to include kayaks and rowboats. The bay 

north of Kutz Bridge would be filled to provide 

additional recreation fields. 

Roads and parking areas would be redesigned to 

be more efficient. In addition to widening and 

repaving walkways, pedestrian bridges would be 

added to reduce congestion. Pedestrian lighting 

would be installed in a manner that would not 

affect the evening lighting ambience of 

memorials. 

Visitor amenities, including the refreshment 

stand and the recreation equipment rental facilities, would be replaced to reduce congestion and 

to complement the historic character of the National Mall. Restrooms would be added. 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial 

Educational programs would be increased, and 

Room 4 would be used for this purpose, as 

intended. A comprehensive condition assessment of the memorial, including visitor use 

patterns, would be undertaken. A refreshment 

stand without restrooms would be constructed 

in a location that would also be convenient to 

the future Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial. 

West Potomac Park Riverfront 

Where feasible, a sustainable, vegetated shoreline would be developed. The river walls would 

be reconstructed where necessary. Trees would 

be added, and river views would be emphasized. 

Recreation fields could be occasionally used as 

staging areas for demonstrations, events, and 

filming; but other uses would be limited during 

recreation seasons. Lockers would be provided 

for personal storage near the recreation fields, 

and children’s play areas would be developed. 

Separate bike and walking trails would be provided, with an emphasis on trail connections to 

East Potomac Park and Rock Creek Park, as well 

as the southwest waterfront. Roads and parking 

areas would be redesigned as needed to 

accommodate bike lanes. 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial and Grounds 

Proposals would generally be the same as the 

no-action alternative and alternative A. For 

demonstrations and special events utilities and 

infrastructure would be installed on the plaza. 

The restrooms in the memorial would be 

renovated and expanded. Under alternative C 

ranger programs would be increased. 

Historic plantings on the memorial grounds 

would be preserved. The tour bus drop-off 

would be redesigned to facilitate pedestrian 

circulation. The refreshment stand would be 

relocated to be more convenient to primary view 

routes (bicycle and pedestrian walkways), as well 

as the tour bus drop-off.

 

120
Alternative C — Focus on Urban Open Space, Urban Ecology, Recreation, and Healthy Lifestyles 

Alternative C — Conservation 

Zoning 

121
This page has been left blank intentionally. 
Alternative C — Focus on Urban Open Space, Urban Ecology, Recreation, and Healthy Lifestyles 

Map 

Alternative C 

123
This page has been left blank intentionally. 
ACTIONS CONSIDERED BUT DISMISSED

Numerous suggestions were made during the 

public scoping and planning process. The National Park Service received around 30,000 

public comments, and many public ideas have 

been included in the alternatives considered in 

this Draft Environmental Impact Statement.

These included separate bike routes or lanes, 

additional and more conveniently located 

restrooms, better pedestrian lighting, an emphasis on the importance of First Amendment 

demonstrations, removal of gravel on walkways, 

more choice in food service, more color, setting 

an example for green and sustainable uses, recycling, more passive recreational opportunities, 

family play opportunities, more recreation 

equipment rentals, and extended hours. In the 

preferred alternative at least eight ideas were 

included from each of the preliminary alternatives presented in newsletter 3, and these alternatives were originally developed to incorporate 

public ideas. The following discussion represents some of the ideas that were considered but 

dismissed from further consideration as 

described below. 

As stated in NPS Director’s Order #12: Handbook for Environmental Impact Analysis (NPS 

2001b), the National Park Service generally 

eliminates alternatives from further study 

because of (a) technical or economic infeasibility; (b) inability to meet project objectives or 

resolve need; (c) duplication with other, less 

environmentally damaging or less expensive 

alternatives; (d) conflict with an up-to-date and 

valid park plan, statement of purpose and 

significance, or other policy such that a major 

change in the plan or policy would be needed to 

implement; and (e) too great an environmental 

impact. Reasons for dismissing individual 

actions are identified in the following discussion. 

A NATIONAL MALL 

BOUNDARY EXPANSION

At the beginning of the 20th century the National Mall was expanded by the McMillan 

Commission at a time when new landfill presented opportunities for what was then an 

enormous swath of undeveloped space. That 

same opportunity no longer exists; the National 

Mall is now surrounded by federal, local, and 

private development. 

Areas considered to be part of the monumental 

core have strong physical and symbolic connections to the National Mall, and this includes areas 

west of the river as well as areas to the north, east, 

and south. Even though these areas are beyond 

the defined boundaries of the National Mall, they 

still make significant contributions to its setting. 

The lands to the north and south of the National 

Mall are either privately owned or owned by the 

federal government and are principally used for 

agency headquarters. They have a much different 

character than the National Mall, which is defined by sweeping landscapes, the symbolic cross 

axis, and the iconic buildings that flank the Mall. 

The NCPC’s Extending the Legacy and its implementing documents, the Memorials and Museums 

Master Plan and the Monumental Core Framework Plan, propose to elevate important secondary axes that emanate from the National Mall to 

establish new symbolic connections to sites that 

are prominently situated. These sites would be 

integrated within an urban context and would 

add a rich layer to the city’s identity as a modern 

capital city. Rather than managing the monumental core as a whole landscape or precinct, 

planning calls for them to be managed as 

individual sites or corridors 

As previously discussed, the National Park Service has defined the National Mall to include 

three specific areas over which the agency has 

legal jurisdiction: 

• The Mall — This area includes Union 

Square, just to the west of the U.S. Capitol 

grounds, to 14th Street at the east edge of 

the Washington Monument grounds. The 

Mall itself extends from 3rd to 14th streets, 

and from Jefferson Drive on the south to 

Madison Drive on the north. Adjacent facilities facing the Mall are under the jurisdiction of the Smithsonian Institution, the 

National Galley of Art, and the Department 

of Agriculture. 

• The Washington Monument — This portion of the National Mall lies between 14th 

125
ALTERNATIVES

and 17th streets, and from Independence 

Avenue north to Constitution Avenue. The 

south Washington Monument grounds are 

between Maine Avenue and Raoul Wallenberg Place south of Independence Avenue. 

• West Potomac Park — This portion lies 

west of 17th Street and extends to the 

Potomac River on the west and south; the 

northern boundary is basically Constitution 

Avenue. This is the setting for numerous 

memorials, including the Lincoln Memorial, the World War II Memorial, the 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial, the Vietnam 

Veterans Memorial, the George Mason 

Memorial, the Franklin Delano Roosevelt 

Memorial, and the Tidal Basin. The northwest end extends toward the Kennedy 

Center north of the U.S. 66 highway ramps. 

The “Mall System” in the 1901 McMillan plan 

included eight areas, and the area that is now 

managed by the National Park Service covers all 

or a part of five of the eight areas. The other 

areas included (1) the White House and President’s Park, which the National Park Service 

manages as a separate unit and for which a 

current comprehensive plan has already been 

approved; (2) the U.S. Capitol; and (3) the Federal Triangle area. East Potomac Park, which is 

adjacent to the National Mall to the south, has a 

separate legislated purpose to forever provide 

recreation space; this area has been addressed by 

the National Capital Planning Commission in 

the Monumental Core Framework Plan so that 

the National Park Service could focus on the 

National Mall. 

The NPS Management Policies 2006 stipulate the 

conditions under which boundary adjustments 

would be considered (NPS 2006e, sec. 3.5): 

As part of the planning process, the Park Service will identify and evaluate boundary adjustments that may be necessary or desirable 

for carrying out the purposes of the park 

unit. Boundary adjustments may be recommended to 

• protect significant resources and values, 

or to enhance opportunities for public 

enjoyment related to park purposes; 

• address operational and management issues, such as the need for access or the 

need for boundaries to correspond to 

logical boundary delineations such as 

topographic or other natural features or 

roads; or 

• otherwise protect park resources that 

are critical to fulfilling park purposes. . . . 

All recommendations for boundary changes 

must meet the following two criteria: 

• The added lands will be feasible to administer considering their size, configuration, and ownership; costs; the views 

of and impacts on local communities 

and surrounding jurisdictions; and 

other factors such as the presence of 

hazardous substances or exotic species. 

• Other alternatives for management and 

resource protection are not adequate. 

The National Park Service does not believe that 

the current definition of the National Mall requires expansion because of coordinated planning efforts by three federal agencies — the 

National Capital Planning Commission, the U.S. 

Commission of Fine Arts, and the National Park 

Service. The National Capital Planning Commission is responsible for planning throughout 

Washington, D.C., including areas adjacent to the 

National Mall. The Commission of Fine Arts is 

responsible for advising on the location of statues, fountains, and monuments in the public 

areas in the District of Columbia and for reviewing the designs of private construction projects 

within certain areas of the national capital. Also, 

adjacent areas are being adequately managed by 

other entities, and the D.C. Office of Planning has 

undertaken numerous city planning projects. 

Therefore, expanding the National Mall would 

not achieve any purpose that is not already being 

addressed, would require a change in park purpose, and would not resolve any need or meet 

park policy. Therefore, it has been eliminated 

from further consideration. 

A NEW NATIONAL MALL 

COMMISSION

Suggestions have been made to establish a new 

commission similar to the McMillan Commission to plan for the areas covered in that 1901 

plan. At the time of the McMillan Commission 

no federal agencies were charged with either 

planning for or protecting the character of lands 

within Washington, D.C. Subsequent to the 

McMillan plan, Congress established the 

 

126
Actions Considered but Dismissed: Building Out the McMillan Plan for the National Mall 

National Capital Planning Commission and the 

U.S. Commission of Fine Arts to protect the 

visions embodied in the McMillan plan, as well 

as the L’Enfant plan. The National Capital 

Planning Commission’s Extending the Legacy 

plan (NCPC 1997) is the successor to the 

McMillan plan and provides an overarching 

vision for the nation’s capital that builds on the 

principles of the L’Enfant and McMillan plans 

and protects the National Mall. Monumental 

Core Framework Plan: Connecting New Destinations with the National Mall, which was developed by the National Capital Planning Commission in cooperation with the Commission of 

Fine Arts, would implement the Extending the 

Legacy plan (NCPC 2009). These agencies have 

been working closely with the National Park 

Service, the D.C. Office of Planning, and the 

Architect of the Capitol to coordinate various 

planning efforts, including the development of 

the National Mall plan. 

A new National Mall commission could only be 

authorized by Congress or the president, not by 

the National Park Service, and it would necessarily supersede the purview of the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts and the National Capital 

Planning Commission, as well as the National 

Park Service. Rather than clarifying the existing 

situation, a new commission would further 

complicate present planning and management 

efforts by delaying urgently needed deferred 

maintenance, jeopardizing funding that may 

become available, stalling private/public 

fundraising, and creating another advocacy or 

grievance forum. 

The work of a new commission might identify 

some new ideas and provide a new forum for 

public participation, but public participation is 

currently part of planning. Much of the work of 

a new commission would likely be duplicative 

and redundant to planning efforts undertaken 

by the National Capital Metropolitan Area 

Commission as well as the National Capital 

Planning Commission, the U.S. Commission of 

Fine Arts, the District of Columbia, the General 

Services Administration, the Smithsonian Institution, the National Gallery of Art, and the 

National Park Service. Washington residents 

have direct access to participating in decisionmaking on the National Mall now through 

NCPC membership (4 of 12 seats) and also on 

the National Capital Metropolitan Area Commission. A new commission could distance that 

relationship between D.C. citizens and decisionmakers. This alternative would duplicate a less 

expensive alternative to use existing commissions that have been developed for the purposes 

of planning for and protecting the character of 

the federal city. Therefore, this proposal is 

eliminated from further consideration. 

BUILDING OUT THE MCMILLAN PLAN 

FOR THE NATIONAL MALL

Suggestions were made to complete the McMillan plan vision for the National Mall or portions 

of it, such as the design for the Washington 

Monument grounds. The development of the 

Mall, the Lincoln Memorial, the Thomas 

Jefferson Memorial, the Ulysses S. Grant Memorial, and adjacent museums were all clear outgrowths of the McMillan plan. While that plan 

established the character of the National Mall as 

the cultural core for our nation, as well as its 

general boundaries, it was a plan geared to the 

needs and sensibilities of the early 1900s. A 

number of projects proposed in the McMillan 

plan were undertaken, while others underwent 

significant changes or were never completed. As 

stated in Designing the Nation’s Capital: The 1901 

Plan for Washington, D.C. (U.S. Commission of 

Fine Arts [CFA] 2006), “As early as the mid1920s, the commission’s Tenth Report noted that 

the agency’s position was that the L’Enfant plan 

of 1791 was the fundamental one for the District 

of Columbia, and the [McMillan] plan of 1901 

was a ‘restatement of the authority of the 

L’Enfant plan, together with such extensions of 

that plan as were necessary to make it apply to 

increased areas and changed conditions. This 

commission have [sic] never held that the plan of 

1901 might not in its turn require changes and 

extensions’” (quoted in CFA 2006, 270). 

One example is the McMillan plan’s elaborate 

proposal for the Washington Monument gardens. Doubts about soil conditions around the 

foundations of the monument caused both the 

Commission of Fine Arts and the National 

Capital Park and Planning Commission (the 

predecessor of the National Capital Planning 

Commission) to call for a full engineering report, 

which recommended the plan be abandoned 

because the areas requiring either excavation or 

127
ALTERNATIVES

heavy loading were located where they would 

seriously affect the stability of the monument 

(CFA 2006, 265). Another example is the 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial, which was placed 

on a site reserved for both a memorial, possibly 

to the Founding Fathers, and a grouping of 

public buildings (CFA 2006, 267). 

The McMillan plan was a strong plan that 

provided an urban design and architectural 

concept illustrating the character for a portion 

of the symbolic monumental core that had not 

developed in accordance with L’Enfant’s vision 

or affected land not available in L’Enfant’s era. 

While the strength of the McMillan plan helped 

propel many components that were eventually 

realized, designs that were either not feasible or 

that no longer aligned with changing conditions 

or tastes were altered as projects were implemented. Projects completed during the 1930s 

and 1940s in Washington, nearly three decades 

after the McMillan plan, were as significant as 

the previous generation’s efforts in contributing 

to the significance of the National Mall. 

The design of the National Mall has become 

more significant with time, and Congress declared it to be “a substantially completed work 

of civic art” in the 2003 amendments to the 

Commemorative Works Act. While the National 

Park Service recognizes that the National Mall is 

an evolving landscape, there would be no reason 

to implement elements of the McMillan plan 

that were previously set aside. NPS Management 

Policies 2006 stipulate that “as a basic principle, 

anything of historical appearance that the National Park Service presents to the public in a 

park will be either an authentic survival from the 

past or an accurate representation of that once 

existing there” (NPS 2006e, sec. 5.3.5). In addition, The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for 

the Treatment of Historic Properties specifically 

state, “Designs that were never executed historically will not be constructed.” This precludes 

implementing historic plans that were never 

built. Therefore, this suggestion was dismissed 

from further consideration since it would conflict with NPS policy, as well as plans approved 

by the Commission of Fine Arts, and it would 

not meet any need. 

CHANGING THE HISTORIC 

LANDSCAPE

Several proposals suggested that the center grass 

panels of the Mall are too wide and should be 

narrowed; that additional trees need to be 

added; that elm trees should be replaced with 

other species; or that some form of gravel should 

be used to replace grass under the elm trees. 

These proposals would alter character-defining 

components of one of the most historic 

landscapes and vistas in our nation. The simple 

and formal Mall landscape is comprised of 

regularly spaced elm trees and rectangular turf 

panels. The formal spatial relationships and 

circulation system were carefully considered in 

both the McMillan plan and in the 1930s when 

the present Mall took form under the guidance 

Frederick Law Olmsted Jr. Elm trees remain one 

of the most tolerant tree species, and the National Park Service has developed significant 

expertise in maintaining the trees. Placing gravel 

under the elm trees would further eliminate 

picnicking, reading, and general enjoyment of 

present turf areas. NPS policies prevent the 

alteration of contributing elements of a nationally significant historic landscape (such as 

different tree species, or adding gravel beneath 

the trees) without a compelling reason. Some of 

these proposals were previously rejected by the 

National Capital Planning Commission and the 

U.S. Commission of Fine Arts. As a result, these 

suggestions were considered but eliminated 

since several of them would conflict with 

proposals in park historic structure reports or 

cultural landscape inventories, or would alter or 

conflict with plans approved by established 

commissions. 

There have been proposals to remove Constitution Avenue and reopen Tiber Creek as a 

canal. The National Park Service does not 

restore a landscape to a specific time without a 

significant reason and only when detailed plans 

are available. Constitution Avenue is a critical 

part of the urban circulation system, and reestablishing the canal would completely disrupt 

the city’s circulation patterns, would be 

economically infeasible, would result in too 

great an environmental impact, and would fail to 

resolve any need. 

 

128
Actions Considered but Dismissed: Features on the National Mall 

It was suggested that the National Mall be 

turned into gardens to produce food. Given the 

National Mall’s purpose and symbolic nature, 

and its historical use for national celebrations, 

First Amendment demonstrations, events, tourism, and recreation, the highest and best use 

would be to continue these uses, not agricultural 

production. This alternative was dismissed from 

further consideration since it would conflict 

with objectives to respect historic plans and 

provide a venue for First Amendment demonstrations and national celebrations, and it would 

not resolve any need. 

FEATURES ON THE NATIONAL MALL

Additional Memorials or Museums 

Several comments proposed additional memorials to people or events or a war museum. This 

action is prohibited by the Commemorative 

Works Clarifications and Revision Act of 2003. 

The act identifies the Reserve, which includes 

the National Mall and the White House and 

President’s Park, and it states that this area is a 

“substantially completed work of civic art.” The 

construction of additional memorials or visitor 

centers that had not already been authorized by 

Congress in 2003 is prohibited. Since this proposal would conflict with a congressional objective and would fail to resolve any need, it was 

not considered further. 

Locations for future memorials and museums 

include Area 1, which is adjacent to the National 

Mall and would be appropriate for nationally 

significant memorials, and Area 2, which encompasses the remainder of the city and would be 

appropriate for other memorials. The NCPC 

Memorials and Museums Master Plan also identifies numerous locations outside the National 

Mall for future memorials in order to protect the 

National Mall from being overbuilt (NCPC 

2001). One of the purposes of the NCPC Monumental Core Framework Plan is to improve the 

viability and attractiveness of proposed locations 

for cultural destinations or commemoration 

(NCPC 2009). Any proposals to add memorials 

or museums would conflict with the Commemorative Works Act and could be addressed 

in accordance within the Memorials and 

Museums Master Plan. Therefore, these 

proposals were dismissed from further 

consideration. 

Moving, Removing, or Destroying 

Memorials or Historic Structures 

Several people and organizations suggested that 

after the death of the last veteran of each war 

that is commemorated on the National Mall (the 

D.C. War Memorial, the World War II Memorial, the Korean War Veterans Memorial, and 

the Vietnam Veterans Memorial) each memorial 

should be relocated to Arlington National Cemetery. Congressionally authorized memorials are 

considered to be cultural resources, and relocating them would alter the historic landscape and 

the original context for the memorial. These 

memorials document our nation’s history, and 

they have historic value for that reason. While 

individual memorials might not be seen as attractive or valued by one group, they may be 

highly valued by others. These proposals would 

conflict with NPS cultural resources policies or 

would not meet congressional objectives when 

the memorials were established, so they were 

dismissed from further consideration. 

A suggestion was made to move the Ulysses S. 

Grant Memorial. However, The Secretary of the 

Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic 

Properties, as well as NPS Management Policies 

2006, set very high standards for considering the 

relocation of an important commemorative element such as this presidential memorial that is 

the visually dominating feature of Union Square. 

Since this proposal would conflict with a congressional objective, as well as NPS cultural 

resource management policies, and it would 

constitute too great an environmental impact, 

this proposal was eliminated from further 

consideration. 

It was also suggested that the historic Monument Lodge be moved because it is within the 

primary east-west viewshed. This structure is 

relevant to the history of the Washington Monument, and grading of the Mall screens it from 

view until viewers are west of 14th Street. The 

facility has been adaptively reused in the past, 

and NPS policy is to adaptively reuse buildings 

in place when their past use is no longer possible. Monument Lodge now serves as a bookstore, ticket location for the Washington 

129
ALTERNATIVES

Monument, and restrooms. This proposal was 

dismissed from further consideration because it 

would conflict with NPS cultural resource 

management policies, would not meet any need, 

and would be economically infeasible. 

A Central Visitor Center 

Proposals have been made that a central visitor 

center should be provided on the National Mall 

to orient and educate visitors. However, the 

Commemorative Works Clarifications and 

Revision Act of 2003 prohibits the construction 

of any visitor centers within the Reserve, which 

includes the National Mall. Also, a National 

Visitor Center was provided at Union Station for 

the 1976 Bicentennial but was later removed. 

When the Washington Monument was restored, 

a temporary visitor center was provided. Neither 

of these facilities proved to be well used. 

The National Park Service emphasizes the value 

of authentic experiences for visitors rather than 

virtual experiences. NPS Management Policies 

2006 state, 

Within the rich learning environments of 

national parks and facilitation by NPS 

interpreters, visitors will be offered authentic 

experiences and opportunities to immerse 

themselves in places where events actually 

happened, experience the thrill of connecting with real objects used by previous generations, enjoy some of the most beautiful and 

historic places in America, and understand 

the difficult moments our nation has 

endured (NPS 2006e, sec. 7.1). 

The National Mall is the ideal location to 

achieve this goal without a central visitor center. 

Today, the widespread availability of websites 

facilitate advance planning, understanding of 

park resources, and getting an overview of 

visitor opportunities. Information and education 

for the National Mall would continue to be 

widely available through brochures, educational 

wayside panels, onsite radio information, guided 

walks, scheduled programs, and cell phone tours 

instead of being centralized at a visitor center. 

The optimal experience on the National Mall 

will continue to be direct personal experiences. 

Currently, a cohesive system of updated 

National Mall signs, orientation maps, and 

pedestrian guide signs is being developed to provide wayfinding information. 

Focused indoor exhibits and audiovisual programs will continue to be offered at several 

memorials — the Washington Monument, the 

Lincoln Memorial, the Thomas Jefferson 

Memorial, and the Franklin Delano Roosevelt 

Memorial. Related bookstores will continue to 

have displays and presentations that use various 

media. Both the Korean War Veterans Memorial 

and the World War II Memorial have interactive 

computer listings. It is expected that the Martin 

Luther King, Jr. Memorial and the Vietnam 

Veterans Memorial Center will continue this 

approach to some extent. Surrounding museums 

and galleries also provide visitor information. 

Multipurpose facilities proposed in some 

alternatives would also provide information and 

education that could be integrated with other 

visitor services. Other changes to facilitate educational opportunities are addressed in the 

alternatives. Traditional visitor centers, with 

auditoriums and extensive media or museum 

exhibits, have been successfully replaced by 

open-air facilities that provide a sense of 

welcome, orientation, information, and 

education, as well as a point of dispersal for 

personalized park visits. These methods also 

provide considerable cost savings. 

Generally, visitor centers in national parks are 

located where the maximum number of visitors 

could be served. However, there are multiple 

entry points to the National Mall, and while the 

Smithsonian Metro station is a primary entrance 

for visitors arriving on the subway, visitors can 

enter from one of several entry points and from 

any direction. Because the destinations are widespread, visitors primarily walk to them, making it 

logical to provide information at dispersed 

locations. This idea was dismissed from further 

consideration because it would not meet plan 

objectives for visitor convenience and would 

duplicate less expensive alternatives of providing 

orientation and information at existing or 

needed multipurpose facilities. 

A central visitor center has been proposed in the 

Smithsonian Institution’s Arts and Industries 

Building. This location is outside the jurisdiction 

of the National Park Service, and as previously 

described, the Smithsonian Institution is considering alternative uses for this space, which the 

National Park Service is closely following. 

 

130
Actions Considered but Dismissed: Visitor Access 

Adding New Features 

Some public comments suggested adding features such as a walk of presidents lined by statues, interactive statues, wishing wells, extremely 

large flagpoles, moats, or patriotically themed or 

brightly colored paving. These suggestions 

would alter the character of the historic landscape and vistas in a way that would be inconsistent with historic preservation guidelines and 

NPS policy. The historic landscape of the 

National Mall is a treasure that represents core 

values of our nation, and other comments have 

reflected a concern that the National Mall could 

be turned into a theme or amusement park. The 

NPS Management Policies 2006 state that a 

cultural landscape may be rehabilitated for 

contemporary use if

• it cannot adequately serve an appropriate 

use in its present condition; and 

• rehabilitation will retain its essential features and not alter its integrity and character or conflict with approved park management objectives (NPS 2006e, sec. 

5.3.5.2.2). 

The actions recommended in the alternatives, 

such as infrastructure for demonstrations and 

events and restrooms for visitors, would meet 

contemporary needs and would be provided in a 

way that would maintain the integrity and character of the National Mall. However, adding any 

of the features suggested above would alter the 

integrity and character of the National Mall. 

Such alternatives would conflict with NPS policy 

and would not meet plan objectives to respect 

historic plans. Therefore, they were eliminated 

from further consideration. 

Historic Appearance for New 

Features 

Several suggestions were made that new 

features, such as signs, seating, or other smallscale features, should have a “historic” appearance. NPS Management Policies 2006 state that 

new construction should be compatible but 

differentiated from historic features (sec. 5.3.5). 

This policy ensures that authentic historic resources are identifiable to the public as well as 

protected. This alternative was eliminated from 

further consider because it would fail to meet 

NPS cultural resource management policies, 

would not meet the plan objective to respect 

historic plans and resources, and would not 

resolve any needs that could not be addressed in 

other ways. 

VISITOR ACCESS

Underground Connections 

to Memorials 

A proposal was made to develop an underground walk system between all visitor attractions on the National Mall. This area is crossed 

by several Metro lines and a number of utility 

systems. Costs to construct such a system would 

be exorbitant, and visitors would not be able to 

enjoy the historic landscape and vistas, part of 

the experience that makes the National Mall 

unique. This alternative would be economically 

and technically infeasible, and it would have too 

great an environmental impact. It would also fail 

to meet plan objectives for visitors to enjoy the 

beauty and significance of the National Mall as 

they move from one destination to another, so it 

was dismissed from further consideration. 

Tram or Streetcar System 

A tram or streetcar system running around the 

National Mall was proposed as a way to improve 

visitor transportation. This system typically requires power to be run through overhead lines, 

which would intrude on views and vistas. The 

same goal for transportation can be achieved 

with a bus system, as proposed in the NPS 

Visitor Transportation Study (NPS 2006c), 

without any adverse effects on the cultural 

landscape. Because this proposal would duplicate less expensive and less environmentally 

damaging means of transportation, and because 

it would fail to meet the plan objective to protect 

historic vistas, it was dismissed from further 

consideration.

131
COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES

Conceptual costs of the alternatives are presented to illustrate the order of magnitude of 

costs, allowing the comparison of the value of 

ideas with the cost to implement. The environmentally preferred alternative, as determined by 

comparing the alternatives to the goals listed in 

the National Environmental Policy Act, is then 

described and detailed in Table 5. How well the 

alternatives meet the objectives of the plan is 

presented in Table 6. The alternatives are shown 

in detail in Table 7, and the environmental 

impacts are summarized in Table 8. 

CONCEPTUAL COST ESTIMATES

In 2008 an NPS consultant prepared conceptual 

cost estimates for the preliminary range of alternatives (the no-action alternative plus alternatives A, B, and C) to aid in the development of a 

preferred alternative (see page 51). This process 

looked first at the values and advantages of 

alternative actions, then the costs in order to 

maximize the advantages to the public, as well as 

the National Park Service, and to provide an 

appropriate level of quality, while minimizing 

the costs. 

The conceptual cost estimates included projects 

within the NPS project management information system (PMIS), which parks use to request 

project funding. This task helped identify the 

magnitude of the deferred maintenance backlog 

for the National Mall at more than $400 million. 

The park is continually examining the costs to 

maintain, preserve, protect, and renew its assets 

and components, so deferred maintenance numbers, PMIS project descriptions, and estimates 

change as additional information is available. 

National Mall annual funding and staffing 

requests would continue to be submitted by the 

National Mall and Memorial Parks through the 

NPS National Capital Region. 

Future annual operating fund requests and 

annual work plans would be based on two NPS 

planning efforts that are outside the scope of the 

National Mall plan: (1) core operations planning, which aligns staffing to essential tasks, and 

(2) park asset management planning, which examines approaches to preserve and maintain the 

National Mall and its new and existing facilities. 

Several projects that were identified in the preliminary alternatives have since been funded, or 

planning has been completed. These projects are 

now addressed in this document under cumulative impacts, and their costs are not included in 

the conceptual cost estimates. These projects 

include: 

• the Potomac Park levee, which is now 

underway 

• five projects funded by the American 

Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 for 

$60.8 million —Thomas Jefferson Memorial plaza seawall, D.C. War Memorial, the 

Lincoln Reflecting Pool area and elm walks, 

Madison Drive, and Ohio Drive 

• the visitor transportation service — 

planning for the Visitor Transportation 

Study (NPS 2006c) is nearing completion 

The conceptual cost estimates presented in 

Table 4 illustrate the relative magnitude of costs 

of each alternative. NPS and industry cost 

estimating guidelines were used to develop the 

costs (in 2008 dollars) to the extent possible, but 

the estimates should not be used for budgeting 

purposes. Once a plan has been approved, 

specific costs would be determined in subsequent, more detailed planning and design 

exercises. More specific estimates would also 

consider the design of facilities, the identification of detailed resource protection needs, 

and changing visitor expectations. Actual costs 

to the National Park Service will vary depending 

on if and when the actions are implemented, and 

on contributions by partners and volunteers. 

The implementation of the approved plan, no 

matter which alternative is selected, will depend 

on future NPS funding levels and servicewide 

priorities, and on partnership funds, time, and 

effort. The approval of the plan does not 

guarantee that funding and staffing needed to 

implement the plan will be forthcoming. Full 

implementation of the plan could be many years 

in the future. 

 132
Comparison of Alternatives: The Environmentally Preferred Alternative 

TABLE 4: CONCEPTUAL COST ESTIMATES FOR PLANNING COMPARISONS ONLY

(IN MILLIONS OF 2008 DOLLARS) 

No-Action 

Alternative 

Preferred 

Alternative Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C 

Alternative Focus Primarily deferred maintenance; no 

expenditures to 

meet desired 

quality and use 

levels and 

standard. 

Improvements to 

meet desired quality 

and use levels and 

standards, plus 

proposals for civic 

stage venues, circulation, visitor facilities, and resource 

sustainability. 

Replacement in kind 

of facilities; some 

additional visitor 

facilities; levels of 

use or civic stage 

needs not addressed. 

Improvements to 

meet use levels and 

standards, plus proposals for civic 

stage venues, circulation (including 

parking garages), 

visitor facilities, and 

resource improvements. 

Improvements to 

meet use levels, 

plus proposals for 

civic stage venues, 

extensive circulation, visitor facilities, and resource 

sustainability. 

One-Time Facility Costs 

New Visitor Facilities 

(restrooms, food 

service, and civic 

infrastructure) 

$9.7 $62.5 $10.4 $63.4 $54.2 

Underground Parking 

Garages NA NA NA $50–$100 for two facilities NA 

Other Costs (roads, 

walks, bicycle, park 

operational access, deferred maintenance, 

restoration or facility 

rehabilitation, misc.) 

$107 $198.8 $147.1 $155.4 $261.6 

Subtotal $116.7 $261.3 $157.5 $268.8–$318.8 $315.8 

Non-facility Costs 

Rehabilitation of Historic Water Features 

(Constitution Gardens 

Lake, Tidal Basin walls 

[more than $250 

million], Potomac River 

seawalls, Capitol 

Reflecting Pool) 

$269.8 $299.1 $299.2 $285.6 $301.8 

Natural Resource 

Restoration $16.3 $40–$80 $37.8–$80 $40–$80 $40–$80 

Education and Communications (website, 

waysides, public address system, communication systems) 

$5.2 $5.6–$7.6 $5.5–$7.6 $5.6–$7.6 $5.4–$7.4 

Subtotal $291.3 $344.7–$386.7 $342.5–$368.8 $331.2–$373.2 $347.2–$389.2 

Total (including deferred maintenance) $408 $606–$648 $502–$542 $600–$652 $665–$705 

Difference from the NoAction Alternative +$198–$240 +$94–$136 +$192–$284 +$255–$297 

NOTE: Costs do not include projects funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (stabilization of the Thomas Jefferson Memorial 

plaza wall; rehabilitation of the D.C. War Memorial; rehabilitation of the Lincoln Reflecting Pool, approachway, and elm walks; rehabilitation of 

Madison Drive and Ohio Drive) or the visitor transportation system. 

THE ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED 

ALTERNATIVE

The environmentally preferred alternative is 

defined as “the alternative that will best promote 

the national environmental policy as expressed 

in section 101(b) of the National Environmental 

Policy Act.” (Council on Environmental Quality 

[CEQ] 1981). Section 101 (b) states that it is the 

continuing responsibility of the federal government to improve and coordinate federal plans, 

functions, programs and resources in order to 

(1) fulfill the responsibilities of each generation as trustee of the environment for 

succeeding generations; 

133
ALTERNATIVES

(2) ensure for all Americans safe, healthful, 

productive and aesthetically and culturally 

pleasing surroundings; 

(3) attain the widest range of beneficial uses of 

the environment without degradation, risk 

of health or safety, or undesirable or 

unintended consequences; 

(4) preserve important historic, cultural, and 

natural aspects of our national heritage 

and maintain, wherever possible, an 

environment that supports diversity and 

variety of individual choice; 

(5) achieve a balance between population and 

resource use that will permit high standards of living and wide sharing of life’s 

amenities; and 

(6) enhance the quality of renewable resources and approach the maximum attainable recycling of depletable resources. 

As the alternatives were analyzed, each alternative was evaluated as to how well the goals stated 

in section 101 of the National Environmental 

Policy Act would be met. The following discussion highlights how each alternative meets these 

goals and compares the differences of each alternative. 

The No-Action Alternative 

The no-action alternative represents continuity 

of present management; planned, congressionally approved projects would be constructed; 

security perimeter projects would be completed; 

First Amendment demonstrations and special 

events would continue to be permitted as they 

are today; and the park would continue to see 

improvements as deferred maintenance projects 

were addressed. 

The impacts of special events would continue to 

result in an appearance visitors find unworthy, 

as well as a continual degradation of the National Mall’s cultural and natural resources. 

Walks would continue to be too narrow for 

current use levels in some areas, and bicycles 

and pedestrians would continue to share the 

same space. Water quality issues would remain, 

and large amounts of potable water would be 

used in water features. Some areas would remain 

too dark for pedestrian nighttime comfort and 

safety. Visitor facilities would continue to be 

inadequate for demand; the distance between 

locations may be too great for many visitors; 

facility locations would remain utilitarian rather 

than pleasant; some facilities would continue to 

have an architectural style not harmonious with 

the cultural landscape; and a limited variety of 

choice in recreation rentals and food service 

would continue. 

None of the NEPA goals would be met to the 

same degree as under other alternatives, and a 

greater portion of goals would not be met under 

the no-action alternative, as described below 

and shown in Table 5: 

• Goal 1 — The National Park Service would 

continue to be unable to fulfill its trustee 

role and pass the National Mall on to succeeding generations because conditions 

would worsen with high levels of use and 

deferred maintenance would likely 

increase. 

• Goal 2 — Perimeter security projects would 

be completed. It would remain difficult to 

provide aesthetically and culturally pleasing 

environments. Pedestrian safety concerns 

would remain. 

• Goal 3 — It would remain difficult to continue offering a wide range of uses, including permitted activities such as national 

celebrations and special events without 

ongoing degradation of the National Mall’s 

natural resources. 

• Goal 4 — While important cultural resources would be preserved, the designed 

landscape setting for them would continue 

to deteriorate. 

• Goal 5 — While a variety of activities would 

continue to occur, the inadequate number 

and lack of conveniently located visitor 

facilities (necessities such as restrooms, 

water, and food) would continue to affect 

all the diverse groups visiting the National 

Mall and would not achieve the high 

expectations, nor the wide sharing of life’s 

amenities. 

• Goal 6 — Despite the fact that new facilities 

would meet sustainability goals, many 

venues would remain unsustainable in 

terms of providing for permitted events, a 

primary function of the National Mall. 

 

134
Comparison of Alternatives: The Environmentally Preferred Alternative 

The Preferred Alternative 

Under the preferred alternative, which was 

developed based on combining the advantages 

of the other alternatives, resource conditions 

would be greatly improved to help achieve the 

paramount goal of enriching and providing a 

quality American experience for all. The ability 

of today’s and future generations to experience 

First Amendment rights, national celebrations, 

and special events would be ensured through 

improved sustainable venues. An understanding 

of core American values and the symbolic meanings of memorials would be improved through 

responsible stewardship, preservation and 

shared educational opportunities. Visitors 

would feel welcome and could widely share 

nationally significant symbols, national and 

patriotic activities, and amenities. Efforts to 

improve the day and nighttime appearance of 

the National Mall would allow visitors to be able 

to appreciate its beauty. This alternative would 

address high levels of use and improve conditions. 

• Goal 1 — Trustee responsibilities would be 

enhanced by addressing the challenges 

posed by events on natural resources; 

improving the health of resources; controlling potential memorial damage through 

education and improved visitor service 

locations; and improved waste 

management. 

• Goal 2 — Safe, healthy environments would 

be provided by completing security perimeters; providing additional restrooms with 

co-located drinking fountains; enhancing 

pedestrian lighting of walks; improving 

pedestrian walks/crosswalks and connections into the city; providing separate bicycle lanes; and installing mass notification 

systems. 

 Aesthetically and culturally pleasing environments would be provided through improved natural resource conditions; 

pleasant multipurpose visitor service 

destinations where visitors could appreciate 

cultural icons and enjoy appropriate 

educational, performance, and entertainment opportunities; and visitor facilities 

that are contextually compatible with 

cultural landscape. 

• Goal 3 — A wide range of beneficial uses 

without environmental degradation would 

be accommodated through an improved 

ability of the National Park Service to 

provide event venues that could withstand 

high levels of use while placing additional 

areas off-limits to temporary facilities. 

Diverse educational programs would 

address civic space, memorials, historic 

plans and development, and issues related 

to stewardship and sustainability. 

• Goal 4 — The National Mall’s important 

historic and cultural aspects are integral to 

our national heritage. It is an environment 

that supports diversity and variety of individual choice, where all visitors can come 

for contemplation, commemoration, 

demonstration, and celebration. 

• Goal 5 — The preservation of public 

resources would be balanced with public 

enjoyment, civic activity, national celebration, and recreation in a sustainable 

manner. 

• Goal 6 — Renewable resources would be 

emphasized through sustainable water 

management; facilities that are energy 

efficient and models of sustainability; solid 

waste and recycling improvements; and an 

emphasis on providing an improved 

walkable, bikable environment and a 

revised alternate transportation system. 

Taken as a whole, the preferred alternative is the 

environmentally preferred alternative because it 

best meets all six goals in the National Environmental Policy Act. 

Alternative A 

Alternative A would focus on improving the 

historic landscape and education. Landscape 

health and appearance would be improved, and 

facilities including walks would be replaced. 

Contemporary uses would be accommodated, 

and over time the historic landscape would 

evolve to reflect ongoing significant historic 

events. The National Mall would continue to see 

First Amendment demonstrations and national 

celebrations and special events. Some permanent event infrastructure would be developed 

for events, and intensive recovery methods 

would used to restore landscape conditions after 

135
ALTERNATIVES

events. Pedestrian crosswalk timing would be 

lengthened. The educational focus would be on 

memorials and the history of planning in Washington, D.C. Guided tours, recreation, and 

entertainment would remain unchanged. There 

would be less pedestrian lighting than today, but 

seating and restrooms would be increased. 

Outdated facilities would be replaced. 

Alternative C 

Alternative C would focus on the urban open 

space, ecology/sustainability, and recreation/ 

healthy lifestyles. It would help meet recreational needs in the capital city, redesigning some 

areas, increasing recreational rentals, and emphasizing recreation connections to adjacent 

areas and the Potomac waterfront. It would 

focus on sustainable approaches to water management and a vegetated sustainable shoreline. It 

would encourage “virtual” events or demonstrations to limit impacts while increasing participation. Smaller areas of turf would be rehabilitated 

more frequently, and success would be carefully 

monitored so that areas could be open to public 

recreation between events. Alternative C would 

separate bicycles and pedestrians to encourage 

bicycling as recreation and alternative 

transportation. Pedestrian lighting would emphasize safe walking and limiting light pollution. 

Park programs would include active guided 

walks and bicycle tours and emphasize year 

round beauty. Cutting edge sustainable facilities 

would model green development. Under 

alternative C the north bay of the Tidal Basin 

would be filled in to provide more recreation 

space and to improve water quality. New walks 

would be low-maintenance, sustainable, and 

universally accessible. Paving would include soft 

surfaces for jogging, and smooth surfaces for inline skating. 

Alternative A would focus on improved conditions, it would largely meet goal 4 in terms of 

preserving important cultural resources (see 

Table 5). However, because it would not address 

the needs to sustain high levels of use, it would 

not fully realize goals 1 (fulfilling trustee responsibilities), 2 (ensuring safe surroundings), 3 

(attaining the widest range of beneficial uses), 5 

(achieving a balance between people and 

resources), and 6 (enhancing sustainability). 

Alternative B 

Alternative B would focus on a welcoming 

national civic space that would see high levels of 

use day and night throughout the year. In 

addition to improved resource conditions, this 

alternative would emphasize improving visitor 

experiences and facilities to make them pleasant 

and inviting. Multipurpose visitor facilities 

would encourage visitors to linger and would 

include indoor/outdoor seating and the potential for nearby or adjacent performance spaces. 

High-quality, coordinated paving, site furnishings, and facilities would meet the needs of 

visitors, and universal design and additional 

facilities for people with disabilities would be 

provided. Technology would be used to monitor 

and improve maintenance and park operations.

Because alternative C would focus on a healthy 

urban ecosystem, recreation, and sustainability, 

it would fully meet goals 2 (ensuring safe surroundings), 5 (achieving a balance between 

people and resources), and 6 (enhancing sustainability). As noted in Table 5, however, because 

this alternative would focus on recreation, it 

would not fully address the needs of a national 

audience, this alternative would not fully realize 

goals 1 (trustee responsibilities), 3 (attaining 

widest range of beneficial uses), and 4 (preserving resources). 

Because this alternative would focus on meeting 

the needs of visitors, it would fully meet goals 1 

(trustee responsibilities) and 2 (ensuring safe 

surroundings) and fully or partially meet the 

remaining goals (see Table 5). 

 

136
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 5: Comparison of How the Alternatives Meet the Goals of the National Environmental Policy Act

TABLE 5: COMPARISON OF HOW THE ALTERNATIVES MEET THE GOALS OF THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT

No-Action Alternative Preferred Alternative Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C 

NEPA Goal 1: Fulfill the responsibilities of each generation as trustee of the environment for succeeding generations.

Meets goal: 

• First Amendment 

demonstrations 

accommodated. 

• Deferred maintenance 

addressed. 

Partially meets goal: 

• Resources repaired for 

future generations. 

Does not meet goal: 

• Continued unsustainable events approach, adversely 

affecting resources. 

• Inadequate facilities for 

use levels.

Meets goal: 

• First Amendment demonstrations accommodated. 

• Deferred maintenance 

addressed. 

• Resources improved for 

future generations. 

• Event venues improved 

to protect resources. 

• Natural resource conditions improved; irrigation systems provided. 

• Facilities redesigned to 

meet current and future high levels of use. 

• Water quality improved 

through re-circulation. 

Partially meets goal: 

• Location of temporary 

facilities limited. 

Meets goal: 

• First Amendment 

demonstrations 

accommodated. 

• Deferred maintenance 

addressed. 

• Resources improved for 

future generations. 

Partially meets goal: 

• Facilities improved but 

still inadequate for 

demand. 

• Location of events 

limited. 

Meets goal: 

• First Amendment 

demonstrations 

accommodated. 

• Deferred maintenance 

addressed. 

• Resources improved for 

future generations. 

• Event venues improved 

to protect resources. 

• Facilities redesigned to 

meet current and 

future high use levels. 

Meets goal: 

• First Amendment 

demonstrations 

accommodated. 

• Deferred maintenance 

addressed. 

• Resources improved for 

future generations. 

• Event venues improved 

to protect resources. 

• Facilities redesigned to 

meet current and 

future high use levels.

NEPA Goal 2: Ensure for all Americans safe, healthful, productive and aesthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings.

Meets goal: 

• Security projects completed. 

Partially meets goal: 

• Drinking water fountains dispersed, but 

frequently in need of 

repair 

Does not meet goal: 

• Walks too narrow in locations; graveled walks 

dusty and slippery. 

• Improvements needed 

to pedestrian environment / crosswalks. 

• Simultaneous use of 

same areas by bicyclists 

and pedestrians. 

• Mass notification 

system not up-to-date. 

Meets goal: 

• Security projects completed. 

• Pedestrian safety improved with lighting. 

• Improved walks and 

crosswalks. 

• Improved communication and mass notification systems. 

• Separate bike lanes and 

routes. 

• Pleasant, restful visitor 

facility destinations 

• Contextually compatible facilities. 

• Pleasant seating environments with views of 

cultural symbols. 

• Year-round use and 

beauty emphasized. 

• Emergency call stations.

• Cooling interactive 

water features. 

• Universal design and 

additional facilities for 

people with disabilities.

• Improved pedestrian 

safety with a new entry 

at the USPP stables. 

Partially meets goal: 

• More restrooms, sized 

for level of use, but 

consolidated on Mall 

instead of near each 

refreshment stand. 

• Drinking fountains 

concentrated near restrooms; can fill water 

bottles and provide 

water for pets. 

Meets goal: 

• Security projects completed. 

• Improved walks and 

crosswalks. 

• More restrooms near 

food service locations. 

• Pleasant, restful visitor 

facility destinations. 

• Contextually 

compatible facilities. 

• Pleasant seating 

environments with 

views. 

Does not meet goal: 

• Walks too narrow in locations; graveled walks 

dusty and slippery. 

Meets goal: 

• Security projects completed. 

• Improved pedestrian 

safety with lighting. 

• Improved walks and 

crosswalks. 

• More restrooms near 

food service locations. 

• Improved communication and mass 

notification systems. 

• Separate bike lanes/ 

routes. 

• Pleasant, restful visitor 

facility destinations. 

• Contextually compatible facilities. 

• Pleasant seating 

environments with 

views of cultural symbols. 

• Emergency call stations. 

• Cooling interactive 

water features. 

• Universal design and 

additional facilities for 

people with disabilities. 

• Pedestrian safety improved with new entry 

to USPP stables. 

Partially meets goal: 

• Drinking water 

fountains concentrated 

near restrooms. 

Meets goal: 

• Security projects completed. 

• Improved pedestrian 

safety with lighting. 

• Separate bike lanes and 

routes. 

• More restrooms near 

food service locations. 

• Cooling water features.

• Cutting edge 

sustainable facilities. 

• Improved pedestrian 

safety at USPP stables 

with new entry. 

Partially meets goal: 

• Drinking water 

fountains concentrated 

near restrooms; can fill 

water bottles and 

provide water for pets. 

137
ALTERNATIVES

No-Action Alternative Preferred Alternative Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C 

NEPA Goal 3: Attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment without degradation, risk of health or safety, or undesirable or unintended consequences.

Meets goal: 

• Congressionally 

approved projects 

constructed. 

Partially meets goal: 

• Limited food and 

recreation choice. 

• Continued variety of 

demonstrations, 

national celebrations 

and events. 

Does not meet goal: 

• Continued resource 

damage due to inadequate venues for 

events. 

Meets goal: 

• Congressionally approved projects constructed. 

• Maximized choice in 

food and recreation 

• Improved walking and 

bicycling 

• Continued variety of 

demonstrations, 

national celebrations, 

and events. 

Partially Meets Goal: 

• Less resource damage 

due to improved 

venues and 

infrastructure for 

events. 

Meets goal: 

• Congressionally 

approved projects 

constructed. 

• More food choice. 

• Continued variety of 

demonstrations, 

national celebrations, 

and events. 

Partially Meets Goal: 

• Less resource damage 

due to improved 

infrastructure for 

events. 

• Limited recreational 

opportunities. 

Meets goal: 

• Congressionally 

approved projects 

constructed. 

• High choice in food 

and recreation. 

• Improved walking 

opportunities. 

• Continued variety of 

demonstrations, 

national celebrations, 

and events. 

Partially meets goal: 

• Less damage due to 

improved venues and 

infrastructure for 

events. 

Meets goal: 

• Congressionally 

approved projects 

constructed. 

• High choice in food 

and recreation. 

• Improved walking and 

bicycling. 

• Continued variety of 

demonstrations, 

national celebrations, 

and events. 

Partially meets goal: 

• Less damage due to 

improved venues and 

infrastructure for 

events. 

NEPA Goal 4: Preserve important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of our national heritage and maintain, wherever 

possible, an environment that supports diversity and variety of individual choice.

Meets goal: 

• Deferred maintenance 

addressed. 

• Memorials preserved. 

Partially meets goal: 

• Some cultural 

landscapes improved. 

Does not meet goal: 

• Continued poor appearance of turf areas 

due to unimproved soil 

conditions. 

• Mall landscape degraded because of 

temporary event 

facilities, such as tents, 

stages, and vehicles. 

Meets goal: 

• Deferred maintenance 

addressed. 

• Memorials preserved. 

• Cultural landscapes 

improved. 

• Historic vistas protected 

and preserved. 

• Improved appearance 

of turf areas due to enhanced soil conditions. 

• Water quality 

improved. 

• Mall landscape 

improved. 

Partially meets goal: 

• Views in some areas 

obstructed by events. 

• Some historic landscapes altered in 

sensitive manner to 

protect characteristics 

and views. 

Meets goal: 

• Deferred maintenance 

addressed. 

• Memorials preserved. 

• Cultural landscapes 

improved. 

• Historic vistas protected 

and preserved, and not 

obstructed by events. 

• Improved appearance 

of turf areas due to enhanced soil conditions. 

• Water quality improved. 

• Little change in 

appearance 

• Mall landscape 

improved. 

Meets goal: 

• Deferred maintenance 

addressed. 

• Memorials preserved. 

• Cultural landscapes 

improved. 

• Historic vistas protected 

and preserved. 

• Improved appearance 

of turf areas due to enhanced soil conditions. 

• Water quality 

improved. 

Partially meets goal: 

• Views in some areas 

obstructed by events. 

• Temporary event facilities, such as tents, 

stages, and vehicles, 

allowed if determined 

to be sustainable. 

• Some historic landscapes altered in 

sensitive manner to 

protect characteristics 

and views. 

Does not meet goal: 

• Water feature in Union 

Square removed. 

Meets goal: 

• Deferred maintenance 

addressed. 

• Memorials preserved. 

• Cultural landscapes 

improved. 

• Historic vistas protected 

and preserved. 

• Mall landscape improved. 

• Improved appearance 

of turf areas due to enhanced soil conditions. 

• Water quality 

improved. 

Partially meets goal: 

• Views in some areas 

obstructed by events. 

• Some historic landscapes altered in 

sensitive manner to 

protect characteristics 

and views. 

Does not meet goal: 

• North bay of Tidal 

Basin filled in. 

NEPA Goal 5: Achieve a balance between population and resource use that will permit high standards of living and 

wide sharing of life’s amenities.

Partially meets goal: 

• Choice of recreational 

opportunities. 

Does not meet goal: 

• High use levels not 

planned for. 

• Social trails persist 

• Continued resource 

damage from events. 

Meets goal: 

• High-use levels planned 

for in an energy efficient and sustainable 

manner. 

• Events venues improved, with more 

paved locations and 

event infrastructure. 

• Events management 

improved, with better 

recovery times / 

methods, balanced 

scheduling, data 

Meets goal: 

• Reduced social trails. 

• Events management 

improved, with intense 

post-event recovery 

methods and permanent infrastructure. 

• Educational topics – 

history, national 

capital, memorials 

Partially meets goal: 

• Coordinated pedestrian 

amenities. 

Does not meet goal: 

Meets goal: 

• High-use levels planned 

for in an energy efficient and sustainable 

manner. 

• Events venues improved, with more 

paved locations and 

event infrastructure. 

• Events management 

improved, with better 

recovery times / 

methods, balanced 

scheduling, data 

Meets goal: 

• High-use levels 

accommodated in an 

energy efficient and 

sustainable manner. 

• Events venues improved, with more 

paved locations, event 

infrastructure. 

• More areas open for 

public use with more 

frequent landscape 

rehabilitation of smaller 

areas. 

 

138
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 5: Comparison of How the Alternatives Meet the Goals of the National Environmental Policy Act

No-Action Alternative Preferred Alternative Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C 

collection, and monitoring. 

• More areas open for 

public use with more 

frequent landscape 

rehabilitation of smaller 

areas. 

• Widened walks, reduced social trails. 

• Coordinated visitor 

circulation. 

• High-quality pedestrian 

and bicycle environments; connections to 

adjacent areas, urban 

traffic accommodated 

in a parklike setting. 

• Welcome area near 

Metro station. 

• Most diverse educational topics — history, 

national capital, memorials, civic space, 

stewardship, 

sustainability. 

• Additional recreational 

opportunities with rentals of bicycles, boats, 

and model boats; 

improved athletic fields; 

and improved areas for 

pedestrians and passive 

recreation. 

• High use levels not 

planned for. 

collection, and 

monitoring. 

• Widened walks, 

reduced social trails 

• Coordinated visitor 

circulation. 

• Educational topics — 

history, national 

capital, memorials, civic 

space. 

• Widened walks, 

reduced social trails. 

• Educational topics — 

stewardship and 

sustainability. 

• Additional recreational 

opportunities with rentals of bicycles, boats, 

and model boats; 

improved athletic 

fields; and improved 

areas for pedestrians 

and passive recreation. 

NEPA Goal 6: Enhance the quality of renewable resources and approach the maximum attainable recycling of 

depletable resources.

Meets goal: 

• Policy goals for sustainable practices met. 

• LEED silver standard 

met. 

Does not meet goal: 

• Unsustainable events 

management. 

Meets goal: 

• Policy goals for sustainable practices met. 

• Goals of climatefriendly parks met with 

recycling, less water 

and energy use, reduced soil compaction. 

• Renewable energy 

sources sought for 

lighting and water 

features. 

• Sustainable pedestrian 

lighting.

• Strive to achieve 

highest LEED standard 

practicable (silver 

minimum). 

• Reduced carbon 

footprint goals met. 

• More sustainable 

events management. 

• Sustainable Sites 

InitiativeTM implemented. 

Meets goal: 

• Policy goals for sustainable practices met. 

• LEED silver standard 

met. 

Partially meets goal: 

• Some climate-friendly 

parks goals met with 

recycling, reduced soil 

compaction, less 

energy use. 

Meets goal: 

• Policy goals for sustainable practices met. 

• Goals of climatefriendly parks met with 

recycling, less water 

and energy use, reduced soil compaction. 

• LEED silver standard 

met. 

• More sustainable 

events management. 

Meets goal: 

• Policy goals for sustainable practices met. 

• Goals of climatefriendly parks met with 

recycling, less water 

and energy use, reduced soil compaction. 

• Renewable energy 

sources sought for 

lighting and water 

features. 

• Sustainable pedestrian 

lighting. 

• Strive to achieve 

highest LEED standard 

practicable (silver 

minimum). 

• Reduced carbon 

footprint goals met. 

• More sustainable 

events management. 

• Sustainable Sites 

InitiativeTM implemented. 

139
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 6 

 140

TABLE 6: HOW WELL THE ALTERNATIVES MEET THE PLAN OBJECTIVES

No-Action Preferred Alternative Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C 

CULTURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION

Objective: Primary east-west vistas and several north-south vistas on the National Mall are improved and perpetuated.

Partially meets objective: 

•Views and vistas remain 

important, but continued intrusions from 

temporary facilities. 

• Continued deterioration 

of vegetation that 

defines vistas, endangering for long-term 

perpetuation of views. 

Meets objective: 

• Protected vegetation 

that defines and perpetuates vistas. 

• Continued predominance of east-west 

vistas, with improved 

multiple north-south 

vistas. 

•View protection encouraged when temporary 

facilities put in place. 

• Facilities located outside 

view corridors. 

Meets objective: 

•Similar to the preferred 

alternative but eastwest vistas protected 

from visual intrusion of 

temporary facilities. 

Meets objective: 

•Similar to the preferred 

alternative, except view 

protection not considered for temporary 

facility placement. 

Meets objective: 

•Same as the preferred 

alternative. 

Objective: Cultural resources, including memorials and their settings, are preserved and protected.

Partially meets objective: 

• Continued deterioration 

of the historic landscape. 

Meets objective: 

• Rehabilitation of 

memorials as needed. 

• Cultural landscape conditions protected and 

preserved.

Meets objective: 

• Same as the preferred 

alternative.

Meets objective: 

• Same as the preferred 

alternative.

Meets objective: 

• Same as the preferred 

alternative.

Objective: Historic plans for the National Mall are respected. Resources are managed compatibly with the intent of the 

historic plans. 

Meets objective: 

•The historic L’Enfant 

and McMillan plans 

respected; actions 

coordinated with the 

NCPC Legacy Plan. 

Meets objective: 

•Same as the no-action 

alternative. 

Meets objective: 

•Same as the no-action 

alternative. 

Meets objective: 

•Same as the no-action 

alternative. 

Meets objective: 

•Same as the no-action 

alternative. 

NATURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION

Objective: Conditions of natural resources, such as water, turf, trees/vegetation, and soils, are improved to be part of a 

sustainable urban ecosystem.

Does not meet objective: 

•Continued water quality 

issues. 

•Unsustainable soil and 

vegetation conditions. 

Meets objective: 

•Soil compaction reversed, improved soil 

conditions, with better 

air and water infiltration. 

•Improved plant growing 

conditions; vegetation 

protected from trampling by wider walks, 

edging / curbs, and 

post-and-chain fencing. 

• Improved water quality; 

reduced water use; efforts to find nonpotable 

water sources for display fountains and to 

reuse gray water; studies to reduce urban 

flooding. 

Meets objective: 

•Improved soils, water, 

and vegetation 

conditions. 

•Most protection of 

vegetation from 

trampling (curbs, postand-chain fencing). 

Meets objective: 

•Improved soils, water, 

and vegetation 

conditions. 

Meets objective: 

•Same as the preferred 

alternative. 

Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations

Objective: The National Mall remains a venue for First Amendment demonstrations and national celebrations.

Meets objective: 

•Essential purpose of the 

National Mall 

continued. 

Meets objective: 

•Same as the no-action 

alternative plus greater 

participation possible 

with improved and 

more flexible venues. 

Meets objective: 

•Same as the no-action 

alternative. 

Meets objective: 

•Same as the preferred 

alternative. 

Meets objective: 

•Same as the preferred 

alternative. 
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 6: How Well the Alternatives Meet the Plan Objectives 

141

No-Action Preferred Alternative Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C 

Objective: Special events are managed to sustain the health of park resources, to balance the desires of all users, and to 

ensure a safe environment. No one’s enjoyment is unacceptably compromised by others, now or in the future.

Does not meet objective: 

•Use levels cannot be 

sustained without 

natural resource 

damage. 

Meets objective: 

•Equitable space distribution plus natural resource restoration and 

time for general visitation and recreation. 

• Improved permitting 

procedures and management. 

Meets objective: 

•Same as the preferred 

alternative. 

Meets objective: 

•Same as the preferred 

alternative. 

Meets objective: 

•Same as the preferred 

alternative. 

Objective: Venues and facilities for demonstrations and special events are provided that are compatible with the historic 

significance of the National Mall, that enhance the experiences of users, and that accommodate operations efficiently 

and effectively with minimal impacts on nationally significant resources.

Does not meet objective 

•Present venues not 

planned to accommodate current uses, to 

meet user needs, or to 

protect resources. 

Meets objective: 

• High-use venues 

redesigned to flexibly 

meet needs and reduce 

impacts. 

•Offsite participation encouraged through 

simulcasts. 

Does not meet objective:

•Same as the no-action 

alternative. 

Meets objective: 

•Same as the preferred 

alternative. 

Meets objective: 

•Same as the preferred. 

ACCESS AND CIRCULATION

Objective: Public access and circulation are convenient, and visitors are easily able to find their way to all sites on the 

National Mall.

Partially meets objective: 

• Pedestrian environment 

dominated by vehicles. 

•Renamed Metro station 

to identify National 

Mall. 

Meets objective: 

• Improved environments 

for walking and bicycling, with separate bike 

routes and potential 

traffic calming measures. Upgraded crosswalks and longer 

crossing times. 

• Supplementary transportation provided to 

meet visitor needs. 

• Programs with offsite 

parking garages. 

•Renamed Metro station 

to identify National 

Mall; welcome plaza for 

visitor orientation. 

Partially meets objective: 

• Improved pedestrian 

crossing times. 

•Renamed Metro station 

to identify National 

Mall. 

Meets objective: 

•Similar to the preferred 

alternative, except 

◦Pedestrian bridges and 

tunnels to separate 

users. 

◦If feasible, develop 

onsite underground 

parking garages. 

Meets objective: 

•Similar to the preferred 

alternative, except 

◦ Vehicular tunnels to 

separate users. 

 

Objective: The National Mall is better integrated with and connected to the urban fabric of Washington, D.C. 

Partially meets objective: 

• Continued physical 

connections to the 

fabric of the city with 

National Mall road 

systems, tunnels, and 

walks. 

Meets objective: 

• Better pedestrian amenities, pedestrian entry 

area, and crosswalks 

emphasize pedestrian 

safety and connections 

to the fabric of the city. 

•Improved access and 

connection with road 

realignments and 

improved access. 

Partially meets objective: 

•Continued physical connections to the fabric of 

the city with National 

Mall road systems, 

tunnels, and walks. 

Partially meets objective:

•Same as the no-action 

alterative. 

Meets objective: 

• Better pedestrian amenities, pedestrian entry 

area, and crosswalks 

emphasize pedestrian 

safety and connections 

to the fabric of the city. 

Partially meets objective: 

•Continued physical connections to the fabric of 

the city with National 

Mall road systems, 

tunnels, and walks. 

Meets objective: 

•Same as the preferred 

alternative. 
ALTERNATIVES

No-Action Preferred Alternative Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C 

VISITOR INFORMATION, EDUCATION, AND ENJOYMENT

Objective: The National Mall provides the quintessential American experience where visitors 

• can feel welcome.

Partially meets objective: 

• Millions visit, but welcoming support opportunities (information, 

multilingual brochures, 

visitor services, or access to uniformed staff) 

possibly inconvenient or 

unknown. 

Meets objective: 

• Enhanced services with 

welcome plaza, staff 

guest services training, 

improved onsite communication networks 

and mass notification 

system, better website. 

multilingual programs, 

and increased coordination with adjacent 

museums. 

Partially meets objective: 

• Better website and 

foreign language 

materials. 

Meets objective: 

• Some lighted signs for 

easier night viewing. 

Partially meets objective: 

• Improved recreational 

information. 

Objective: The National Mall provides the quintessential American experience where visitors 

• fully understand the importance of this preeminent civic area for First Amendment rights. 

Does not meet objective: 

• Minimal visitor programs to explain the 

role of the National 

Mall in providing for 

civic expression or the 

importance of the First 

Amendment. 

Meets objective: 

• Improved programs 

about First Amendment 

rights and the role of 

the National Mall, 

supported by onsite 

wayfinding. 

Does not meet objective:

• Same as the no-action 

alternative. 

Meets objective: 

• Same as the preferred 

alternative. 

Does not meet objective:

• Same as the no-action 

alternative. 

Objective: The National Mall provides the quintessential American experience where visitors 

• learn about our core values as a nation by making an educational, emotional, inspirational, or patriotic connection 

to the memorials that commemorate our history and the physical design that reflects our democratic form of 

government.

Meets objective: 

• Many visitors inspired 

and feel a patriotic connection. 

• Longer Washington 

Monument operating 

hours. 

Partially meets objective: 

• Importance of some 

under-visited memorials 

not fully explained. 

Meets objective: 

• Increased education 

about all memorials, 

their values and ties to 

American culture, 

history and democratic 

form of government. 

• Better opportunities for 

visitor connections due 

to improved quality of 

all facilities and appropriate programs at 

multipurpose facilities. 

• Longer Washington 

Monument operating 

hours. 

Meets objective: 

• Increased education 

about all memorials, 

their values and ties to 

American culture, 

history and democratic 

form of government. 

• Longer Washington 

Monument operating 

hours. 

• Many visitors inspired 

and feel a patriotic 

connection. 

Meets objective: 

• Better opportunities for 

visitor connections due 

to improved quality of 

all facilities and appropriate programs at 

multipurpose facilities.

• Longer Washington 

Monument. operating 

hours. 

• Many visitors inspired 

and feel a patriotic 

connection

Partially meets objective: 

• Importance of some 

under-visited memorials 

not fully explained. 

Meets objective: 

• Longer Washington 

Monument operating 

hours. 

Partially meets objective:

• Same as the no-action 

alternative. 

Objective: The National Mall provides the quintessential American experience 

• where visitors appreciate the beauty of the National Mall during the day, at night, and year-round.

Does not meet objective: 

• Resources do not meet 

expected conditions for 

the nation’s front yard. 

Meets objective: 

• Improved resource 

conditions — vistas, 

plant materials, walks, 

lighting — while 

respecting the historic 

character and limiting 

light pollution. 

Meets objective: 

• Improved resource 

conditions — vistas, 

plant materials, walks 

— while respecting the 

historic character. 

Partially meets objective:

• Evening use limited by 

inadequate lighting. 

Meets objective: 

• Similar to the preferred 

alternative. but less 

emphasis on limiting 

light pollution. 

Meets objective: 

• Same as the preferred 

alternative. 

Objective: Lighting on the National Mall evokes emotion and provides enjoyment, while respecting historic fixtures and 

existing lighting at memorials. The Washington Monument, Lincoln Memorial, and Thomas Jefferson Memorial (as well 

as the U.S. Capitol and the White House) continue to be the most prominent nighttime features.

Does not meet objective: 

• Tidal Basin nighttime 

use limited by lack of 

lighting. 

Meets objective: 

• Interagency lighting task 

force reestablished; 

lighting of five icons 

and nighttime character 

protected. 

• Energy-efficient pedesPartially meets objective:

• Work with others to 

reestablish interagency 

lighting task force. 

Meets objective: 

• Same as the preferred 

alternative. 

Meets objective: 

• Same as the preferred 

alternative. 

 

142
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 6: How Well the Alternatives Meet the Plan Objectives 

143

No-Action Preferred Alternative Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C 

trian lighting provided 

to respect memorials, 

protect nighttime character, and limit light 

pollution. 

Objective: Visitor information is convenient, accurate, easy to understand, and consistent throughout the site. 

Information reaches the widest audience possible.

Meets objective: 

•Cell phone tours provided. 

•Staff review of materials 

sold at bookstores or 

stands for accuracy. 

•Work with groups to 

disseminate accurate 

information. 

Partially meets objective: 

•Difficult to navigate 

park websites, with 

minimal planning 

information. 

Meets objective: 

•Similar to the no-action 

alternative except 

◦ Improved park websites, with advance 

planning information. 

Meets objective: 

•Same as the preferred 

alternative. 

Meets objective: 

•Same as the preferred 

alternative. 

Meets objective: 

•Same as the preferred 

alternative. 

Objective: Visitors understand and appreciate the social experiences they are likely to encounter — millions of people 

come here to celebrate, commemorate, demonstrate, or recreate.

Does not meet objective: 

•Limited visitor information about activities 

taking place on the 

National Mall or how 

they may affect their 

visit. 

Meets objective: 

• Expanded information 

about the civic roles of 

the National Mall 

through signs, education, waysides, and 

websites. 

Does not meet objective: 

•Same as the no-action 

alternative. 

Meets objective: 

•Same as the preferred 

alternative. 

Does not meet objective: 

•Same as the no-action 

alternative. 

Objective: Learning opportunities are provided to engage all ages and abilities of an increasingly multicultural and 

technologically sophisticated society. Educational information inspires all visitors, including populations that have not 

typically visited national parks.

Meets objective: 

•Variety of programs offered, including maps, 

brochures, handouts, 

ranger talks, cell phone 

tours, bicycling tours, 

radio information and 

educational waysides. 

Meets objective: 

•Same as the no-action 

alternative, plus 

◦More living history, 

interactive programs, 

and use of technology.

Meets objective: 

•Same as the no-action 

alternative, plus 

◦More living history. 

Meets objective: 

•Same as the preferred 

alternative. 

Meets objective: 

•Same as the no-action 

alternative, plus 

◦Increased bicycling 

tours and emphasis on 

sustainable recreation. 

Objective: Recreational opportunities are balanced with other uses of the National Mall, and both active and passive 

forms of recreation meet the needs of visitors, residents, and workers.

Meets objective: 

•Continued meeting of 

local active recreation 

needs through permitted use of athletic 

fields. 

• Improved conditions for 

volleyball courts. 

Partially meets objective: 

•Continued sharing of 

walkways by bicyclists 

and pedestrians, resulting in use conflicts. 

• Limited recreation 

rentals. 

Meets objective: 

•Continued meeting of 

local active recreation 

needs through permitted use of athletic 

fields. 

• Improved conditions for 

volleyball courts, athletic 

fields, and passive 

recreation areas. 

• Pedestrian environment 

improved. 

•Improved bicycling opportunities with bike 

lanes. 

•More choice in seating 

for passive enjoyment. 

•More choice in potential 

recreation equipment 

rentals (bikes, boats, 

model boats, ice skates).

Meets objective: 

•Continued meeting of 

local active recreation 

needs through permitted use of athletic 

fields. 

• Improved conditions for 

volleyball courts, athletic fields, and passive 

recreation areas. 

• Pedestrian environment 

improved. 

•More choice in seating 

for passive enjoyment. 

Partially meets objective:

•Continued sharing of 

walkways by bicyclists 

and pedestrians, resulting in use conflicts. 

• Limited recreation 

equipment rentals. 

Meets objective: 

•Continued meeting of 

local active recreation 

needs through permitted use of athletic 

fields. 

• Improved conditions for 

volleyball courts, athletic fields, and passive 

recreation areas. 

• Pedestrian environment 

improved. 

•More choice in seating 

for passive enjoyment 

•More choice in potential recreation equipment rentals (boats, 

model boats). 

Partially meets objective: 

•Continued sharing of 

walkways by bicyclists 

and pedestrians, resulting in use conflicts. 

Meets objective: 

•Continued meeting of 

local active recreation 

needs through permitted use of athletic 

fields. 

• Improved conditions for 

volleyball courts. athletic fields, and passive 

recreation areas. 

• Pedestrian environment 

improved. 

•More choice in seating 

for passive enjoyment. 

• Improved bicycling 

opportunities with bike 

lanes. 

•More choice in potential recreation equipment rentals (bikes, 

boats, model boats, ice 

skates). 
ALTERNATIVES

No-Action Preferred Alternative Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C 

VISITOR AMENITIES

Objective: Facilities are of high quality and reflect a compatible and enduring character, thus creating a sense of place 

that reinforces the civic, historic, and symbolic role of the National Mall to our nation and are appropriate for public 

commemorative and symbolic spaces in our nation’s capital.

Partially meets objective: 

• A few newer concession buildings, but 

many outdated facilities 

that generate 

complaints. 

Meets objective: 

• High-quality facilities 

that reinforce the sense 

of place. 

Partially meets objective: 

• Some new-high quality 

facilities that would reinforce the sense of 

place, along with rehabilitated facilities from 

various eras. 

Meets objective: 

• Same as the preferred 

alternative. 

Meets objective: 

• Same as the preferred 

alternative. 

Objective: Various visitor and commercial amenities are provided that are conveniently located and that are sized and 

configured to meet visitor use levels on high-volume days.

Does not meet objective: 

• Facilities such as restroom not easy to find, 

undersized for many 

uses, and are not located near food service. 

Meets objective: 

• Visitor facilities better 

dispersed, easy to find, 

and convenient; sized 

for high levels of use; 

restrooms provided near 

food service locations. 

Partially meets objective: 

• Additional visitor facilities such as restrooms 

and more conveniently 

located, but possibly 

undersized for many 

uses. 

Meets objective: 

• Same as the preferred 

alternative. 

Meets objective: 

• Same as the preferred 

alternative. 

HEALTH, PUBLIC SAFETY, AND SECURITY

Objective: Safe, healthy, secure visits are provided.

Partially meets objective: 

• Lack of pedestrian lighting in some areas, short 

pedestrian crosswalk 

countdowns, use conflicts with bicyclists and 

pedestrians on the 

same walkways. 

• Limited facilities to 

address heat and 

humidity. 

Meets objective: 

• Improved pedestrian 

lighting for safer nighttime visitation, improved pedestrian crosswalks and longer countdowns; separate bike 

lanes or routes, emergency call boxes. 

• Misters and interactive 

water features for summer heat and humidity 

relief, and more seating 

in shady areas. 

Partially meets objective:

• Less pedestrian lighting 

than today; longer pedestrian crosswalk 

countdowns; use conflicts with bicyclists and 

pedestrians on the 

same walkways. 

• Limited facilities to address heat and 

humidity. 

Meets objective: 

• Same as the preferred 

alternative plus 

◦ Pedestrian tunnels or 

bridges to separate 

users. 

• Misters and interactive 

water features for 

summer heat and 

humidity relief, and 

more seating in shady 

areas. 

Meets objective: 

• Same as the preferred 

alternative plus 

◦ A vehicular tunnel at 

Maine Avenue and 

14th Street. 

Objective: Visitors have adequate information to find their way around or notification of what to do in emergency 

situations.

Partially meets objective: 

• New sign system; interagency preparedness 

programs with shelter 

in place/safe haven or 

evacuation plans; and 

use of temporary signs 

and notification by 

personnel. 

• No public address 

system. 

Meets objective: 

• Same as the no-action 

alternative except 

◦ Electronic variable 

message signs. 

◦ Staff notification; 

emergency call 

systems. 

◦ Public address system. 

Meets objective: 

• Similar to the preferred 

alternative. 

Meets objective: 

• Same as the preferred 

alternative. 

Meets objective: 

• Same as the preferred 

alternative. 

Objective: Fully accessible visitor facilities, with appropriate walking surfaces, seating, lighting, and amenities; and programs offering visitors comfortable and enjoyable opportunities for reflection, commemoration, celebration, and 

recreation.

Partially meets objective: 

• Access to memorials 

provided, and parking 

for visitor with disabilities; free wheelchairs 

available only at certain 

sites and not the entire 

National Mall. 

• Uneven and gravel walk 

surfaces difficult for 

visitors with wheelchairs 

and strollers. 

Meets objective: 

• Improved access with 

better walkway surfacing; universal access 

for programs and facilities; more parking 

spaces for visitors with 

disabilities; wheelchairs 

or rental electric scooters available for day use; 

supplementary transportation on walkways 

for visitors needing 

assistance. 

Partially meets objective: 

• Same as the no-action 

alternative. 

Meets objective: 

• Same as the preferred 

alternative. 

Meets objective: 

• Improved access with 

better walkway 

surfacing; universal 

access is the goal in 

facilities. 

 

144
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 6: How Well the Alternatives Meet the Plan Objectives 

145

No-Action Preferred Alternative Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C 

PARK OPERATIONS

Objective: Facilities are consistently maintained to the desired standards of excellence.

Does not meet objective: 

• Out-of-date standards 

not applicable to all 

facilities. 

Meets objectives: 

• New standards 

developed for all 

facilities. 

Meets objectives: 

•Same as the preferred 

alternative. 

Meets objectives: 

•Same as the preferred 

alternative. 

Meets objectives: 

•Same as the preferred 

alternative. 

Objective: All maintenance and park operations emphasize efficient, effective, and sustainable practices.

Partially meets objective: 

• Maintenance and 

operations not fully 

efficient or sustainable. 

Meets objective: 

•Improved, more efficient, and sustainable 

maintenance and 

operations. 

Meets objective: 

•Similar to the preferred 

alternative without an 

emphasis on sustainable practices. 

Meets objective: 

•Improved, more efficient, and sustainable 

maintenance and 

operations. 

Meets objective: 

•Improved, more efficient, and sustainable 

maintenance and 

operations. 

Objective: Cooperating agencies coordinate planning, information, services, facilities, and programs for visitors, 

residents, and the local workforce.

Partially meets objective: 

•Some NPS coordination 

with others to provide 

visitor information. 

Meets objective: 

• Increased cooperation 

and coordination for 

information and onsite 

communication. 

Partially meets objective: 

•Same as the no-action 

alternative. 

Meets objective: 

•Same as the preferred 

alternative. 

Meets objective: 

•Same as the preferred 

alternative. 
Comparison of Alternatives 

COMPARISON OF CONCEPTS AND 

ALTERNATIVES

In accordance with the Commemorative Works 

Act, as amended, the National Mall will be 

considered under all alternatives a substantially 

completed work of civic art — a historic open 

space with planned views that provide the 

setting for national memorials, many of them 

symbols of democracy, and a setting to showcase 

federal buildings and branches of government, 

as well as the great cultural institutions of our 

nation. Consistent with the First Amendment to 

the U.S. Constitution and federal regulations, 

the National Mall will continue to accommodate 

First Amendment demonstrations, special 

events, and national celebrations. 

As previously described, several projects have 

been approved by Congress for the National 

Mall and would be implemented under all alternatives. Planning, compliance, and construction 

would be completed by others for the following: 

• Vietnam Veterans Memorial Center —

This would be an underground facility with 

restrooms, information, exhibits, and a 

bookstore. 

• National Museum of African American 

History and Culture — Land has been 

transferred to the Smithsonian Institution; 

Washington Monument food and retail 

services will be relocated. 

• Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial — The 

memorial would include restrooms, information, and a bookstore. 

The 2001 Memorials and Museums Master Plan

by the National Capital Planning Commission 

identifies sites for future memorials in the study 

area, but outside the Reserve. The Watergate 

area (see row 19) could accommodate six 

memorials — the Constitution Avenue 

belvedere, a gateway site, two sites along Constitution Avenue, and two sites along Rock Creek 

Parkway. Under all alternatives future memorials will be accommodated in locations outside 

the Reserve. The National Park Service will 

participate in the memorial process to ensure 

that historic views, character, and plans are 

respected. 

Also several projects that were previously considered in the alternatives have been funded by 

the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 

2009. These include 

• the Lincoln Reflecting Pool area (lower 

approachway, pool, and related landscape, 

plus the north and south elm walks) 

• the D.C. War Memorial 

• the Thomas Jefferson Memorial plaza 

seawall; 

• Madison and Ohio drives 

Other projects include a coordinated National 

Mall sign system, which has been approved, and 

the Potomac Park levee project, which is 

underway and will address flood protection for 

downtown D.C. Proposals from the NPS 2006 

Visitor Transportation Study were considered as 

this management plan was developed, and they 

will be implemented separately. Security screening for the Washington Monument will be completed separately. All of these projects are considered as projects outside the scope of this plan, 

and their impacts are addressed under 

cumulative impacts. 

Sites on the National Mall where no major 

actions are proposed, such as the World War II 

Memorial and the D.C. War Memorial, are not 

included in Table 7.

 146
Comparison of Alternatives: Contents for Table 7 

CONTENTS FOR TABLE 7: CONCEPTS AND ALTERNATIVES 

FOR THE NATIONAL MALL

National Mall Concepts.......................................................................................................................................... 150 

1. Overall Concept.................................................................................................................................... 150 

1.1 Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions)........................................................ 150 

1.2 Vision Emphasis ........................................................................................................................... 150 

2. Cultural Resources................................................................................................................................ 152 

2.1 Memorials ................................................................................................................................... 152 

2.2 Historic Properties and Cultural Landscapes.................................................................................. 152 

2.3 Spatial Organization and Land Use............................................................................................... 152 

2.4 Historic Views and Vistas.............................................................................................................. 152 

3. Natural Resources................................................................................................................................. 154 

3.1 Science and Urban Ecology .......................................................................................................... 154 

3.2 Water Resources.......................................................................................................................... 154 

3.3 Flooding in the Monumental Core................................................................................................ 154 

3.4 Soils and Vegetation .................................................................................................................... 156 

3.5 Wildlife........................................................................................................................................ 156 

3.6 Air Quality ................................................................................................................................... 158 

3.7 Noise ........................................................................................................................................... 158 

3.8 Effects of Climate Change ........................................................................................................... 158 

4. The Civic Stage: Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations.......................................... 158 

4.1 Demonstrations (First Amendment) .............................................................................................. 158 

4.2 Special Events and National Celebrations...................................................................................... 160 

4.3 Venues for Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations ......................................... 162 

4.4 Operations................................................................................................................................... 162 

5. Access and Circulation.......................................................................................................................... 164 

5.1 Coordination of Circulation Systems............................................................................................. 164 

5.2 Roads .......................................................................................................................................... 166 

5.3 Visitor Parking.............................................................................................................................. 166 

5.4 Pedestrian Access......................................................................................................................... 166 

5.5 Supplementary Visitor Transportation........................................................................................... 168 

5.6 Public Transportation ................................................................................................................... 168 

5.7 Taxis ........................................................................................................................................... 168 

5.8 Tour Bus Management................................................................................................................. 168 

6. Visitor Information, Education, and Enjoyment...................................................................................... 168 

6.1 Park Information and Orientation................................................................................................. 168 

6.2 Educational Programs and Exhibits ............................................................................................... 170 

6.3 Guided Tours............................................................................................................................... 172 

6.4 Entertainment.............................................................................................................................. 172 

6.5 Recreational Activities .................................................................................................................. 174 

6.6 Commercial Recreational Activities............................................................................................... 174 

7. Visitor Amenities .................................................................................................................................. 176 

7.1 Architectural Character ................................................................................................................ 176 

7.2 Ornamental Water Features ......................................................................................................... 178 

7.3 Site Furnishings............................................................................................................................ 178 

7.4 Paving ......................................................................................................................................... 178 

7.5 Lighting Guidelines ...................................................................................................................... 180 

7.6 Seating ........................................................................................................................................ 180 

7.7 Drinking Water ............................................................................................................................ 182 

7.8 Food Service ................................................................................................................................ 182 

7.9 Public Restrooms.......................................................................................................................... 182 

8. Health, Public Safety, and Security ........................................................................................................ 184 

8.1 Incompatible Activities ................................................................................................................. 184 

8.2 Pedestrian Safety ......................................................................................................................... 184 

8.3 Visitors with Disabilities................................................................................................................ 184 

8.4 Mass Notification System ............................................................................................................. 184 

8.5 Weather-Related Health Problems................................................................................................ 186 

9. Park Operations.................................................................................................................................... 186 

9.1 Deferred Maintenance ................................................................................................................. 186 

9.2 Park Standards............................................................................................................................. 186 

147
ALTERNATIVES

9.3 Maintenance Activities and Operations......................................................................................... 186 

9.4 Operational Access ...................................................................................................................... 188 

9.5 Energy Use................................................................................................................................... 190 

9.6 Sustainability Indicators................................................................................................................ 190 

9.7 Solid Waste Management and Recycling ...................................................................................... 192 

9.8 Communication Network............................................................................................................. 192 

9.9 Staffing ....................................................................................................................................... 192 

9.10 Park Partners and Volunteer Activities .......................................................................................... 194 

9.11 Commercial Business Services....................................................................................................... 194 

The Mall................................................................................................................................................................ 194 

10. Union Square (1st to 3rd Streets) .......................................................................................................... 194 

10.1 Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions)........................................................ 194 

10.2 Vision Emphasis ........................................................................................................................... 194 

10.3 Ulysses S. Grant Memorial............................................................................................................ 196 

10.4 Historic Resources........................................................................................................................ 196 

10.5 Capitol Reflecting Pool................................................................................................................. 196 

10.6 Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations........................................................... 198 

10.7 Access and Circulation ................................................................................................................. 198 

10.8 Visitor Information, Education, and Enjoyment ............................................................................. 198 

10.9 Visitor Amenities.......................................................................................................................... 198 

11. The Mall (3rd to 14th streets) ............................................................................................................... 200 

11.1 Vision Emphasis ........................................................................................................................... 200 

11.2 Historic Resources........................................................................................................................ 200 

11.3 Natural Resources ........................................................................................................................ 200 

11.4 Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations........................................................... 202 

11.5 Access and Circulation ................................................................................................................. 204 

11.6 Visitor Information, Education, and Enjoyment ............................................................................. 208 

11.7 Visitor Amenities.......................................................................................................................... 208 

11.8 Health, Public Safety, and Security................................................................................................ 210 

The Washington Monument .................................................................................................................................. 210 

12. Washington Monument ....................................................................................................................... 210 

12.1 Tours ........................................................................................................................................... 210 

13. Washington Monument Grounds ......................................................................................................... 210 

13.1 Vision Emphasis ........................................................................................................................... 210 

13.2 Historic Resources........................................................................................................................ 212 

13.3 Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations........................................................... 212 

13.4 Access and Circulation ................................................................................................................. 212 

13.5 Visitor Information, Education, and Enjoyment ............................................................................. 214 

13.6 Visitor Amenities.......................................................................................................................... 214 

13.7 Operations................................................................................................................................... 216 

West Potomac Park (North of Independence Avenue)............................................................................................. 216 

14. Constitution Gardens ........................................................................................................................... 216 

14.1 Vision Emphasis ........................................................................................................................... 216 

14.2 Historic Resources........................................................................................................................ 216 

14.3 Natural Resources ........................................................................................................................ 218 

14.4 Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations........................................................... 218 

14.5 Access and Circulation ................................................................................................................. 218 

14.6 Visitor Information, Education, and Enjoyment ............................................................................. 220 

14.7 Visitor Amenities.......................................................................................................................... 220 

15. Vietnam Veterans Memorial ................................................................................................................. 222 

15.1 Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations........................................................... 222 

15.2 Access and Circulation ................................................................................................................. 222 

15.3 Visitor Information, Education, and Enjoyment ............................................................................. 222 

16. Lincoln Memorial.................................................................................................................................. 222 

16.1 Visitor Amenities.......................................................................................................................... 222 

17. Lincoln Memorial Grounds.................................................................................................................... 224 

17.1 Historic Resources........................................................................................................................ 224 

17.2 Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations........................................................... 224 

18. Lincoln Memorial Grounds: Memorial Circle and Radial Roads............................................................... 224 

18.1 Historic Resources........................................................................................................................ 224 

 

148
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — Contents 

18.2 Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations........................................................... 224 

18.3 Access and Circulation ................................................................................................................. 226 

18.4 Visitor Information, Education, and Enjoyment ............................................................................. 226 

18.5 Visitor Amenities.......................................................................................................................... 226 

19. Lincoln Memorial Grounds: Watergate Area ......................................................................................... 226 

19.1 Historic Resources........................................................................................................................ 226 

19.2 Commemorative Sites .................................................................................................................. 228 

19.3 Access and Circulation ................................................................................................................. 228 

19.4 Visitor Enjoyment......................................................................................................................... 228 

19.5 Operations................................................................................................................................... 228 

20. Korean War Veterans Memorial............................................................................................................ 230 

20.1 Access and Circulation ................................................................................................................. 230 

20.2 Visitor Information and Education ................................................................................................ 230 

21. Ash Woods .......................................................................................................................................... 230 

21.1 Access and Circulation — Ash Road............................................................................................. 230 

21.2 Visitor Information, Education, and Enjoyment ............................................................................. 230 

21.3 Visitor Amenities.......................................................................................................................... 230 

21.4 Operations — United States Park Police Stables............................................................................ 232 

West Potomac Park (South of Independence Avenue)............................................................................................. 232 

22. Tidal Basin Area.................................................................................................................................... 232 

22.1 Vision Emphasis ........................................................................................................................... 232 

22.2 Historic Resources........................................................................................................................ 232 

22.3 Natural Resources ........................................................................................................................ 232 

22.4 Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations........................................................... 234 

22.5 Access and Circulation ................................................................................................................. 234 

22.6 Visitor Information, Education, and Enjoyment ............................................................................. 236 

22.7 Visitor Amenities.......................................................................................................................... 236 

23. Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial ..................................................................................................... 238 

23.1 Access and Circulation ................................................................................................................. 238 

23.2 Visitor Information, Education, and Enjoyment ............................................................................. 238 

23.3 Visitor Amenities.......................................................................................................................... 238 

24. West Potomac Park Riverfront............................................................................................................... 238 

24.1 Historic Resources........................................................................................................................ 238 

24.2 Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations........................................................... 238 

24.3 Access and Circulation ................................................................................................................. 240 

24.4 Visitor Information, Education, and Enjoyment ............................................................................. 240 

25. George Mason Memorial...................................................................................................................... 240 

25.1 Historic Resources........................................................................................................................ 240 

26. Thomas Jefferson Memorial.................................................................................................................. 240 

26.1 Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations........................................................... 240 

26.2 Visitor Information and Education ................................................................................................ 242 

26.3 Visitor Amenities.......................................................................................................................... 242 

27. Thomas Jefferson Memorial Grounds.................................................................................................... 242 

27.1 Historic Resources........................................................................................................................ 242 

27.2 Access and Circulation ................................................................................................................. 242 

27.3 Visitor Amenities.......................................................................................................................... 242 

149
ALTERNATIVES

TABLE 7: CONCEPTS AND ALTERNATIVES FOR THE NATIONAL MALL

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

NATIONAL MALL CONCEPTS 

1. OVERALL CONCEPT 

1.1 Opportunities, 

Problems, and 

Concerns (Existing 

Conditions) 

The National Mall has multiple purposes to fulfill — accommodating First Amendment 

demonstrations and national celebration events, preserving memorials and historic 

landscapes, and providing for diverse public use and enjoyment.

1.2 Vision Emphasis • This alternative outlines existing conditions and serves as a baseline to 

compare the action alternatives. 

• The National Mall, as the premier civic space 

for our nation, would be refurbished so that 

very high levels of use could be perpetuated 

and the needs of visitors could be met in an 

energy-efficient and sustainable manner. Its 

memorials and landscapes would be protected, with large areas of unprogrammed 

open space as defining features of the 

historic landscape. 

• The designed historic landscape would evolve, and its value over time would change, 

reflecting significant national events. Contemporary uses would be accommodated 

while respecting the planned historic character and visions of the L’Enfant and 

McMillan plans. 

• The intent would be to establish an overall 

identity and character for the National Mall, 

creating a coherent pedestrian environment 

that would complement and balance the 

natural environment, the combination of 

formal and informal features, and national 

commemorative works. The National Mall 

would be emphasized as a year-round 

destination where the beauty and variety of 

every season would enhance visitor 

experiences. 

• Uses for First Amendment demonstrations, 

commemorations, and national ceremonies 

and celebrations would be emphasized. 

• Visitors would be made to feel welcome 

through helpful wayfinding signs, knowledgeable staff, and high-quality and 

accessible facilities. 

• Diverse opportunities would be offered for 

public enjoyment, including educational, 

cultural, and musical programs, as well as 

active and passive recreational activities. 

• Professionals would design high-quality 

solutions to unify the National Mall and to 

articulate the visions for specific sites. 

• The National Park Service would ensure 

compatible, enduring high-quality design, as 

well as the highest facility maintenance standards, to create a sense of place that would 

reinforce the civic, historic, and symbolic role 

of the National Mall to our nation. 

150
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — National Mall Concepts 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

NATIONAL MALL CONCEPTS 

1. OVERALL CONCEPT

1.1 Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• This alternative concept would 

restore and maintain the resources 

of the National Mall as a historic 

landscape. Under this concept the 

designed historic landscape would 

evolve, and its value over time 

would change, reflecting significant 

national events. 

• Contemporary uses would be 

accommodated while respecting 

the planned historic character and 

visions of the L’Enfant and 

McMillan plans. 

• The National Park Service would 

ensure enduring high-quality 

design, as well as the highest facility 

maintenance standards, to create a 

sense of place that would reinforce 

the civic, historic, and symbolic role 

of the National Mall to our nation. 

• This alternative would improve the 

National Mall as the premier civic 

space for our nation and would 

support very high use levels. The 

evolving ceremonial, celebratory, 

cultural, and visitor uses at this 

national civic space would be 

emphasized. Diverse peoples would 

be welcomed through multilingual 

educational opportunities, and the 

needs of large groups (including 

those arriving by tour bus), demonstrators, and event participants 

would be met. 

• Some areas would be redesigned to 

provide a more sustainable civic 

forum and a stage for First Amendment demonstrations and other 

events. 

• The National Park Service would 

ensure compatible and enduring 

high-quality design, as well as the 

highest facility maintenance 

standards, to create a sense of 

place that would reinforce the civic, 

historic, and symbolic role of the 

National Mall to our nation. 

• This alternative would meet 

evolving recreational needs in the 

nation’s capital by providing beautiful, enjoyable, and ecologically 

sustainable open spaces that could 

be adapted to changing 

recreational patterns of diverse local 

and national users. This concept 

would contribute to healthy 

lifestyles, healthy parks, and 

healthy, more sustainable cities. 

• Recreational activities would be 

expanded by redesigning some 

areas, increasing recreation equipment rentals (such as boats, skates, 

and bicycles), adding playgrounds, 

and emphasizing connections to the 

recreational and enjoyment opportunities in East Potomac Park,

the Georgetown Waterfront, and 

Rock Creek Park, as well as the 

southwest waterfront. 

• The National Park Service would 

ensure compatible and enduring 

high-quality design, as well as the 

highest facility maintenance 

standards, to create a sense of 

place that would reinforce the civic, 

historic, and symbolic role of the 

National Mall to our nation. 

151
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

2. CULTURAL RESOURCES 

2.1 Memorials Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The National Mall is the site of a 

number of memorials, some of them well-known symbols of our nation. 

All memorials are managed pursuant to specific laws and regulations, and changes may 

require congressional authorization. 

Commemorative works are generally subject to review, and in some instances approval by 

the National Capital Planning Commission and the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, and 

possibly by the D.C. Historic Preservation Office. 

As a result of the 2003 amendments to the Commemorative Works Act, no new memorials 

will be added to the National Mall; however, memorials could be placed in area I adjacent 

to the National Mall.

Actions • Preserve memorials, related statuary, 

and places of commemoration. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. 

2.2 Historic Properties 

and Cultural 

Landscapes 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The National Park Service 

consults with the D.C. Historic Preservation Office and others in accordance with section 

106 of the National Historic Preservation Act to preserve, restore, adaptively reuse, or 

rehabilitate cultural resources (see specific areas). 

Actions • Manage resources in accordance with 

The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards 

for the Treatment of Historic Properties 

and general recommendations of 

historic structure reports. 

• Continue to consult with the D.C. Historic Preservation Office and others. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. 

2.3 Spatial Organization and Land Use 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Areas with integrity of existing 

plant materials exist, including portions of Union Square, the Mall, the Lincoln Memorial, 

the Tidal Basin, and the Thomas Jefferson Memorial. 

Landscape health and appearance are deteriorating. 

Actions • Manage the historic landscape in accordance with the Secretary of the 

Interior’s Standards for the Treatment 

of Historic Properties, with Guidelines 

for the Treatment of Cultural Landscapes and general recommendations 

of cultural landscape reports and 

inventories.

• Maintain landscape health and 

conditions at current levels. 

• Similar to the no-action alternative, except 

◦ Recognize that the public’s use of the 

designed historic landscape and the 

memorials, historic structures, and other 

landscape features would continue to 

evolve and that its value would change 

over time, reflecting significant national 

events. 

◦ Improve landscape health and appearance. 

◦ Implement general recommendations 

from historic structure and cultural 

landscape reports. 

2.4 Historic Views and 

Vistas 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Primary views (spatial organization and land patterns) were defined in historic landmark plans. Large areas of unprogrammed open space define historic landscape features. 

The view from the White House to the Thomas Jefferson Memorial is somewhat obscured by 

trees northeast of the Tidal Basin. Some events on the Mall can obstruct the view between 

the U.S. Capitol and the Washington Monument. 

Actions • Recognize planned views within the 

historic landscape, including large areas 

of unprogrammed open space. 

• Improve and perpetuate planned viewsheds 

or vistas, including large areas of unprogrammed open space. 

 

152
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — National Mall Concepts 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

2. CULTURAL RESOURCES 

2.1 Memorials: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page.

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. 

2.2 Historic Properties and Cultural Landscapes: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See 

facing page.

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. 

2.3 Spatial Organization and Land Use: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page.

• Similar to the no-action alternative, 

except 

◦ Recognize that the use of the 

designed historic landscape 

would continue to evolve and 

that its value would change over 

time, reflecting significant national events. 

◦ Improve landscape health and 

appearance. 

◦ Implement general recommendations from historic structure 

and cultural landscape reports. 

• Same as alternative A. • Same as alternative A. 

2.4 Historic Views and Vistas: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page.

• Improve and perpetuate planned 

viewsheds or vistas, including large 

areas of unprogrammed open 

space. 

• Ensure views and vistas are not 

obscured, even during events. 

• Improve and perpetuate planned 

viewsheds or vistas, including large 

areas of unprogrammed open 

space. 

• Same as alternative B. 

153
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

3. NATURAL RESOURCES 

3.1 Science and Urban 

Ecology 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Various organizations have 

indicated a strong interest in helping undertake projects based on scientifically sound 

research to address problems. 

The National Park Service manages to preserve physical and biological processes, and national 

park system units are managed as parts of larger ecosystems. 

The National Park Service will pursue cooperative conservation. 

Nonnative species may be used to meet desired conditions at cultural resources.

Actions • Build on a science-based understanding 

of park resources. 

• Incorporate science-based decision 

making. 

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Incorporate science and best practices in 

urban ecology, based on a continued 

program of inventorying, assessment, 

surveys, evaluation/analysis, data collection, documentation, and resource 

monitoring. 

◦ Use sound science, support appropriately 

designed and peer reviewed scholarly 

studies, engage the scientific community, 

and seek subject matter expertise. 

3.2 Water Resources Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Water quality issues affect most 

water features; changes in water chemistry have resulted in algae growth; some pools and 

ornamental fountains lack proper circulation systems; and the Tidal Basin does not flush as 

intended. Large volumes of potable water are used in designed water features.

Actions • Continue to address algae growth in 

designed water features. 

• Design and install a runoff filtration 

system to minimize water pollution 

from larger parking areas; consider 

both structural and bioremediation 

(fungi, microorganisms, higher plants) 

options. 

• Improve water resources by rehabilitating 

some water features, installing circulation 

and filtration systems, and taking advantage 

of current technology, maintenance techniques, and upgraded equipment. 

• Conserve water, reduce the use of potable 

water, reuse water, and seek nonpotable 

water sources for water features. 

• Seek environmentally sound, natural ways to 

improve water quality. 

3.3 Flooding in the 

Monumental Core 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Flooding in the Monumental 

Core occurs from Potomac River overbank flooding, urban drainage flooding (stormwater 

management), and tidal surges. Heavy rains can overwhelm the urban drainage system, 

and the city sewer system needs capital improvements. 

The National Capital Planning Commission has the lead in coordinating a comprehensive approach to flood prevention and control. Buildings in low-lying areas near submerged 

streams may require dewatering. Dewatering and its impact on urban drainage flooding 

will be examined by the commission and the city. 

The National Park Service released the Potomac Park Levee Project Environmental Assessment 

in 2008.

Actions • Continue cooperation with the Army 

Corps of Engineers to maintain the 

flood control system and address permanent solutions to hydrology and 

flood control.

• Work with the Army Corps of Engineers, the Federal Emergency 

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Undertake a comprehensive sustainable 

water management approach to address 

flooding. 

◦ Develop sustainable approaches to address urban drainage flooding in conjunction with the Army Corps of Engineers, 

 

154
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — National Mall Concepts 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

3. NATURAL RESOURCES

3.1 Science and Urban Ecology: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page.

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Incorporate science and best 

practices in urban ecology, based 

on a continued program of inventorying, assessment, surveys, 

evaluation/analysis, data collection, documentation, and 

resource monitoring. 

◦ Use sound science, support 

appropriately designed and peer 

reviewed scholarly studies, engage the scientific community, 

and seek subject matter 

expertise. 

• Same as alternative A. • Same as alternative A. 

3.2 Water Resources: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page.

• Improve water resources by rehabilitating some water features, 

installing circulation and filtration 

systems, and taking advantage of 

current technology, maintenance 

techniques, and upgraded 

equipment. 

• Same as alternative A. • Same as alternative A plus 

◦ Seek environmentally sound, 

natural ways to improve water 

quality. 

◦ Conserve water, reduce the use 

of potable water, reuse water, 

and seek nonpotable water 

sources for water features. 

3.3 Flooding in the Monumental Core: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page.

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Seek a long-term solution based 

on results of engineering studies. 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus: 

◦ Develop sustainable approaches 

to address urban drainage 

flooding in conjunction with the 

Army Corps of Engineers, the 

Federal Emergency Management

155
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

Management Agency, and the city as 

needed. 

• Help implement NCPC/DC plans for 

comprehensive flood prevention and 

control as appropriate. 

 the Federal Emergency Management 

Agency, the Environmental Protection 

Agency, the National Capital Planning 

Commission, the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, DC agencies, 

and others. 

◦ Explore potential collection and storage of 

water from subsurface drainage / dewatering activities and re-use for 

irrigation. 

3.4 Soils and 

Vegetation 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): About half of the nearly 700 

acres within the National Mall were constructed on tidal flats. Imported soils have often 

been of poor quality. Additionally, soil compaction from high levels of use affects tree root 

systems and hardens turf areas. Soil compaction reduces water infiltration and contributes 

to runoff. Social trails adjacent to designated walkways or water edges destroy turf and 

further compact soils. 

Turf recovery periods are scheduled every other winter.

Actions • Manage soils and vegetation health; 

improve appearance. 

• Improve natural resource conditions for tree 

and turf areas; improve soil conditions 

and/or reengineer and replace or restore soils 

to reduce or reverse effects from 

compaction; implement the most successful 

turf management practices; install or replace 

irrigation systems so that they would be protected from damage during events. 

• Seek ways to reduce the physical impacts of 

events, such as compaction and erosion 

within the Mall elm tree panels and around 

the Tidal Basin cherry trees. 

• Revise rehabilitation and recovery periods so 

that smaller areas could be set aside more 

frequently and broader public access 

maintained. 

• Protect trees and plants from social trails. 

3.5 Wildlife Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Urban wildlife is present, along 

with less frequently seen fox and deer. Visitors have complained about Canada geese 

droppings. 

There are a few listed threatened or endangered species.

Actions • Continue to protect threatened or 

endangered species. 

• Continue regional coordination with 

other national park system units and 

with other federal and city agencies to 

address urban wildlife issues and 

nuisance species. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. 

 

156
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — National Mall Concepts 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

 Agency, the Environmental Protection Agency, the National 

Capital Planning Commission, 

the Washington Metropolitan 

Area Transit Authority, DC 

agencies, and others. 

◦ Explore potential collection and 

storage of water from subsurface 

drainage / dewatering activities 

and re-use for irrigation. 

◦ Develop stormwater management structure(s) to mitigate 

urban drainage flooding. 

◦ Explore stormwater retention to 

reduce flooding from urban 

drainage (e.g., Constitution 

Gardens Lake) as well as rain 

gardens. 

3.4 Soils and Vegetation: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page.

• Similar to the no-action alternative, 

except: 

◦ Improve soil conditions and/or 

reengineer and replace soils to 

reduce effects from compaction. 

◦ Implement the most successful 

turf management practices. 

◦ Protect trees and plants from 

social trails. 

• Similar to alternative A plus 

◦ Seek ways to reverse the physical 

impacts of events, such as compaction and erosion within the 

Mall elm tree panels and around 

the Tidal Basin cherry trees. 

• Same as alternative B plus 

◦ Revise rehabilitation and recovery 

periods so that smaller areas 

could be set aside more 

frequently and broader public 

access maintained. 

◦ Implement practices to protect 

and improve conditions for 

special vegetation populations. 

◦ Implement Sustainable Sites 

InitiativeTM approach to soils 

management. 

3.5 Wildlife: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page.

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. 

157
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

3.6 Air Quality Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Urban air quality is impacted by 

vehicular exhaust. 

Air quality is affected by dust from gravel paving. 

Actions • Take no additional management 

actions. Better air quality will result 

from improved technology (e.g., cleaner 

vehicles). 

• Same as the no-action alternative, except 

◦ Eliminate gravel as a paving material. 

3.7 Noise Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Urban sounds, such as traffic 

and airplane noise, are audible in all areas. Water features may mask noise to some degree.

Actions • Take no additional management 

actions; existing conditions would 

continue. 

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Use the sound of water features to muffle 

urban traffic noise in additional areas. 

3.8 Effects of Climate 

Change 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): There is little that park managers can do to prevent global climate change, which could affect temperature, rainfall, 

and sea level; however, they can take some steps to mitigate its impact. A 3-meter rise in 

sea levels could affect many areas in the park. Increased storm severity could result in tidal 

surges that would inundate more park areas. 

Actions • Monitor conditions, assess potentially 

affected areas and risks for sea level 

rise, and consider strategies to mitigate 

impacts. 

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Coordinate with others to undertake a 

comprehensive approach to address the 

impacts of climate change. 

◦ Develop a natural shoreline. 

4. THE CIVIC STAGE: DEMONSTRATIONS, SPECIAL EVENTS, AND NATIONAL CELEBRATIONS 

According to the Code of Federal Regulations (36 CFR 7.96(g)): 

• 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 term “national celebration events” means the annually recurring special events regularly scheduled by the 

National Capital Region, including the . . . the Fourth of July celebration, Festival of American Folklife, Columbus 

Day Commemorative Wreath-Laying, and Inaugural ceremonies. 

4.1 Demonstrations 

(First Amendment) 

(NOTE: Language related 

to demonstrations has 

also been included in the 

areas most frequently 

used for these purposes.) 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The First Amendment to the 

U.S. Constitution provides for freedom of expression as a right of citizens. The National 

Mall is the most prominent space in our country for the demonstration of these rights, and 

that is an essential purpose of the National Mall. Areas where national symbols are 

prominent backdrops are especially popular locations for demonstrations. 

Consistent with the First Amendment and federal regulations, demonstrations will continue 

to be fully accommodated on a first-come, first-served basis throughout the National Mall. 

Federal regulations (36 CFR 7.96) define allowable areas and activities related to the Lincoln Memorial, Washington Monument, Jefferson Memorial and Vietnam Veterans 

Memorial. 

Demonstrations involving 25 people or fewer do not require a permit. 

Demonstration permits can be extended unless a site has already been reserved. 

 

158
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — National Mall Concepts 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

3.6 Air Quality: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page.

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative, 

except 

◦ Eliminate gravel as a paving 

material. 

• Same as the no-action alternative, 

except 

◦ Eliminate gravel as a paving 

material. 

3.7 Noise: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Use the sound of water features 

to muffle urban traffic noise in 

additional areas.

• Same as alternative B. 

3.8 Effects of Climate Change: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Consider raising the height of 

the seawalls. 

• Same as alternative A plus 

◦ Coordinate with others to 

undertake a comprehensive 

approach to address the impacts 

of climate change. 

◦ Develop a natural shoreline. 

4. THE CIVIC STAGE 

See facing page. 

4.1 Demonstrations (First Amendment): Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing 

page. 

159
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

Actions • Consistent with the First Amendment 

and federal regulations, continue to 

fully accommodate demonstrations. 

• Consistent with the First Amendment 

and federal regulations, better monitor 

demonstrations to facilitate and 

improve the ability to host them; ensure 

that resources are protected to the 

extent possible and that soil, turf, and 

vegetation impacts are reduced. 

• Seek to improve permit procedures for 

demonstrations. 

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Improve highly visible venues throughout 

the National Mall and better design for 

high levels of use; provide infrastructure 

(electrical power, communication systems) 

and durable surfacing. 

◦ Provide sufficient staff to support 

demonstrations. 

4.2 Special Events and 

National Celebrations 

(NOTE: Language related 

to events has also been 

included in the areas 

most frequently used for 

these purposes.) 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Regulations for special events 

and national celebrations on the National Mall are codified at 36 CFR 7.96. Federal courts 

have ruled that reasonable regulations relating to time, place, and manner for events are 

appropriate. All special events require a permit. 

Noise from generators used during events affects visitor experiences. 

Actions • Continue to improve NPS events 

permitting procedures to better protect 

resources and to reduce soil, turf, and 

vegetation impacts. 

• Better enforce permit requirements and 

monitor events. 

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Encourage organizers of large events to 

schedule their functions during non-peak 

seasons.

◦ Ensure that event scheduling (not First 

Amendment demonstrations) leaves part 

of the Mall’s grass panels open for public 

recreation at all times, part available for 

events, and part available for landscape 

recovery/restoration. 

◦ Define product types and standards to be 

used during events, and provide definitions to event organizers. Standards could 

address location, seasonal time limits for 

temporary surfacing materials, tent installation methods for various areas, generator decibel levels, use of waterless 

hand cleaners in portable restrooms, 

supplementary drinking water, locations 

to remain free of event facilities, and 

acceptable locations for temporary 

facilities (e.g., portable restrooms, incident 

command centers, and events staging). 

◦ Require the use of supplementary (hired) 

transit services to facilitate large-scale 

events based on estimated event size and 

location. 

◦ Encourage bicycle parking at special 

events. 

◦ Require the use of supplementary (hired) 

transit services to facilitate large-scale 

events based on estimated size and 

location of events.

 

160
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — National Mall Concepts 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Provide sufficient staff to prevent 

resource impacts. 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Improve highly visible venues 

throughout the National Mall 

and better design for high levels 

of use; provide infrastructure 

(electrical power, communication 

systems) and durable surfacing. 

• Same as alternative B. 

4.2 Special Events and National Celebrations: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing 

page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Require events to have a meaningful association with the 

National Mall venues.

◦ Define product types and standards to be used during events, 

and provide definitions to event 

organizers. Standards would 

address location, installation, 

temporary surfacing materials, 

tent installation methods for various areas, generator decibel 

levels, use of waterless hand 

cleaners in portable restrooms, 

supplementary drinking water, 

locations to remain free of event 

facilities, and acceptable locations for temporary facilities 

(e.g., portable restrooms, 

incident command centers, and 

events staging). 

• Similar to alternative A except 

◦ Revise NPS permit requirements 

to recommend that event 

organizers consider placement of 

all structures so that they do not 

block eye-level views between 

national symbols (such as the 

U.S. Capitol, the Washington 

Monument, the Lincoln Memorial, the Thomas Jefferson 

Memorial, and the White House). 

◦ Require the use of supplementary (hired) transit services to 

facilitate large-scale events based 

on estimated size and location of 

events. 

• Similar to alternative A except 

◦ Revise NPS permit requirements 

to recommend that event 

organizers consider placement of 

all structures so that they do not 

block eye-level views between 

national symbols (same as 

alternative B). 

◦ Ensure that event scheduling 

(not First Amendment demonstrations) leaves part of the 

Mall’s grass panels open for 

public recreation at all times, 

part available for events, and 

part available for landscape 

recovery/restoration. 

◦ Require that bicycle parking be 

provided at events estimated to 

be attended by more than 2,000 

people (with estimated use by 

1% of attendees) to encourage 

bicycle access. 

161
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

4.3 Venues for 

Demonstrations, 

Special Events, and 

National Celebrations 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Over 3,000 events take place 

annually on the National Mall, and the wear and tear contribute to the slow deterioration 

of significant character-defining elements within the historic landscape or affecting historic 

planned views and visitor experiences. 

Giant video screens are often used to broadcast onsite events to large crowds (e.g., the 2009 

inauguration) or to broadcast offsite events. 

Actions • Continue to accommodate demonstrations, special events, and national 

celebrations at current venues. 

• Similar to the no-action alternative, except 

◦ Improve the nation’s premier civic space, 

focusing on high visibility areas within the 

National Mall. 

◦ Redesign some areas to provide improved 

or additional sustainable civic forums and 

stages for First Amendment demonstrations, as well as special events and 

enjoyment. 

◦ Provide a more convenient and sustainable civic forum and stage for First 

Amendment demonstrations, national 

celebrations, ceremonies, and other 

events by providing multiple, desirable, 

hard-surface venues, staging areas, and 

utilities (water, electricity, communications). 

◦ Provide civic infrastructure at convenient 

locations to accommodate portable 

restrooms and to facilitate servicing them. 

4.4 Operations Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The reservation system does not 

take advantage of current technology to schedule and coordinate events, maintenance 

and rehabilitation, and construction periods. 

Areas are regularly needed for law enforcement and command — first aid, command, 

parking, dogs, horses, motorcycles, bicycles, etc. 

Resource protection measures such as fencing, signs, and flooring may be required as part of 

the permitting process for special events. 

Covering turf distributes weight and reduces compaction but may kill grass. 

Under the turf management program record of decision half of the Mall area (3rd Street to 

14th Street) is closed every other winter for restoration, making these areas unavailable for 

events or demonstrations. 

During the Fourth of July roads are closed, a temporary fence is erected, and security checkpoints are established throughout the National Mall. 

The capabilities and opportunities of different event areas (venues) are not effectively 

marketed. 

Portable restrooms are a permit requirement for some events and demonstrations. 

Staff are insufficient to monitor permitted activities. 

Actions • Continue current practices for managing demonstrations, special events, 

and national celebrations. 

• Continue to work with the Environmental Protection Agency on guidelines for 

ensuring sustainable and low-impact 

events. 

• Continue to use portable restrooms at 

certain demonstrations and events. 

• Develop a new computer mapping-based 

reservation system to provide venue and 

permit information, as well as to schedule 

events, maintenance, and recovery periods 

or to schedule park projects. 

• Seek to provide more balance in scheduling 

and the distribution of special events (not 

First Amendment demonstrations) to more 

equitably accommodate open space for 

events, recreation, general visitation, and 

natural resource restoration. 

 

162
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — National Mall Concepts 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

4.3 Venues for Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns 

(Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Similar to the no-action alternative, 

except 

◦ Improve the nation’s premier 

civic space, focusing on high 

visibility areas within the National 

Mall. 

◦ Provide a more convenient and 

sustainable civic forum and stage 

for First Amendment demonstrations, national celebrations, ceremonies, and other events by providing multiple, desirable, hardsurface venues, staging areas, 

and utilities (water, electrical, 

Internet, and media 

connections). 

• Same as alternative B. 

4.4 Operations: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Similar to the no-action alternative, 

except 

◦ Develop a new computer mapping-based reservation system to 

provide venue and permit information, as well as to schedule 

events, maintenance, and 

recovery periods or to schedule 

park projects. 

◦ Plan permanent infrastructure 

and space for temporary facilities 

• Same as alternative A plus 

◦ Rewrite permit brochures and 

handouts to better inform potential demonstration and event 

organizers about how to promote sustainable, low-impact 

activities. 

◦ Provide infrastructure at convenient locations to accommodate 

portable restrooms and to facilitate servicing them. 

• Same as alternative A plus 

◦ Revise the turf management 

program rehabilitation and 

recovery periods so that smaller 

areas are set aside more frequently and broader public 

access is maintained. Monitor 

and consider turf recovery results 

in reopening venues early for 

general and recreational use. 

163
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

4.4 Operations: Actions 

(cont.) 

• Provide sufficient staff to monitor permitted 

activities. 

• Continue to collect data on best practices for 

events, success rates, and standards; incorporate into park standards where feasible. 

• Limit onsite staging and logistical areas for 

special events. Plan permanent infrastructure 

and space for temporary facilities (such as 

portable restrooms, trash, recycling, logistical 

or operational space, media activities, access, 

and law enforcement) in order to protect resources, reduce the impact of annual events, 

and make setup and takedown operations 

for event organizers more efficient. 

• Develop intense recovery procedures (such as 

turf renovation methods, deep-tine aeration, 

overseeding, with recovery time periods 

depending on event duration and attendance). Monitor and consider turf recovery 

results in reopening venues early for general 

and recreational use. 

• Continue to work with the Environmental 

Protection Agency on guidelines for ensuring 

sustainable and low-impact events. Rewrite 

permit brochures and handouts to better 

inform demonstration and event organizers 

about how to promote sustainable, lowimpact activities. 

5. ACCESS AND CIRCULATION 

5.1 Coordination of 

Circulation Systems 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Commuter and urban traffic 

continues to mix with high volumes of pedestrians. There is a large community of bicycle 

commuters. 

The National Mall is walkable and easily bikable, but it lacks convenient, visible, and 

coordinated amenities and information to encourage healthy and non-polluting circulation 

activities. Pedestrian circulation can be encouraged by helping visitors get additional information that would make walking more enjoyable. 

Various public and commercial, tour and sightseeing bus services are provided, including NPS 

visitor transit. A majority of visitors arrive by public transportation and tour buses. 

Actions • Continue uncoordinated means of 

circulation within the National Mall for 

different users (public transit, NPS 

visitor transportation system users, tour 

buses, taxis, commuters, pedestrians, 

and bicycle riders). 

• Implement a coordinated pedestrian 

environment that would accommodate 

various types of uses and needs, including a 

high-quality, enjoyable pedestrian and 

bicycle environment, while providing a 

positive urban experience and coordinated 

urban connections within a parklike setting; 

connect all areas of the National Mall and 

provide better transitions into adjacent areas. 

• Increase coordinated pedestrian amenities 

(signs, orientation maps, transit stops, 

crosswalks, seating, and lighting). 

• Develop a coordinated strategy to limit 

visitor vehicular traffic and emphasize 

alternative modes of transportation in 

cooperation with the city and other 

governmental agencies. 

 

164
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — National Mall Concepts 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

 (such as portable restrooms and 

law enforcement) to reduce the 

impact of annual events. 

◦ Develop intense recovery procedures (turf renovation methods, deep-tine aeration, overseeding, with recovery time 

periods depending on event 

duration and attendance) to 

improve resource conditions but 

minimize rest periods. 

◦ Provide sufficient staff to 

monitor permitted activities. 

5. ACCESS AND CIRCULATION 

5.1 Coordination of Circulation Systems: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing 

page. 

• Coordinate pedestrian amenities 

(signs, orientation maps, transit 

stops). 

• Implement coordinated visitor circulation focused on a high-quality, 

enjoyable pedestrian environment 

while providing a positive urban 

experience and coordinated urban 

connections within a parklike 

setting. 

• Same as alternative B plus 

◦ Provide a high-quality, enjoyable 

bicycling environment. 

165
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

5.2 Roads Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Roads provide important urban 

circulation and commuter routes, but high volume roads (such as 17th and 14th streets, 

and Constitution and Independence avenues, can be pedestrian barriers. Traffic may 

exceed the posted speed in some locations. Tunnels under the National Mall are at I-395, 

9th Street, and 12th Street. 

The streets near the National Mall accommodate around 400,000 commuters every weekday. 

It may be difficult for infrequent visitors to navigate the roads. 

Actions • Make no change to roads. • Redesign some roads and crosswalks to 

improve and facilitate pedestrian movements 

while accommodating urban traffic. 

• Add traffic-calming measures. 

5.3 Visitor Parking Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): More than 1,000 free public 

parking spaces are provided, primarily along park roads and at the Tidal Basin, with 

approximately 250 additional spaces in three lots near the 14th Street bridge corridor. The 

amount of parking for people with disabilities is 10%, which exceeds standards; however, 

some locations attract more visitors who are elderly or have disabilities (see specific areas). 

Actions • Make no change to parking. • Work with the city and local parking garages 

to offer visitor parking and weekend rates; 

consider valet or shuttle service to and from 

parking garages to designated drop-off and 

pickup locations on the National Mall. 

• Provide additional parking for visitors with 

disabilities. 

• Redesign some parking areas for more 

efficient operation. 

5.4 Pedestrian Access Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): High-volume roads surround 

and cross through the National Mall. 

Traffic lights generally include pedestrian countdown times, but they may be too short for 

many users. 

City and regional plans focus on maximizing public transportation. 

Actions • Make no change to pedestrian access. • Improve pedestrian experiences with 

upgraded walking surfaces and crosswalks as 

part of a coordinated National Mall paving 

system, larger intersections and adjacent 

waiting areas to accommodate large 

numbers of people, and longer pedestrian 

crossing times. 

• Improve access for people with disabilities. 

• Facilitate nonmotorized access by providing 

separate circulation routes for pedestrians 

and bicyclists or personal transit users, and 

by providing additional facilities geared to 

pedestrians and bicyclists. 

• Provide for electric scooter rentals to seniors, 

visitors with disabilities, or those for whom 

walking long distances is difficult. 

 

166
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — National Mall Concepts 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

5.2 Roads: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Redesign some roads and crosswalks to improve and facilitate 

pedestrian movements while 

accommodating urban traffic. 

• Add traffic-calming measures. 

• Same as alternative B plus 

◦ Tunnel some roads to improve 

vehicular circulation. 

5.3 Visitor Parking: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Provide additional visitor parking for 

people with disabilities. 

• Redesign parking areas for more 

efficient operation. 

• If determined feasible by engineering, security, geotechnical, and 

economic studies, develop 

underground public parking 

garages. 

• Redesign parking areas for more 

efficient operation. 

5.4 Pedestrian Access: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Relocate the truck route from 15th 

Street to 14th Street. Work with the 

city to lengthen pedestrian crossing 

times. 

• Improve pedestrian experiences 

with upgraded walking surfaces 

and longer pedestrian countdowns. 

• Add pedestrian bridges or tunnels. 

• Improve pedestrian experiences 

with upgraded walking surfaces 

and longer pedestrian countdowns; 

upgrade and coordinate paving 

(same as alternative B). 

• Redesign some roads. 

• Add pedestrian bridges or pedestrian/vehicular underpasses. 

• Provide separate circulation routes 

for pedestrians and bicyclists or 

personal transit users; provide 

additional facilities for pedestrians. 

167
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

5.5 Supplementary 

Visitor Transportation 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Up to 25% of visitors may not 

be able to walk long distances, or they may be exhausted from visiting multiple sites. 

Actions • No opportunities for supplementary 

visitor transportation. 

• Provide supplementary transportation, 

including scooter rentals or wheelchairs, and 

roving health and safety courtesy shuttles for 

the elderly, families with small children, and 

others as needed. 

5.6 Public Transportation 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Public and commuter bus routes 

cross the National Mall, but the west end is not well-served. Circulator buses use several 

routes in the area. 

There is one Metro stop on the National Mall and four more within two blocks. 

Actions • Continue to accommodate public and 

commuter bus services. 

• Continue to accommodate public and 

commuter bus services. 

• Support an additional Metro entry at 7th 

Street and Constitution Avenue NW (Navy / 

Archives / Penn Quarter) and the Federal 

Triangle. 

5.7 Taxis Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Taxi stands are dispersed 

throughout the National Mall, at the Washington Monument, major memorials, and near 

museums. 

Actions • Make no change to taxi stands. • Same as the no-action alternative. 

5.8 Tour Bus Management 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Up to a third of visitors to the 

National Mall may arrive by tour bus. 

Tour bus drop-offs and pickups are accommodated in the following areas: 

◦ the Mall (four locations)

◦ Washington Monument 

◦ Thomas Jefferson Memorial 

◦ Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial / future Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial 

◦ Lincoln Memorial (Daniel French, Henry Bacon drives) 

◦ Raoul Wallenberg Place 

Tour bus regulations limit time for engine idling. 

Tour buses frequently deposit large amounts of waste from box lunches. 

Turf areas may be destroyed or compacted by large numbers of people getting on / off buses. 

Actions • Continue to work with the D.C. 

Department of Transportation and 

other city agencies to address tour bus 

parking needs. 

• Continue to improve tour bus drop-off 

locations and waste management. 

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Redesign tour bus drop-offs as needed. 

◦ Increase tour bus drop-offs on the Mall. 

6. VISITOR INFORMATION, EDUCATION, AND ENJOYMENT 

6.1 Park Information 

and Orientation 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The National Park Service 

provides online information about visiting the National Mall, but layers of information may 

be hard to navigate. 

Brochures, maps, and general park information are available at visitor contact stations (see 

specific areas below). Outdated orientation maps are being replaced; wayfinding signs are 

coordinated with the city. 

The park radio station (AM 1670) provides onsite information. 

Park information has been provided by others through tour books, maps, and brochures, but 

sometimes this information is inaccurate. 

 

168
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — National Mall Concepts 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

5.5 Supplementary Visitor Transportation: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing 

page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Provide supplementary transportation, including scooter rentals or 

wheelchairs, and roving health and 

safety courtesy shuttles for the 

elderly, families with small children, 

and others as needed. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. 

5.6 Public Transportation: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Continue to accommodate public 

and commuter bus services. 

• Support an additional Metro entry 

at 7th Street and Constitution 

Avenue NW (Navy / Archives / Penn 

Quarter). 

• Same as alternative A. • Same as alternative A. 

5.7 Taxis: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. 

5.8 Tour Bus Management: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Redesign tour bus drop-offs as 

needed. 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Redesign tour bus drop-offs as 

needed. 

◦ Increase tour bus drop-offs on 

the Mall. 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Redesign tour bus drop-offs as 

needed. 

6. VISITOR INFORMATION, EDUCATION, AND ENJOYMENT 

6.1 Parking Information and Orientation: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing 

page. 

169
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

Actions • Continue to improve website information about visiting the park as staffing 

and funding are available, and develop 

innovative improvements. 

• Continue to work with tour groups and 

others to disseminate accurate information. 

• Continue to replace outdated, onsite 

orientation maps.

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ In addition to improved orientation, wayfinding, and information services; provide 

signs and brochures in multiple languages; provide roving rangers to greet 

visitors and answer questions. 

◦ Provide orientation / map areas near key 

pedestrian entries and intersections or 

corridors that are readable at night. Make 

sign and information systems flexible 

enough to incorporate changes in cutting 

edge technology; use glare-free variable 

message signs. 

◦ Create a seamless visitor experience 

through communication networks, mass 

notification systems, program/ activity 

listings (also on-line), coordinated information about adjacent museums and 

visitor destinations, and links to tourist 

websites. 

◦ Ensure all park staff, including maintenance staff, are able to direct visitors to 

destinations and provide park maps. 

◦ Work with adjacent museums and 

managers of visitor destinations to provide 

park information. 

6.2 Educational 

Programs and 

Exhibits

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Memorials and park areas 

provide interpretive opportunities based on commemoration, unique features, activities 

and uses, and the history of development and use. 

Audiovisual exhibits are provided at the Lincoln and Jefferson memorials. Interactive 

computer displays at the Korean War Veterans and World War II memorials may be 

difficult to see because of glare. 

Regularly scheduled daily programs take place. 

Programs include living history and curriculum-based education. 

Temporary and permanent educational panels provide additional visitor information. 

Special programs celebrate the Fourth of July, the National Cherry Blossom Festival, Veteran’s 

Day, Memorial Day, and birthdays for George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham 

Lincoln, and Franklin Delano Roosevelt, as well as Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. 

Actions • Focus educational programs on the 

memorials as symbols of democracy 

and the history of the nation’s capital. 

• Continue to provide living history and 

special programs in some locations.

• Continue to add educational panels.

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Develop programs to inspire visitors so 

that they leave with a new or renewed 

appreciation of their inalienable rights, the 

American experience, and our diverse 

culture. 

◦ Develop educational methods that would 

be flexible and adaptable to technological 

innovations, such as digital electronic 

displays, cell phone tours, and interpretive 

boards and activity listings that could be 

programmed by computer and would 

allow visits to the National Mall to be 

personalized. 

◦ Use mobile information stations and 

roving staff to supplement dispersed

 

170
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — National Mall Concepts 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Improve website information by 

offering downloadable 

information to help visitors plan 

their visits. 

◦ Provide greetings, welcoming 

information, and brochures in 

foreign languages. 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Provide an on-line events 

calendar on glare-free variable 

message signs that can also be 

used to provide emergency information. 

◦ Light onsite orientation maps for 

readability and viewing during 

evening hours. 

◦ Provide roving rangers to 

welcome visitors and answer 

questions. 

◦ Ensure all park staff, including 

maintenance staff, are able to 

direct visitors to destinations and 

provide park maps. 

◦ Work with adjacent museums 

and managers of visitor destinations to provide park 

information. 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Provide information (brochures, 

web-based information) about 

recreational opportunities in East 

Potomac Park. 

6.2 Educational Programs and Exhibits: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page.

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Educate visitors about the 

planned open space of the 

nation’s capital as developed in 

the L’Enfant, McMillan, and 

other historic plans, as well as 

about the history of planning 

and development of the nation’s 

capital and individual memorials. 

◦ Offer additional living history 

programs. 

◦ Offer multilingual programs. 

◦ Provide educational programs 

about sustainability. 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Educate visitors about how the 

National Mall is the nation’s civic 

stage and gathering place, the 

history of First Amendment expression in a democracy, national 

celebrations, and the nation’s 

capital as a civic stage for all 

kinds of cultural and other 

activities. 

◦ Offer multilingual and educational publications and more 

large-print publications. 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Provide information about 

walking opportunities and trails. 

◦ Educate visitors about healthy 

parks / healthy lifestyles, plant 

materials/gardens, natural resources, sustainable practices 

and ecosystems, and stewardship 

activities (including the 

importance of recycling, 

reducing waste, and reusing 

items). 

171
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

6.2 Educational 

Programs and Exhibits: 

Actions (cont.) 

 visitor contact stations rather than having 

a single visitor center to provide visitor 

orientation, information, and education. 

◦ Educate visitors about civic space and First 

Amendment demonstrations, history, 

commemorative works, historic plans and 

the development of the capital city, 

healthy lifestyles, and sustainability 

(including the importance of recycling, 

reducing waste, and reusing items as a 

stewardship message). 

◦ Offer additional living history programs. 

◦ Offer multilingual programs. 

◦ Provide educational, stewardship, or 

informational components at all visitor 

facilities, including restrooms. 

6.3 Guided Tours Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The National Park Service and 

others provide sightseeing, bicycling, walking, and cell phone tours. Walking tour 

brochures and maps, as well as cell phone tours, are offered during the National Cherry 

Blossom Festival and at other special events and national celebrations. 

Technological advances, such as cell phones and portable media players, offer opportunities 

to reach visitors at times and locations convenient to them. 

Actions • Continue to offer NPS bicycle and 

walking tours. 

• Continue to incorporate technology to 

diversify NPS educational tours (e.g., 

cell phone or downloadable tours). 

• Continue to develop NPS programs and 

handouts related to national 

celebrations, anniversaries, and special 

events. 

• Jointly promote walking and bicycle 

tours through Cultural Tourism DC. 

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Provide more NPS guided walking/ 

bicycling interpretive tours and brochures. 

◦ Emphasize multi-season touring 

opportunities (spring cherry blossoms, fall 

colors). 

◦ Offer multiple thematic walking tour 

brochures or cell phone tours (e.g., 

development of D.C., civic stage / First 

Amendment, presidential memorials, tree 

guides, seasonal guides, exploring with 

children). 

◦ Provide multilingual tours, perhaps by 

portable media players, cell phones, or 

other means.

6.4 Entertainment Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Various locations are used for 

entertaining educational programs and performances, including concerts, small group 

performances, military tattoos, school band performances, Screen on the Green (movies), 

and Kennedy Center simulcasts. 

Actions • Continue to offer opportunities for 

variety in entertainment at existing 

venues (Sylvan Theater, the D.C. War 

Memorial, lower approachway of the 

Lincoln Memorial, the Thomas Jefferson 

Memorial plaza) and at temporary locations set up for the event performances. 

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Facilitate increased entertainment through 

improved or additional venues designed 

with the necessary infrastructure. 

◦ Encourage thematically appropriate 

performances, entertainment, and 

educational programs at new visitor food 

service destinations (if feasible). 

◦ Use small-scale programs or 

entertainment to enhance the pedestrian 

experience.

 

172
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — National Mall Concepts 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

6.3 Guided Tours: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Provide multilingual tours, 

perhaps by portable media 

players, cell phones, or other 

means. 

◦ Offer multiple thematic walking 

tour brochures or cell phone 

tours (e.g., development of D.C., 

civic stage / First Amendment, 

presidential memorials, tree 

guides, seasonal guides, 

exploring with children). 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Provide more guided walking/ 

bicycling interpretive tours and 

brochures. 

◦ Emphasize multi-season touring 

opportunities (spring cherry 

blossoms, fall colors). 

6.4 Entertainment: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Facilitate increased entertainment through improved or 

additional venues designed with 

the necessary infrastructure. 

◦ Encourage thematically appropriate performances, entertainment, and educational programs 

at new visitor food service 

destinations (if feasible). 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Facilitate entertainment through 

improved infrastructure. 

173
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

6.5 Recreational 

Activities 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Informal or passive recreation, 

such as walking, picnicking, reading, sunning, kite flying, Frisbee, and play, occurs 

everywhere. 

A variety of recreational activities are available, including softball, volleyball, kickball, running, 

rugby, soccer, kickball, bicycling, and football. Some areas are used for recreational sports 

leagues and are permitted through the D.C. Department of Parks and Recreation. Seasonal 

ice-skating occurs on natural ice when conditions permit. 

Organized sports require a permit. 

Swimming or wading in fountains and the Tidal Basin is prohibited. 

Pavement and surfaces are not conducive to some types of recreation, such as running or inline skating. 

Skateboarding is prohibited since it damages memorials, curbing, steps, and walls. 

Actions • Continue a mix of recreational activities, 

with some authorized locations used by 

organized sport leagues. 

• Reconfigure recreation fields to 

accommodate the Vietnam Veterans 

Memorial Center. 

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Expand recreational opportunities to meet 

evolving recreational needs; improve field 

conditions. 

◦ Improve surface materials to better 

accommodate some recreational activities. 

◦ Improve connections to other nearby 

recreation facilities in East Potomac Park. 

◦ Improve trail connections along the 

Washington Waterfront and along the 

Potomac and Anacostia rivers. 

◦ Design all facilities, curbs, and steps to 

discourage skateboarding. 

◦ Develop an online permitting system for 

athletic fields.

6.6 Commercial 

Recreational 

Activities 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): While additional recreational 

services may be desired, some may be outside existing contractual agreements. Actual 

future services and facilities will be contingent on a park assessment of the economic 

feasibility, whether the proposed services are necessary and appropriate, and under what 

authority these services could be offered. An example of an existing commercial activity is 

the rental of seasonal paddleboats at the Tidal Basin. 

Actions • Assess the economic feasibility, necessity, and appropriateness of recreation 

services to determine the amount/level 

and type of such services to be offered. 

• Continue current commercial activities. 

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Expand and possibly diversify recreational 

activities, including potential recreation 

equipment rentals: 

- rowboats and kayaks at the Tidal Basin 

- model boats at Constitution Gardens 

Lake 

- ice skates at Union Square/ Capitol 

reflecting pool 

- bicycles 

- kites at the Washington Monument 

grounds

◦ Work with city bicycle rental programs. 

 

174
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — National Mall Concepts 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

6.5 Recreational Activities: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Develop an online permitting 

system for athletic fields. 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Improve surface materials to 

better accommodate some 

recreational activities. 

◦ Design curbs and steps to 

discourage skateboarding. 

◦ Develop an online permitting 

system for athletic fields. 

• Same as alternative B plus 

◦ Expand opportunities to meet 

evolving recreational needs; 

improve field conditions. 

◦ Improve connections to other 

nearby recreation facilities in East 

Potomac Park. 

◦ Improve trail connections along 

the Washington Waterfront and 

along the Potomac and 

Anacostia rivers. 

6.6 Commercial Recreational Activities: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing 

page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Improve conditions and the 

variety of recreation equipment 

rentals. 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Expand recreational activities, 

including potential recreation 

equipment rentals: 

- rowboats and kayaks at the 

Tidal Basin 

- model boats at Constitution 

Gardens Lake 

- ice skates at Union Square/ 

Capitol reflecting pool 

- lawn chairs

◦ Continue offsite bicycle rentals. 

175
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

7. VISITOR AMENITIES 

7.1 Architectural 

Character 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Historic structures and 

memorials are unique and contribute to the National Mall character. Visitor 

amenities developed for memorials are generally compatible with the specific 

memorial’s character. Historic buildings such as Survey Lodge and Monument 

Lodge on the Washington Monument grounds, or the Lockkeeper’s House near 

17th Street and Constitution Avenue, have been or are being adaptively reused 

to provide visitor amenities. Their character contributes to telling stories about the 

National Mall. 

The variety of architectural styles in visitor facilities does not contribute to a unified 

identity and awareness of an NPS management presence. 

Facilities such as restrooms, food service, and information/contact stations may not 

be recognizable or easy to find because there is no common architectural and 

graphic character. 

Newer visitor facilities developed since the mid 1990s have had a consistent use of 

materials, colors, and textures (e.g., refreshment stands on the Mall and north 

and south of the Lincoln Memorial), and are sustainable (geothermal). 

Other facilities are not readily apparent; their color, architectural character, 

materials, and appearance are not coordinated or compatible; and some look 

temporary or not in keeping with the importance of the National Mall. Some are 

nearing the end of their useful lives, were not designed for current use levels, or 

are no longer needed because of changing use or technology. Examples: 

◦ circular restrooms — Washington Monument, Constitution Gardens, and Ash Woods 

◦ refreshment stands or recreation equipment rental locations — Constitution Gardens, 

Tidal Basin, Jefferson Memorial 

◦ small kiosks for tickets or bus ticket sales — Washington Monument, Mall, FDR and 

Jefferson memorials, carousel 

◦ the U.S. Park Police stables, which include mobile structures and grapestake fencing, 

giving the facility a transient appearance. 

Actions • Make no change to the mixture of 

architectural styles on the National Mall. 

• Design all new visitor service facilities to be 

compatible with the character of the 

National Mall (e.g., the refreshment stands 

on the Mall and at the Lincoln Memorial), 

making them easily identifiable for visitors, 

strengthening the NPS identity, and denoting 

that they are secondary to national 

memorials. 

• Potentially develop a limited number of 

architecturally significant destination visitor 

facilities in certain locations (e.g., Union 

Square, Washington Monument, Constitution Gardens, Tidal Basin area). 

• Focus on cutting-edge, sustainable design 

solutions, exceeding the minimum 

requirement of a silver rating under the 

Leadership in Energy and Environmental 

Design (LEED) program. 

• Incorporate visible but subtle renewable 

energy components, such as photovoltaic 

solar energy and geothermal systems. 

• Design visitor facilities to withstand 

vandalism, forced entry, and skateboarding. 

 

176
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — National Mall Concepts 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

7. VISITOR AMENITIES 

7.1 Architectural Character: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Design all new visitor service facilities to be compatible with the 

character of the National Mall (e.g., 

the refreshment stands on the Mall 

and at the Lincoln Memorial), 

making them more identifiable for 

visitors, strengthening the NPS 

identity, and denoting that they are 

secondary to national memorials. 

• Design visitor facilities to withstand 

vandalism, forced entry, and skateboarding. 

• Similar to alternative A, except 

◦ Potentially develop a limited 

number of architecturally significant destination visitor facilities 

in certain locations (e.g., Union 

Square, Washington Monument, 

Constitution Gardens, Tidal Basin 

area). 

• Similar to alternative B, except 

◦ Focus on cutting-edge, sustainable design solutions, exceeding 

the silver rating under the LEED 

program. 

◦ Incorporate visible but subtle 

renewable energy components, 

such as photovoltaic solar energy 

and geothermal systems. 

177
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

7.2 Ornamental Water 

Features 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Water can be reflective or active 

and is highly attractive to visitors. The sound of water can muffle noise. 

Swimming and wading in memorial fountains is prohibited. 

Interactive water features, such as those at the German-American Friendship Garden, can 

provide opportunities for visitors to cool off and have fun. 

Actions • Retain reflecting pools and active water 

features. 

• Retain reflecting pools and active water 

features; add some new water features, 

including interactive water features. 

7.3 Site Furnishings Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Park furniture remains uncoordinated; some is outdated and difficult to maintain. Some site furnishings were developed 

for a specific memorial. 

Furnishings are diverse, with more than 10 kinds of seating, 5 types of bollards and post-andchain fences, 8 kinds of light fixtures (in addition to memorial lights, ground lights, and 

fountain lighting); 5 kinds of drinking fountains, and more than 8 types of trash 

receptacles when planning began. 

Actions • Maintain present site furnishings. • Provide new, coordinated, high-quality, 

compatible furnishings, including seasonal 

tables and chairs, as well as trash/ recycling 

containers, curbs, signs, shelters, drinking 

fountains, and temporary components such 

as fencing. Design to be sensitive to the 

character of the historic landscape and to 

visually connect different areas on the National Mall to establish a sense of place and 

an overall identity. 

• Incorporate the following character-defining 

components for furnishings: 

◦ historic benches, including the NPS 

standard Washington bench 

◦ historic lighting (Olmsted, Twin twenties, 

Washington globe, Saratoga lights) 

◦ furnishings specifically designed for 

memorials (seating, trash receptacles, 

signs, drinking fountains, light fixtures, 

etc.) 

• Incorporate sustainable designs into all new 

visitor facilities for ease of maintenance and 

use. 

7.4 Paving Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The use of various types of paving does not contribute to a sense of place or character. Current paving includes gravel, 

asphalt, plain or brushed concrete, exposed aggregate concrete, brick, stone (cut granite, 

marble, flagstone), and concrete pavers. 

Loose paving material (e.g., gravel) migrates onto paved walks and into grass, is slippery, and 

creates dust, resulting in complaints. It may not be accessible to people with disabilities. 

Actions • Maintain, repair, and replace current 

paving as budgets and staffing allow. 

• Develop a low-maintenance, sustainable, 

universally accessible paving system for 

sidewalks, walkways, and crosswalks on the 

National Mall to improve the visitor experience and park operations; ensure that the 

surface would be suitable for pedestrian 

access and recreational activities, as well as 

durable enough for event, operations, and 

maintenance access. Encourage the use of 

porous or other sustainable approaches. 

 

178
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — National Mall Concepts 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

7.2 Ornamental Water Features: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Retain reflecting pools and active 

water features; add some new 

water features, including interactive 

water features. 

• Same as alternative B. 

7.3 Site Furnishings: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Provide new, coordinated, highquality, compatible furnishings, 

including but not limited to 

trash/recycling containers, curbs, 

signs, drinking fountains, and 

temporary fencing. 

• Incorporate the following characterdefining components for 

furnishings: 

◦ historic benches, including the 

NPS standard Washington bench 

◦ historic lighting (Olmsted, Twin 

twenties, Washington globe, 

Saratoga lights) 

◦ furnishings specifically designed 

for memorials (seating, trash 

receptacles, signs, drinking 

fountains, light fixtures, etc.) 

• Same as alternative A plus 

◦ Develop replacement furnishings 

at memorials (seating, trash 

receptacles, signs) to unify the 

National Mall except for custom 

furnishings such as seating 

specifically designed for 

memorials 

• Same as alternative B plus 

◦ Ensure that furnishings are 

sustainable. 

7.4 Paving: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Coordinate new areas of paving 

with the most common and 

visible adjacent paving.

• Develop a low-maintenance, sustainable, universally accessible 

paving system to improve the visitor 

experience and park operations; 

consider paving that could simulate 

the appearance of gravel. 

• Same as alternative B plus 

◦ Consider porous paving if 

feasible, soft surfaces for 

jogging, and smooth surfaces for 

in-line skating or wheeled 

recreation. 

179
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

7.5 Lighting Guidelines Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The night sky in Washington, 

D.C., is dominated by lighting of five symbolic icons — the U.S. Capitol, the White House, 

the Washington Monument, the Lincoln Memorial, and the Thomas Jefferson Memorial. 

Other public and private buildings, memorials, public art, streets and walks, and park areas 

are lit to varying degrees, with the potential for conflict. 

Projects are reviewed by the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts; however, there is no written and 

approved lighting plan to protect the city’s nighttime character and provide guidance. 

Actions • Provide comments to the Commission 

of Fine Arts on lighting and work to 

retain the existing character while 

increasing the efficiency of light bulbs.

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Work closely with the National Capital 

Planning Commission, the Commission of 

Fine Arts, and the Architect of the Capitol 

to reestablish the lighting task force to 

develop an approved, written comprehensive lighting guideline for the 

monumental core area that addresses the 

following at a minimum: 

∗ protections to maintain dominant 

lighting of the five symbolic icons 

∗ desired lighting character for urban 

and park areas, character-defining elements such as statuary and building 

facades, pedestrian and vehicular 

areas, and transitions between 

different light levels 

∗ appropriate light levels (foot-candles or 

lumens) and light color (color rendition) 

for different areas 

∗ energy efficiency and sustainable 

lighting practices 

∗ light pollution / protection of night sky 

from excessive, horizontal light pollution (temporarily blinding light) 

∗ security lighting 

◦ Improve the welcoming atmosphere and 

safety by increasing pedestrian-oriented 

lighting throughout the National Mall; 

ensure that pedestrian lighting sources 

would not contribute to light pollution. 

7.6 Seating Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Seating is provided on benches, 

tables, and chairs; on steps; and on some walls. Bench seating (nearly 1,200 seats) is 

insufficient at some times and in some locations. Bench seating is often not facing 

memorials, views, or features. Shaded seating is highly desirable in the summer. 

Actions • Continue present seating. • Increase seating opportunities and locations 

for visitors to enjoy views or summer shade; 

provide seating for groups. 

• Design seating to meet the needs of people 

with disabilities. 

• Increase seating options by using benches, 

site components such as walls, and portable 

lawn chairs. Consider adding seating at 

some memorials. 

 

180
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — National Mall Concepts 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

7.5 Lighting Guidelines: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Work closely with the National 

Capital Planning Commission, 

the Commission of Fine Arts, and 

the Architect of the Capitol to 

reestablish the lighting task force 

to develop an approved, written 

comprehensive lighting guideline 

for the monumental core area 

that addresses the following at a 

minimum: 

∗ protections to maintain dominant lighting of the five symbolic icons 

∗ desired lighting character for 

urban and park areas, character-defining elements such 

as statuary and building 

facades, pedestrian and vehicular areas, and transitions 

between different light levels 

∗ appropriate light levels (footcandles or lumens) and light 

color (color rendition) for 

different areas 

∗ energy efficiency and sustainable lighting practices 

∗ light pollution / protection of 

night sky from excessive, 

horizontal light pollution 

(temporarily blinding light) 

∗ security lighting 

◦ Maintain present pedestrian 

lighting.

• Similar to alternative A except 

◦ Improve the welcoming atmosphere and safety by increasing 

pedestrian-oriented lighting 

throughout the National Mall; 

ensure that pedestrian lighting 

sources would not contribute to 

light pollution.

• Same as alternative B. 

7.6 Seating: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Increase numbers of benches and 

locate for enjoyment of views. 

Design seating to accommodate the 

needs of people with disabilities. 

• Same as alternative A plus . 

◦ Increase seating options by using 

site components such as walls. 

Increase seating at some 

memorials, including seating for 

groups. 

• Same as alternative B plus 

◦ Increase seating, including 

portable chairs, in areas used for 

active recreation, such as 

ballfields. 

181
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

7.7 Drinking Water Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Some drinking fountains have a 

delay feature, and drinking fountains need frequent repairs. Surfaces and basins may not 

be sanitary. During summer hydration is essential. 

Water bottles are readily available for purchase, and water is available at first-aid tents and 

EMS stations. Water bottles are also handed out at many events. 

Actions • Maintain drinking fountains. 

• Continue to make water bottles available at some events and first-aid stations. 

• Reduce the number of free-standing drinking 

fountains and concentrate drinking fountains 

near restrooms. 

• Provide new drinking fountains / drinking 

water stations designed to reduce the 

possibility of misuse (e.g., vandalism) and to 

facilitate filling reusable water bottles or 

taking care of pet water needs.

7.8 Food Service Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Food service is limited to 

refreshment stands and mobile carts. 

While additional food services may be desired, some may be outside existing contractual 

agreements. Actual future services and facilities will be contingent on a park assessment of 

the economic feasibility, whether the proposed services are necessary and appropriate, and 

under what authority these services could be offered. 

Actions • Assess the economic feasibility, 

necessity, and appropriateness of 

additional food service to determine the 

amount/level and type of such services 

to be offered. 

• Continue refreshment stands and 

mobile carts. 

• Same as the no-action alternative, plus if 

feasible 

◦ Provide more variety in types of food, 

including mobile carts, refreshment 

stands, and sit-down restaurants, and 

provide longer service hours.

◦ In some locations replace or upgrade 

existing facilities. 

◦ Provide several, well-located, convenient, 

attractive, and architecturally unique 

multipurpose facilities as pleasant places 

for visitors to sit and relax, with food 

service and infrastructure for programs, 

performances, and entertainment. 

◦ Encourage visitors to linger with highquality designs and pleasant surroundings, 

and concentrate trash and recycling at 

these locations to protect memorials. 

◦ Consider multiple food service contracts. 

◦ Use well-designed, clearly identifiable 

mobile food carts, coordinated with signs 

and site furnishings, to help convey the 

NPS stewardship message during high-use 

seasons and special events.

7.9 Public Restrooms Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Restrooms are often insufficient 

for demand, are not well designed, and some are outdated and difficult to keep clean. 

Restrooms are not available east of 15th Street. Museum restrooms must be accessed 

through security checkpoints and are not open evenings. 

Restrooms are usually not provided near refreshment stands, so hand washing is not possible. 

Actions • Continue present restroom facilities. • Provide additional conveniently located visitor restrooms throughout the National Mall 

and service more frequently. Locate and size 

some restrooms to flexibly accommodate increased demand generated by events, tour 

buses, or peak-season visitation. 

 

182
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — National Mall Concepts 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

7.7 Drinking Water: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Reduce the number of freestanding drinking fountains and 

concentrate more drinking 

fountains and drinking water near 

staffed and monitored restrooms. 

• Provide new drinking fountains / 

drinking water stations designed to 

reduce the possibility of misuse 

(e.g., vandalism) and to facilitate 

filling reusable water bottles or 

taking care of pet water needs. 

7.8 Food Service: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative, 

plus if feasible 

◦ Replace or upgrade outdated 

food service facilities. 

◦ Seek to improve and diversify 

food service, but rely on refreshment stands. 

• Same as the no-action alternative, 

plus if feasible 

◦ In some locations replace or 

upgrade existing facilities. 

◦ Provide well-located, convenient, 

and attractive multipurpose facilities, with food service, indoor/ 

outdoor seating, and potential 

for performance venues. 

◦ Consider longer service hours. 

◦ Consider multiple contracts to 

provide food service. 

• Similar to alternative B, except if 

feasible 

◦ Focus on providing more food 

variety, but still rely primarily on 

refreshment stands. 

7.9 Public Restrooms: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Provide new restrooms near food 

service facilities. 

• Replace outdated restrooms. 

• Provide public restrooms approximately every quarter mile and keep 

them open longer. 

• Increase the capacity of some existing restrooms; at new restrooms; 

monitor cleanliness. 

• Add restrooms near food service 

(including some that are sustainable, automated, self-cleaning, 

and available day and night in some 

areas). 

183
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

7.9. Public Restrooms: 

Actions (cont.) 

• Expand capacity in some existing restrooms; 

increase staffing; monitor cleanliness. 

• Consider sustainable, automated, selfcleaning restrooms (which sanitize surfaces 

after use) to extend operating hours of 

facilities. 

• Provide restrooms at new or renovated food 

service areas. 

8. HEALTH, PUBLIC SAFETY, AND SECURITY 

8.1 Incompatible 

Activities 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Highly used areas with many 

different activities can result in safety concerns or use conflicts. Examples are bicycle use 

on sidewalks or softball games near areas where people are picnicking or walking. 

Actions • Continue multiple uses of different 

areas. 

• Continue to offer bicycle parking at 

events to reduce bike riding in highly 

crowded areas. 

• Continue to offer bicycle parking at events 

to reduce bike riding in highly crowded 

areas. 

• Redesign areas to safely differentiate 

multiple uses (e.g., separate bicycle lanes). 

8.2 Pedestrian Safety Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Pedestrian countdown times at 

street crossings are too short for many visitors; jaywalking is common in some areas. 

Some pedestrian walks are not lit. 

Actions • Continue present conditions. • Increase pedestrian street-crossing times; 

add mid-block crossing points; consider 

traffic-calming measures (such as raised 

crosswalks); improved crosswalks; provide 

wider waiting areas; explore in-pavement 

lighting; and redesign roadways to reconnect 

park areas and improve pedestrian safety. 

• Better light pedestrian walkways for safety 

and peace of mind, emphasizing surface 

conditions and the pedestrian environment. 

• Add emergency call stations, with a 

coordinated design and located near 

orientation signs. 

8.3 Visitors with 

Disabilities 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Visitors with disabilities find 

some areas difficult to access due to paving materials. 

Some furniture does not meet accessibility guidelines for people with disabilities. 

Actions • Maintain present paving materials. 

• Improve park furniture, and improve 

access for visitors with disabilities. 

• Provide universally accessible paving 

materials to improve conditions for all 

visitors; provide additional facilities for 

visitors with disabilities. 

• Offer wheelchairs or scooter rentals at 

central locations. 

• Increase parking for visitors with disabilities. 

8.4 Mass Notification 

System 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Visitors must be notified of 

severe weather conditions or other circumstances. 

No coordinated mass notification system is available. 

Actions • Continue emergency notification by 

park police and ranger staff. 

• Provide a mass notification capability to keep 

visitors and staff informed of what to do in 

case of weather or other emergencies; 

coordinate with an upgraded 

communication network. 

 

184
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — National Mall Concepts 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

• Provide new restrooms near food 

service facilities. 

• Replace outdated restrooms. 

• Provide public restrooms approximately every quarter mile and keep 

them open longer. 

• Increase the capacity of some 

existing restrooms; at new restrooms; monitor cleanliness. 

• Add restrooms near food service 

(including some that are sustainable, automated, self-cleaning, 

and available day and night in some 

areas). 

8. HEALTH, PUBLIC SAFETY, AND SECURITY 

8.1 Incompatible Activities: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Continue to offer bicycle parking at 

events to reduce bike riding in 

highly crowded areas. 

• Redesign areas to safely accommodate multiple uses (e.g., separate 

bicycle lanes). 

• Redesign and separate circulation 

systems to improve safety and 

reduce use conflicts. 

8.2 Pedestrian Safety: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Increase pedestrian street-crossing 

countdowns; add some midblock 

crossing points. 

• Emphasize lighting of memorials, 

rather than pedestrian walkways. 

• Increase pedestrian street-crossing 

times; add mid-block crossings; 

provide wider waiting areas, improved crosswalks, special paving; 

install in-pavement lighting; provide 

pedestrian tunnels or bridges; redesign roadways to reconnect park 

areas, improve pedestrian safety. 

• Better light pedestrian walkways for 

safety and peace of mind. 

• Add emergency call stations, with a 

coordinated design and located 

near orientation signs. 

• Same as alternative B plus 

◦ Light pedestrian walkways in a 

manner that emphasizes surface 

conditions (low or hidden light 

sources for path lighting). 

8.3 Visitors with Disabilities: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Provide universally accessible paving 

materials to improve conditions for 

all visitors; provide additional 

facilities for visitors with disabilities. 

• Provide universally accessible paving 

materials to improve conditions for 

all visitors. 

8.4 Mass Notification System: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Provide a mass notification capability to keep visitors and staff 

informed of what to do in case of 

weather or other emergencies; 

coordinate with an upgraded 

communication network. 

• Same as alternative A. • Same as alternative A. 

185
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

8.5 Weather-Related 

Health Problems 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Hot, humid weather and air 

pollution contribute to visitor discomfort and health issues for the public and park staff. 

Weather-related warnings and staff activity restrictions are instituted as needed. 

Shaded areas are highly desirable during hot weather. 

Actions • Continue current warning systems. • Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Add interactive water features and misters 

in paved areas to allow visitors to cool off. 

◦ Increase seating in shaded areas and 

provide shade in some areas. 

9. PARK OPERATIONS 

9.1 Deferred Maintenance 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The National Mall has a large 

amount of deferred maintenance (repair) and related capital improvement projects that are 

already included in the NPS project management system. 

Actions • Address deferred maintenance as 

funding and staffing allow. 

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Redefine some projects to allow more use, 

to better protect resources, and to 

upgrade and provide sufficient visitor 

amenities. 

9.2 Park Standards Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): NPS planning typically 

indentifies management zones for park areas to prescribe how areas are to be managed. 

Best practices include the development of written and photographic performance standards. 

Actions • Continue to use current park standards, 

which are outdated and limited. 

• Continue to develop a pilot program on 

new standards. 

• Develop park standards to clearly define 

desired qualities for different areas of the 

National Mall; address activities such as 

inspections, monitoring, maintenance 

(grounds, memorials, and other facilities), 

and education and interpretation, as well as 

activities by other park divisions. 

• Use best practices and approaches to achieve 

desired standards for maintenance and 

operations to improve the National Mall’s 

visual appearance and operational efficiency; 

maximize sustainable practices. 

9.3 Maintenance 

Activities and 

Operations 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Park staff may not be able to 

keep up with planned and scheduled maintenance due to multiple, often conflicting and 

immediate demands. A study of best management practices revealed that some other sites 

use special teams to address immediate special project needs. 

Under the turf management program half of the Mall area (3rd Street to 14th Street) is 

closed every other winter for restoration, making it unavailable for events or demonstrations. 

Public comments indicate that the snow fencing used to protect turf areas undergoing rest 

and rehabilitation are out of character with the desired appearance for the National Mall. 

Existing infrastructure has not been designed to facilitate routine maintenance activities and 

operations, or for special events and demonstrations. 

 

186
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — National Mall Concepts 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

8.5 Weather-Related Health Problems: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Provide permanent or temporary 

water misters in paved areas 

during very hot weather. 

◦ Add interactive water features to 

allow visitors to cool off. 

◦ Increase seating in shaded areas. 

• Same as alternative B. 

9. PARK OPERATIONS 

9.1 Deferred Maintenance: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Redefine some projects to allow 

more use, to better protect resources, and to upgrade and 

provide sufficient visitor amenities.

• Same as alternative B. 

9.2 Park Standards: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Develop park standards to clearly 

define desired qualities for different 

areas of the National Mall; address 

activities such as inspections, monitoring, maintenance (grounds, 

memorials, and other facilities), and 

education and interpretation, as 

well as activities by other park 

divisions. 

• Use best practices and approaches 

to achieve desired standards for 

maintenance and operations to 

improve the National Mall’s visual 

appearance and operational 

efficiency; maximize sustainable 

practices. 

• Same as alternative A. • Same as alternative A. 

9.3 Maintenance Activities and Operations: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing 

page. 

187
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

9.3 Maintenance 

Activities and 

Operations: 

Opportunities, 

Problems, and 

Concerns (Existing 

Conditions) — 

cont. 

Existing infrastructure has not been designed to facilitate routine maintenance activities and 

operations, or for special events and demonstrations. 

Equipment such as pumping systems for water features at various memorials (Korean War 

Veterans, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, George Mason, WWII, and Constitution Gardens) are 

difficult to maintain. 

The large homeless population challenges resources and maintenance. Tall shrub beds 

provide areas that are used for storage and sleeping. Federal regulations prohibit camping 

on the National Mall. 

Restrooms and fountains may be misused for bathing or toileting. 

Skateboarding can damage memorials and historic resources and is not allowed within the 

National Mall. 

Actions • Clean restrooms twice daily. Address 

deferred maintenance as budgets and 

staffing allow. 

• For turf management, continue to close 

half of the Mall (3rd to 14th streets) 

every other winter for restoration. 

• Continue to use a visual quality team to 

identify and prioritize needed projects; 

establish a quick response team to 

make repairs and to improve conditions 

and appearance. 

• Continue to reduce the use of snow 

fencing to restrict access to certain 

areas. 

• Similar to the no-action alternative, except 

◦ Design and construct new facilities to be 

able to achieve the highest maintenance 

standards, generate respect, and be 

vandal-resistant; incorporate cutting edge 

sustainable facility and site design measures into all facilities. 

◦ For turf management close smaller areas 

more frequently and provide more 

equitable opportunities for all uses — 

events, demonstrations, recreation, and 

general visitation, as well as 

restoration/rehabilitation.

◦ Increase restroom cleaning to cover hours 

of visitation; use technology such as selfcleaning, automated public restrooms in 

some areas to reduce maintenance. 

◦ Design or retrofit water features to be 

sustainable; install durable, easy-tomaintain, and standardized recirculation 

systems. 

◦ To protect areas during rehabilitation and 

restoration, develop an attractive, durable, 

temporary fence system (in lieu of snow 

fencing) or another means to notify 

visitors when areas should not be used. 

Ensure the system is lightweight, not 

easily scaled, and easy to store, transport, 

and install. 

◦ Reduce or eliminate tall shrub beds and 

areas allowing cover and storage, in 

keeping with the original landscape 

design intent. 

9.4 Operational Access Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Vehicular access has not been 

provided to all locations for park operations (deliveries, trash removal, grounds maintenance), resulting in vehicles driving over curbs and damaging resources, as well as making 

operations less efficient. 

Actions • Continue limited operational access in 

some areas. 

• Provide operational access as circulation 

systems are upgraded. 

• Develop walkways wide enough to accommodate maintenance, staff, and operational 

vehicles, as well as the public, and that can 

withstand the weight of vehicles used for 

park operations and event deliveries. 

 

188
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — National Mall Concepts 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

9.3 Maintenance Activities and Operations: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing 

page 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Rehabilitate facilities to be sustainable and to reduce maintenance. 

◦ Install durable, easy-to-maintain, 

and standardized pumping 

systems for water features.

◦ Design new facilities for sustainable operations and efficient 

maintenance. 

◦ In cooperation with the city, 

comprehensively study the 

adequacy of utilities and the 

sewer system, and implement 

recommendations. 

◦ To protect areas during rehabilitation and restoration, 

develop an attractive, durable, 

temporary fence system (in lieu 

of snow fencing). It should be 

lightweight, not easily scaled, 

and easy to store, transport, and 

install. 

• Same as alternative A plus 

◦ Utilize electronic facility monitoring to schedule opening/ closing of restrooms and cleaning. 

• Same as alternative A, except 

◦ Use technology such as selfcleaning, automated public 

restrooms in some areas to 

reduce maintenance. 

◦ Develop means other than snow 

fencing to protect areas during 

rest and rehabilitation periods. 

9.4 Operational Access: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Provide operational access as 

circulation systems are upgraded. 

• Same as alternative A plus 

◦ Develop walkways wide enough 

to accommodate maintenance/ 

operational vehicles and that can 

withstand the weight of vehicles 

used for park operations and 

event deliveries. 

• Same as alternative A. 

189
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

9.5 Energy Use Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): There are over 20,000 light 

fixtures in the park. 

The National Mall and Memorial Parks is the highest energy user within the national park 

system. 

The National Park Service is to further improve energy efficiency by 2010.

Actions • Use energy-efficient bulbs that would 

be compatible with the historic scene. 

• Increase the use of sustainable 

transportation (electric cars) for park 

operations, and explore the efficiency 

and reliability of new technology as it 

emerges. 

• Meet NPS energy efficiency goals. 

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Seek renewable energy sources to reduce 

energy demand and supply energy for 

lighting and for water feature pumping 

systems (e.g., a large-scale photovoltaic 

system on the roof of the Interior 

Building).

9.6 Sustainability 

Indicators 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): NPS Management Policies 2006

require environmental leadership and high standards for sustainable design, energy 

efficiency, and reduction of greenhouse gases, while providing opportunities to educate 

the public. All major facilities are required to meet the LEED silver rating. 

Recently completed concession refreshment stands and retail facilities north and south of the 

Lincoln Memorial use a closed loop geothermal heating and air conditioning system that 

also supports a freezer, refrigerator, and ice maker. The system is non-polluting, improves 

indoor air quality, lowers energy consumption, has almost no environmental impact, 

eliminates outdoor condensing units, and conserves water in ice making (saving 2.1 million 

gallons of fresh water annually). 

Actions • Continue present programs. • Provide public education about sustainable 

projects. 

• Advance the principles of sustainability: 

◦ Participate in the Environmental 

Protection Agency’s “Climate Friendly 

Parks” program. 

◦ Reduce solid waste; increase recycling and 

use of biodegradable products. 

◦ Reduce water use; retain stormwater for 

irrigation. 

◦ Reduce soil compaction. 

◦ Reduce energy consumption, greenhouse 

gas emissions, and air pollutants; use 

renewable energy sources; maximize 

energy efficiency. 

◦ Maximize public transportation; increase 

use of alternative fuels. 

◦ Ensure that new or replacement facilities 

meet the LEED silver rating. 

◦ Strive to achieve the highest LEED 

standard practicable. 

◦ Determine the park’s carbon footprint 

(estimated through the Climate Leadership in Parks program). 

◦ Reduce greenhouse gases by 18% by 

2012. 

◦ Implement recommendations of the 

Sustainable Sites InitiativeTM

.

 

190
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — National Mall Concepts 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

9.5 Energy Use: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Seek renewable energy sources 

for lighting and water feature 

pumping systems (e.g., a largescale photovoltaic system on the 

roof of the Interior Building). 

◦ Take the lead in demonstration/interactive programs for 

efficient energy use.

9.6 Sustainability Indicators: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Advance the principles of sustainability: 

◦ Participate in the Environmental 

Protection Agency’s “Climate 

Friendly Parks” program. 

◦ Reduce solid waste; increase 

recycling and use of biodegradable products. 

◦ Reduce water use; retain 

stormwater for irrigation. 

◦ Reduce soil compaction. 

◦ Reduce energy consumption, 

greenhouse gas emissions, and 

air pollutants; use renewable 

energy sources; maximize energy 

efficiency. 

◦ Maximize public transportation; 

increase use of alternative fuels. 

◦ Ensure that new or replacement 

facilities meet the LEED silver 

rating. 

• Same as alternative A. • Same as alternative A plus 

◦ Strive to achieve the highest 

LEED standard practicable. 

◦ Determine the park’s carbon 

footprint. 

◦ Reduce greenhouse gases by 

18% by 2012. 

◦ Implement recommendations of 

the Sustainable Sites InitiativeTM

. 

191
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

9.7 Solid Waste 

Management 

and Recycling 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Park staff remove 3–4 tons of 

trash daily; a major event may produce 25 tons or more of trash. 

The National Park Service has been working with the Environmental Protection Agency to 

improve solid waste management and recycling for events and daily operations. 

Emptying heavy trash barrels by hand can result in injury. The park does not have the capability to mechanically empty trash containers. 

Plastic bottles generate a large amount of trash, and recycling is not universal. 

Actions • Study and implement feasible waste 

management and recycling systems to 

increase efficiencies. 

• Expand recycling at events. 

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Increase trash removal to cover hours of 

visitation; plan circulation routes for 

efficient mechanized trash removal.

◦ Require recycling at events; convey the 

importance of recycling, reducing waste, 

and reusing items. 

◦ Increase NPS identity and stewardship 

messaging for recycling efforts.

9.8 Communication 

Network 

(Also see “6. Visitor 

Information, Education, 

and Enjoyment.”)

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Major communications and 

fiber-optic lines are close to the study area. 

Communication capabilities for park operations, events, public information/education, emergencies, or media use are inefficient or lacking. 

Temporary communication systems are installed as needed for events. 

There is increased public demand for access to wireless communication. 

Actions • Continue to install temporary 

communication systems as needed for 

events. 

• Provide state-of-the-art communications 

with dedicated lines for NPS operations 

(phones / computers), law enforcement, 

emergency communications (audio lines / 

loudspeakers / mass notification system), 

media, and event sponsor use. 

• Provide public wireless access and landline 

pay phones (in cooperation with service 

providers). 

• Provide emergency call stations. 

9.9 Staffing Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Present staffing numbers are 

lower than when there were fewer memorials and facilities to maintain. The staffing of 

some authorized positions has been deferred. 

The park completes core operations planning to align staffing needs to the core mission. 

Actions • Maintain present staffing levels. • Use core operations planning to match 

staffing needs to the core mission; examine 

staffing needs and correlate with park 

standards. 

• Reassess staffing levels and fill authorized 

positions. Likely increase staffing for resource 

management, communications (web, 

technology, media, and public information), 

maintenance, events, special project teams, 

and law enforcement to manage high 

volumes of use, events, and event recovery. 

 

192
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — National Mall Concepts 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

9.7 Solid Waste Management and Recycling: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing 

page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Increase NPS identity and 

stewardship messaging for 

recycling efforts. 

• Same as alternative A plus 

◦ Plan circulation routes for 

efficient mechanized trash 

removal. 

◦ Require recycling at events. 

• Same as alternative B plus 

◦ Convey the importance of recycling, reducing waste, and 

reusing items. 

9.8 Communication Network: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Provide a state-of-the-art communication network with dedicated 

lines for NPS operations (phones/ 

computers), law enforcement, 

emergency communications (audio 

lines / loudspeakers / mass notification system), media, and event 

sponsor use. 

• Provide public wireless access and 

landline pay phones (in cooperation 

with service providers). 

• Same as alternative A plus 

◦ Provide emergency call stations. 

• Same as alternative B. 

9.9 Staffing: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Use core operations planning to 

match staffing needs to the core 

mission; examine staffing needs and 

correlate with park standards. Likely 

increase staffing for resource management and communications 

(web, technology, media, and 

public information). 

• Similar to alternative A except 

◦ Likely increase staffing for maintenance, events, special project 

teams, and law enforcement to 

manage high volumes of use, 

events, and event recovery. 

• Similar to alternative A, except 

◦ Likely increase staff to provide 

more recreational and educational programs. 

193
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

9.10 Park Partners and 

Volunteer Activities 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The National Park Service has 

several authorized partnerships and agreements to facilitate park management. 

The Trust for the National Mall is the authorized NPS fundraising partner. 

Eastern National is the cooperating association and operates educational bookstores. 

Volunteers-in-Parks help meet various needs. 

Actions • Continue to work with authorized 

private and public partners, nonprofit 

organizations, and volunteers to 

support park goals, provide services, 

supplement park staff, or undertake 

specific projects.

• Same as the no-action alternative. 

9.11 Commercial Business Services 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Food, retail, transportation, and 

recreational services are provided through concession contracts. Current contracts have 

provisions that limit competition. As contracts expire, they will be replaced by revised 

contracts. 

New concession contracts are open to competition, no longer include provisions that limit 

competition, must be economically viable, and must be determined to be both necessary 

and appropriate. 

Actions • Assess the economic feasibility, 

necessity, and appropriateness of any 

proposed changes to services, including 

service types and locations, appropriate 

educational messages, and desired 

identity. 

• Continue currently authorized visitor 

services. 

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Require recycling and waste reduction. 

◦ Incorporate public information about 

recycling / waste reduction and green 

practices. 

◦ Offer multiple contract opportunities to 

provide visitor services determined to be 

necessary and appropriate. 

THE MALL 

10. UNION SQUARE (1ST TO 3RD STREETS) 

The 11.4-acre Union Square, with its presidential memorial to Ulysses S. Grant, will remain an essential civic space 

in the immediate vicinity of the legislative branch of the government, providing opportunities for demonstrations 

and events. 

10.1 Opportunities, 

Problems, and 

Concerns (Existing 

Conditions) 

Union Square lacks visitor amenities and infrastructure to attract visitation or to meet the 

needs of special events. Its overall condition is serious. 

The Capitol backdrop makes this area an essential civic and First Amendment space. 

Wide social trails have developed at the end of pedestrian walks on the Mall. 

Multiple levels or grade changes inhibit universal access and include narrow walks that limit 

pedestrian circulation and park operations. 

10.2 Vision Emphasis • The Grant Memorial and the Capitol 

reflecting pool would remain the focal 

point of the east end of the National 

Mall, the foreground of the U.S. 

Capitol. 

• Union Square would fulfill its McMillan plan 

purpose of connecting the U.S. Capitol 

grounds with the National Mall, as well as 

providing more convenient and flexible land 

use at the foot of the Capitol. The Grant 

Memorial would be the focal point of a symmetrical and formally laid out civic square 

based on historic precedents, It would be a 

popular, active, and dignified day and evening destination that could be easily transformed into a large venue for First Amendment demonstrations and events. Grade 

changes would be addressed to improve 

pedestrian access and circulation for all. The 

square would highlight sustainable water 

management practices, with reflective and 

interactive water features. The sound of 

 

194
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — The Mall 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

9.10 Park Partners and Volunteer Activities: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing 

page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. 

9.11 Commercial Business Services: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Require recycling and waste 

reduction. 

◦ Incorporate public information 

about recycling / waste reduction 

and green practices. 

• Same as alternative A plus 

◦ Offer multiple contracts to better 

provide visitor services that have 

been determined to be necessary 

and appropriate. 

• Same as alternative A. 

THE MALL 

10. UNION SQUARE (1ST TO 3RD STREETS) 

 See facing page. 

10.1 Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• The Grant Memorial would be the 

focal point of a redesigned civic 

square and reflecting pool, 

highlighting the former Washington 

Canal and the history of the U.S. 

Botanic Garden site. 

• The Grant Memorial would be the 

focal point of a dignified, paved 

urban civic square that would be 

redesigned to highlight views, meet 

event needs, be a visitor destination, and offer comfort, convenience, and entertainment. It would 

also be a venue for demonstrations 

and events. 

• The Grant Memorial would be the 

focal point of an active, paved 

urban civic square that would be a 

visitor destination and that would 

showcase reflective and interactive 

water features with an environmentally friendly design to highlight sustainable water management 

practices. The area would be visually and physically connected to 

the U.S. Botanic Garden and U.S. 

Senate Youth Park and U.S. Botanic 

Garden Education and Outreach 

Center to the north. 

195
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

10.2 Vision Emphasis 

(cont.) 

 water would be used to muffle the noise of 

urban traffic. The area would be visually and 

physically connected to the U.S. Botanic 

Garden and U.S. Senate Youth Park and U.S. 

Botanic Garden Education and Outreach 

Center to the north and would incorporate 

floral plantings. 

10.3 Ulysses S. Grant 

Memorial 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The Ulysses S. Grant Memorial, 

one of five presidential memorials on the National Mall, is in fair condition. Many people 

may be unaware of the memorial. 

Actions • Maintain the Ulysses S. Grant Memorial.

• Provide wayside exhibits about the 

man, the memorial, and its history. 

• Restore the Ulysses S. Grant Memorial. 

• Provide wayside exhibits about the man, the 

memorial, and its history. 

10.4 Historic Resources Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The historic landscape has some 

integrity, and a few trees have been listed as “witness” trees because of their age. 

Actions • Continue to preserve components of 

the historic landscape that have 

integrity. 

• Resolve any outstanding cultural resource 

identification issues associated with Union 

Square in consultation with the D.C. Historic 

Preservation Office before developing plans. 

• Improve the condition of historic landscape 

components and incorporate them into a 

new design. 

• Protect and emphasize the historic east-west 

views between the U.S. Capitol and the 

Washington Monument, as well as view 

corridors along Pennsylvania and Maryland 

avenues terminating in historic statuary near 

1st Street. 

• Protect existing historic or “witness” trees. 

Minimize and redesign turf areas, but retain 

low plantings to create a sense of continuity 

with the historic landscape that was once 

home to the Botanic Garden. 

10.5 Capitol Reflecting 

Pool 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The Capitol Reflecting Pool has 

water quality, structural, and leaking problems. 

The size of the reflecting pool is an obstacle to pedestrian circulation. 

Actions • Maintain the reflecting pool, along with 

the Grant Memorial, as the focal point 

of the east end of the National Mall; 

undertake improvements to solve water 

quality, structural, and leaking problems 

as budgets and staffing allow. 

• Consider a smaller reflecting pool or water 

features to make the space more suited to 

various uses. 

• Reduce the water volume, and seek a nonpotable water source. 

• To increase enjoyment, consider adding vertical water jets to create a more enjoyable 

atmosphere by muffling traffic noise and 

providing play opportunities; consider redesigning the pool as a shallow sheet of interactive water that could be drained for demonstrations and special events or frozen for 

seasonal ice skating. 

 

196
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — The Mall 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

10.3 Ulysses S. Grant Memorial: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Restore the Ulysses S. Grant 

Memorial. 

• Provide wayside exhibits about the 

man, the memorial, and its history. 

• Same as alternative A. • Same as alternative A. 

10.4 Historic Resources: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Resolve any outstanding cultural 

resource identification issues 

associated with Union Square in 

consultation with the D.C. Historic 

Preservation Office before 

developing plans. 

• Improve the condition of historic 

landscape components and incorporate them into a new design. 

• Same as alternative A. • Same as alternative A. 

10.5 Capitol Reflecting Pool: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Redesign the reflecting pool to be 

smaller to facilitate pedestrian 

circulation. 

• Remove the reflecting pool. • Redesign the reflecting pool as a 

shallow, sustainable pool with 

interactive water features and that 

could be drained for demonstrations and events or frozen for ice 

skating. 

197
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

10.6 Demonstrations, 

Special Events, and 

National Celebrations 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The location of Union Square 

with the Capitol as the backdrop makes it very popular for demonstrations and special 

events. There are no utilities to facilitate events. 

Actions • Consistent with the First Amendment and federal regulations, continue to fully accommodate demonstrations. 

• Continue to permit events at Union 

Square, consistent with federal 

regulations; coordinate with the 

Architect of the Capitol as necessary. 

• Provide no infrastructure for 

demonstrations or special events.

• Similar to the no-action alternative, except 

◦ Redesign as a paved square to 

accommodate more use, including 

demonstrations and events. 

◦ Provide infrastructure, such as utilities and 

communication system networks 

(including media connections), for demonstrations and events. 

10.7 Access and 

Circulation 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Access and circulation are constrained by the size and configuration of the reflecting pool. 

The current parking function at the terminus of Maryland and Pennsylvania avenues 

diminishes the grand views of the Capitol defined in the L’Enfant and McMillan plans, and 

disconnects the avenues from the Capitol complex, the National Mall, and the city. 

The Architect of the Capitol has responsibility for roads surrounding Union Square, has 

adjacent permit parking, and is completing a master plan for the Capitol Complex. 

Actions • Maintain current public access and 

circulation. 

• Improve pedestrian circulation and visual and 

physical connections and access to the Mall, 

the U.S. Capitol, and areas north and south 

of Union Square. 

• Eliminate social trails. 

• Design crosswalks on 3rd Street to highlight 

and continue pedestrian connections and 

circulation patterns on the Mall. 

10.8 Visitor Information, 

Education, and 

Enjoyment 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The area is heavily used for 

school and group photographs, but its lack of information, amenities, and facilities limits 

other uses. 

• Continue current conditions. • Provide educational exhibits about First 

Amendment demonstrations, the Grant 

Memorial, history of the monumental core, 

and the U.S. Capitol. 

Actions 

• To increase enjoyment, consider interactive 

water jets and seasonal ice skating (see row 

10.5). 

10.9 Visitor Amenities Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Paving with asphalt embedded 

with small stones (seeded asphalt) creates maintenance challenges and plugs drains. 

There are no visitor amenities such as seating, restrooms, or food service. 

Actions • Make repairs as needed. • Provide shade structures for visitor comfort, 

and pleasant places for rest and relaxation. 

• Provide a flexible indoor/outdoor, multipurpose food service destination, where views 

of the Grant Memorial and the Capitol could 

be enjoyed, with space for seating, performances, educational wayside exhibits, and 

small exhibitions or displays (size and character of facilities determined during design). 

 

198
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — The Mall 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

10.6 Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing 

Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Similar to the no-action alternative, 

except 

◦ Require that all viewing screens, 

stages, and large video screens 

be located so as to not block the 

primary east-west views for 

people on site. (This might 

require locating video screens at 

angles.) 

• Similar to the no-action alternative, 

except 

◦ Redesign Union Square to 

increase space available for 

demonstrations, civic engagement, and special events. 

◦ Provide infrastructure such as 

utilities and communication 

system networks (including 

media connections), for demonstrations and events. 

• Similar to the no-action alternative, 

except 

◦ Provide infrastructure for 

demonstrations and events; 

provide structures to accommodate large video screens 

(provided by event organizers) to 

broadcast demonstrations taking 

place elsewhere. 

10.7 Access and Circulation: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as alternative A. • Same as alternative A. 

10.8 Visitor Information, Education, and Enjoyment: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See 

facing page. 

• Provide additional educational information about the Washington City 

Canal and the history of the U.S. 

Botanic Garden site. 

• Same as alternative A plus 

◦ Provide entertainment or performance space at a multipurpose visitor destination facility. 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Provide interactive water features 

for summer use and explore 

seasonal ice skating (see actions 

for row 10.5). 

10.9 Visitor Amenities: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Redesign paving and widen walks 

to facilitate public access and 

maintenance. 

• Add seating. 

• Same as alternative A plus 

◦ Provide utilities, shade, and 

seating on the north and south 

sides.

◦ Provide a multipurpose visitor 

facility with food service, retail, 

restrooms, and media stands. 

• Same as alternative A plus 

◦ Provide food and retail sales, plus 

automated, self-cleaning public 

restrooms. 

199
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

10.9 Visitor Amenities: 

Actions (cont.) 

• Provide flexible, high-capacity restrooms 

where more stalls could be opened during 

high use, with nearby drinking water and 

recreation equipment rentals. 

11. THE MALL (3RD TO 14TH STREETS) 

The Mall (146.35 acres) will remain the designed promenade west of the U. S. Capitol, featuring expansive green 

lawns (the formal French tapis verte or green carpet) bordered by formal rows of American elm trees that frame 

views to and from the Capitol, a fundamental concept of McMillan plan. It is bordered by the museums of the 

National Gallery of Art and the Smithsonian Institution as well as the Department of Agriculture. The Mall is an 

extremely popular venue for demonstrations, special events, cultural activities, and other civic events. 

11.1 Vision Emphasis • The Mall would continue to serve as a 

near non-stop venue for demonstrations, public gatherings, and cultural 

and other civic events.

• The Mall would remain a highly visible landscape that would be renovated to improve 

conditions and to sustainably accommodate 

very high levels of use for First Amendment 

demonstrations, public gatherings, national 

celebrations, cultural programs, and special 

events, as well as passive recreation and 

informal play. The National Park Service 

would encourage partnerships between all 

visitor destinations along the Mall to serve 

visitor needs. 

11.2 Historic Resources Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The Mall is a historic landscape 

with a great deal of integrity. The changes implemented as a result of the McMillan plan 

are clearly evident. 

Actions • Continue to preserve components of 

the historic landscape that have 

integrity. 

• Improve and protect the condition of critical 

elements of the historic landscape, such as 

lawns and elm trees. 

• Reduce social trails through a combination of 

design elements, paving, edging, and 

stewardship messages. 

• To protect the historic landscape, add park 

furniture and interactive water features 

outside the primary viewshed. 

11.3 Natural Resources 

Soils Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Soils compacted by high levels 

of use make turf very difficult to maintain and affect the health of the trees and lawns. 

Actions • Continue to seek funding to treat soils 

compacted by repeated events. 

• Restore soils to improve turf and tree growing conditions by replacing or augmenting 

soils or implementing other sustainable 

technologies. 

• Implement Sustainable Sites InitiativeTM

benchmarks for soils. 

Lawns Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The continuous green lawn is 

one of the most prominent and recognizable features of the Mall. 

Two grass types are used, but high use levels make it difficult to sustain the turf, which is 

often brown, with bare patches and many weeds. Access to half of the grass panels is 

restricted from late fall to spring every year for restoration by using snow fences and 

plastic tape. 

Gravel has migrated from paths, social trails near walks obliterate grass, and planned crisp 

turf edges have been destroyed by visitors cutting corners. 

The irrigation system has been damaged by tent stakes used during events. 

 

200
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — The Mall 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

11. THE MALL (3RD TO 14TH STREETS) 

 See facing page. 

• The Mall would be rehabilitated to 

improve conditions. 

• The Mall would be rehabilitated and 

redesigned as a highly visible, 

sustainable venue with more hard 

surfaces for very high levels of use 

(demonstrations, public gatherings, 

cultural programs, and other civic 

events), while its critical historic 

features would be maintained.

• The Mall would be redesigned to 

provide additional, sustainable areas 

for recreational enjoyment (gardens 

and fountains) and improved lawn 

conditions (for informal pickup 

games and play).

11.2 Historic Resources: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Improve the condition of components of the historic landscape 

that have integrity. 

• Same as alternative A plus 

◦ Add a decorative and interactive 

water feature at the 8th Street 

cross axis. 

• Add park furniture and interactive 

water features outside the primary 

viewshed to protect the historic 

landscape. 

11.3 Natural Resources 

Soils: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page.

• Restore soils to improve turf and 

tree growing conditions by 

replacing or augmenting soils or 

implementing other sustainable 

technologies. 

• Implement Sustainable Sites 

InitiativeTM benchmarks for soils. 

• Same as alternative A. • Same as alternative A. 

Lawns: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

201
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

Lawns (cont.) 

Actions 

• Continue to rest half of the Mall every 

other winter. 

• Begin demonstration plots to try new 

management techniques, such as using 

organic practices or new grass varieties. 

• Replace gravel walkways around lawns with 

new paved surfaces; install edges to define 

lawn panels. 

• Improve turf conditions by replacing 

compacted soils or implementing other 

sustainable technologies. 

• Use slightly elevated turf to improve 

drainage and perpetuate the sense of 

continuous turf on the Mall from groundlevel views. 

• Undertake more frequent restoration of 

smaller areas. 

• Provide drainage and irrigation; design the 

irrigation system so that it would not be 

damaged by event facilities. 

• Remove narrow strips of turf and create 

wider sidewalks in center sections along 3rd, 

4th, 7th, and 14th streets. To improve 

growing conditions for trees, remove gravel 

near Madison Drive NW and Jefferson Drive 

SW and replace with turf edged with low 

curbs. Retain shaded seating. 

American Elms Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): American elms contribute to the 

high integrity of the historic planting plan. 

The National Park Service has successfully developed disease-resistant elm varieties. 

The side panels containing mature American elms have been used for special events, and the 

health of trees continues to be affected by soil compaction and large-scale events. 

Actions • Control impacts to elm trees from 

overuse as budgets and staffing allow. 

• Continue to replace elm trees as 

needed in accordance with the historic 

planting plan. 

• Allow individuals to still enjoy the shade that 

rows of American elm trees provide but no 

longer allow temporary event facilities such 

as tents, walkway surfaces, stages, or 

restrooms in the tree panels. 

• Continue to replace elm trees as needed in 

accordance with the historic planting plan. 

• Minimize the use of post-and-chain fencing 

to control resource damage. 

• Continue to seek ways to reduce the impacts 

of compaction and erosion within the Mall 

elm tree panels. 

Other Trees Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): A few trees (elms, bald cypress, 

cedar, and oak trees) do not contribute to the historic landscape. 

Actions • Allow present noncontributing planting 

schemes to continue. 

• Update the planting plan for all vegetation 

on the Mall and ensure it is compatible with 

contributing features of historic plans. 

11.4 Demonstrations, 

Special Events, and 

National Celebrations

. 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): During the Fourth of July celebration 

Madison Drive NW and Jefferson Drive SW are closed to public vehicular access and parking, security 

checkpoints are established for the entire National Mall, and additional restrooms, law enforcement, 

and first-aid stations may be established.

The Smithsonian Institution has developed some infrastructure to support the Festival of 

American Folklife. 

(Also see “4. The Civic Stage: Demonstrations, Special Events.”) 

 

202
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — The Mall 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

• Install edging or curbs to limit 

gravel migration and post-andchain fencing to prevent social 

trails. 

• Install a new irrigation system 

designed so that it cannot be 

damaged during events. 

• Same as alternative A except 

◦ Eliminate gravel walkways 

around lawns; install edges to 

define lawn areas. 

◦ Undertake more frequent restoration of smaller areas. 

• Similar to alternative B, except do 

not install edging. 

American Elms: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page.

• Install curbs or edging and/or postand-chain fencing to protect 

improved landscapes and tree 

panels while allowing pedestrian 

access to shady areas. 

• Continue to replace elm trees as 

needed in accordance with the 

historic planting plan. 

• Same as alternative A except 

◦ Minimize the use of post-andchain fencing to control resource 

damage. 

◦ Continue to seek ways to reduce 

the physical impacts of compaction and erosion within the Mall 

elm tree panels. 

• Same as alternative A. 

Other Trees: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page.

• Update planting plan to address 

noncontributing vegetation on the 

Mall; do not replant noncontributing features. 

• Update the planting plan for all 

vegetation on the Mall and ensure 

is it compatible with contributing 

features of historic plans. 

• Same as alternative B. 

11.4 Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing 

Conditions) — See facing page.

203
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

11.4 Demonstrations, 

Special Events, and 

National Celebrations: 

Actions (cont.) 

• Consistent with the First Amendment 

and federal regulations, continue to 

fully accommodate demonstrations. 

• Consistent with federal regulations, 

accommodate special events. 

• Increase paved areas to facilitate events and 

improve the Mall’s appearance. 

• Allow no temporary event facilities, such as 

tents, stages, or vehicles, in the elm tree 

panels. (Note: This action would not apply to 

First Amendment demonstrations.) 

• Allow temporary event facilities (such as 

tents and stages) in the center grass panels 

or on paved areas, depending on the size of 

the facilities. Allow very limited, temporary 

staging and storage areas on site. 

• Develop event utility infrastructure to protect 

resources, reduce setup / takedown times, 

and accommodate media communications. 

• Identify locations for temporary portable 

restroom and trailers with restrooms so that 

these facilities would be convenient, easy to 

service, and not block views. 

• Add a paved area for events south of the 

National Gallery of Art Sculpture Garden and 

north of the center grass panels; provide 

visitor sidewalk amenities. 

• Redesign the 12th Street axis to accommodate high levels of use and the placement of 

tents, stages, and special events logistical 

and operational staging areas. Provide a 

flexible office space and public restroom 

facility to support demonstrations and 

special events. 

• Widen the north-south walks that border the 

center area between 10th and 13th streets. 

• Create additional special events staging 

space over the 12th Street tunnel entry north 

of Madison Drive NW to reduce the impact 

of truck parking on the historic landscape. 

11.5 Access and 

Circulation 

(Also see “5.3 Visitor 

Parking.”) 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Three-hour free public and 

permit parking is allowed on Madison Drive NW and Jefferson Drive SW and is highly 

sought after by visitors and workers. There are 407 parking spaces, 47 for people with 

disabilities, and 32 tour bus drop-offs. 

The city provides metered parking on 3rd, 4th, and 7th streets NW/SW through the Mall. 

Actions • Continue designated drop-off/ pickup 

stops for visitor transportation and 

commercial tour buses. 

• Continue to allow three-hour free 

public and permit parking on Madison 

and Jefferson drives. 

• Continue designated drop-off/pickup stops 

for visitor transportation, commercial tour 

buses. 

• Accommodate visitor transportation, commercial tour bus drop-offs, bicycles and other 

wheeled vehicles on Madison and Jefferson 

drives over the short- to mid-term (10–15 

years); occasionally restrict access to accommodate events and national celebrations 

(such as the Fourth of July). Adopt as a longterm goal the removal of private vehicle 

parking on Madison and Jefferson drives to 

improve traffic flow and better accommodate 

bicycling, visitor transit, and pedestrians. 

 

204
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — The Mall 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Provide infrastructure for 

demonstrations and events. 

◦ Allow no temporary event 

facilities, such as tents, stages, or 

vehicles, in the elm tree panels. 

◦ Encourage event organizers not 

to install temporary event facilities, such as tents and stages, 

directly in the center of the 

major view corridor between the 

U.S. Capitol and the Washington 

Monument to protect open, eyelevel views on the grass panels. 

• Same as alternative A, except 

◦ Allow some temporary event 

facilities to be located in the elm 

tree panels if turf/root zones and 

soils were protected through an 

acceptable and authorized 

method.

◦ Allow Jefferson and Madison 

drives to be used during large 

special events or demonstrations 

(more than 250,000 people) and 

reroute non-emergency / law 

enforcement vehicular traffic 

(similar to current management 

of the Fourth of July celebration). 

◦ Create new public space for 

event staging, etc. over the 12th 

Street tunnel portals at Madison 

and Jefferson drives. 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Provide infrastructure for 

demonstrations and events. 

◦ Allow no temporary event 

facilities, such as tents, stages, or 

vehicles, in the elm tree panels. 

11.5 Access and Circulation: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Continue designated drop-off/ pickup stops for visitor transportation 

and commercial tour buses. 

• Work with the city to remove 

vehicle parking on the north-south 

cross streets through the Mall (3rd, 

4th, and 7th streets) within the 

east-west viewshed. 

• Continue designated drop-off/ pickup stops for visitor transportation 

and commercial tour buses. 

• Continue visitor transportation, 

commercial tour bus drop-offs, bicycles and other wheeled vehicles 

on Madison and Jefferson drives; 

occasionally restrict access for some 

events and national celebrations. 

• If determined feasible by engineering, security, geotechnical, and economic studies, provide an underground facility for paid visitor parking between 15th and 12th streets 

and entered from 15th Street. 

• Continue designated drop-off/ pickup stops for visitor transportation 

and commercial tour buses. 

• Construct a 14th Street vehicular 

tunnel to create a larger pedestrianonly area (one alternative in the 

14th Street Bridge Corridor Study). 

205
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

Smithsonian Metro 

Station

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The most popular transit 

entrance to the National Mall is the Smithsonian station. The name does not mention that 

this is the stop for the National Mall. 

The Smithsonian station is closed during highly attended events such as the Fourth of July 

celebration to prevent overcrowding on the Mall. 

Actions • Work with the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority to add the 

name of the National Mall to the Metro 

station. 

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Develop a welcome area on the Mall near 

12th Street and Jefferson Drive (see 

actions for row 11.6). 

Paving and Pedestrian 

Circulation

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Pedestrian walks between 

Constitution Avenue and Madison Drive NW and between Independence Avenue and 

Jefferson Drive SW need improvements to enhance the aesthetic and functional qualities 

of the streetscape and to improve pedestrian safety, circulation, and connectivity between 

downtown and the National Mall, as outlined in the Framework Plan.

Gravel-paved walkways are difficult for people with disabilities, They are slippery, dust can 

create breathing problems, and gravel migrates everywhere since it not contained by 

curbing (cut for budget reasons). The McMillan and the Skidmore Owings and Merrill plans 

included curbs to define turf and tree areas. 

Actions • Maintain gravel and exposed aggregate 

paving; deal with maintenance 

problems as budgets and staffing allow. 

• As part of a coordinated paving plan for the 

National Mall, remove gravel from pathways 

and former roadbeds, and pave walks and 

other areas with universally accessible 

material to improve circulation, facilitate 

events, and maintain improved landscape 

conditions. 

• Widen some walks and pave some turf areas 

to enhance the visitor experience by 

providing space for orientation, rest and 

enjoyment; First Amendment 

demonstrations, and event venues; allow for 

more efficient park operations. 

• Improve the pedestrian circulation system 

and better connect Union Square, the 

Washington Monument, and museums and 

other areas adjacent to the east end of the 

National Mall. Remove some north-south 

walks between 7th and 9th streets. Design 

crosswalks on 3rd, 4th, 7th, and 14th 

streets, as well as on Madison and Jefferson 

drives, to identify and continue pedestrian 

connections and patterns on the Mall and 

emphasize the pedestrian experience. 

 

206
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — The Mall 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

Smithsonian Metro Station: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Construct a custom-designed, 

covered entry over the Metro 

entrance on the Mall; locate 

additional Metro signs to identify 

the station entrance on the Mall. 

◦ Develop a welcome area on the 

Mall near 12th St. and Jefferson 

Drive (see actions for row 11.6).

• Same as the no-action alternative. 

Paving and Pedestrian Circulation: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Refurbish gravel walkways, and 

keep exposed aggregate walkways, 

but create edging or curbs around 

grass panels to contain gravel. 

• Develop a coordinated paving plan. 

• Replace gravel on walkways with 

universally accessible surfaced 

walks, and provide surfaces in other 

areas to facilitate events and to 

maintain improved landscape 

conditions. 

• Widen some walks and pave some 

turf areas for event venues. 

• Replace gravel on walkways with 

sustainable, universally accessible 

surface materials; add soft 

pavement edges; and eliminate 

some north-south walks between 

7th and 9th streets to increase 

recreation space on center lawn 

panels. 

207
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

11.6 Visitor Information, 

Education, and 

Enjoyment

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Outdated orientation maps are 

located around the Mall. 

In summer 2008 the National Park Service opened a contact station on the Mall at the 

Smithsonian Metro station. 

Actions • Continue to provide a temporary visitor 

contact station at the Metro station; 

improve orientation maps and information here and elsewhere on the Mall. 

• Create a paved welcome plaza near the 

Metro station entrance as the primary 

pedestrian entrance for the National Mall, 

including a visitor contact station, multiple 

orientation maps, and a large tactile model 

or pavement map of the National Mall. 

• Provide electronic information and a listing 

of events and activities. 

• Increase coordination of visitor information 

with museums surrounding the Mall. 

Education Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): There are no educational panels.

Actions • Provide no additional education. • Provide educational information about First 

Amendment demonstrations, the Mall as the 

nation’s premier civic space, and the development of the federal city around the Mall. 

• Regularly schedule ranger programs, walks. 

Visitor Recreation Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Informal or passive recreation, 

such as picnicking, sunning, napping, reading, and enjoying views, occurs everywhere. 

The center grass panels are used for informal recreation (e.g., ball games, kite flying, Frisbee). 

The Smithsonian Institution operates a carousel under an agreement. 

Actions • Continue existing recreational 

opportunities. 

• Provide entertainment at special events. 

• Update the agreement with the 

Smithsonian Institution for the carousel. 

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Provide cooling interactive water features 

in some locations. 

◦ Encourage small-scale entertainment, 

along with entertainment at events. 

◦ Reconfigure the center grass panels near 

the 8th Street cross axis to provide larger 

spaces for informal recreation.

11.7 Visitor Amenities Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Four refreshment stands provide 

souvenirs and food sales. There are nine tables and seating at each stand. The architecture 

is understated and timeless, and high-quality materials are used. However, the NPS identity 

and management are not apparent, and there are no nearby restrooms. 

There are 540 benches, 4 drinking fountains, 237 trash cans, and 4 bike racks on the Mall. 

Visitor facilities and adjacent museums must be accessed through security checkpoints. 

Actions • Continue the four refreshment stands 

and retail (souvenir) sales. 

• Provide a paved welcoming plaza near the 

Metro station for visitor information and 

orientation; provide high-capacity restrooms, 

shade, and group seating. 

• Provide additional shaded seating along 

north-south sidewalks within the elm tree 

panels, including some group seating areas. 

• Add small interactive water features as a 

means for visitors to cool off during the 

summer, along with containers with plantings for seasonal color and enjoyment. 

• To enhance the Mall as well as pedestrian 

safety, increase pedestrian lighting levels (to 

supplement the historic Olmsted lights). 

 

208
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — The Mall 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

11.6 Visitor Information, Education, and Enjoyment: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See 

facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Provide a large tactile model of 

the National Mall for orientation.

◦ Provide electronic information 

and listings of events and activities. 

◦ Increase coordination of visitor 

information with museums 

surrounding the Mall.

• Same as the no-action alternative. 

Education: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Provide educational information 

about the history of the Mall and 

the development of the federal city. 

• Provide educational information 

about First Amendment demonstrations and the Mall as the 

nation’s premier civic space. 

• Regularly scchedule ranger 

programs or walks. 

• Provide educational information 

about recreational opportunities 

and ecologically sustainable management of designed landscapes. 

Visitor Recreation: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative, 

except 

◦ Remove the carousel.

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Provide interactive water features 

in some locations. 

◦ Encourage entertainment. 

◦ Provide portable lawn chair 

rentals. 

• Reconfigure the center grass panels 

near the 8th Street cross axis to 

provide larger spaces for informal 

recreation (e.g., pickup games). 

• Provide interactive water features at 

some locations. 

• Provide a children’s play area. 

11.7 Visitor Amenities: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Construct small restroom facilities 

near existing refreshment stands 

using a similar architectural style. 

Redesign paving near refreshment 

stands to better accommodate use. 

• Construct small restroom facilities 

near existing refreshment stands 

using a similar architectural style. 

Redesign paving near refreshment 

stands to better accommodate use 

and to allow for expanded service 

as needed. 

• Provide a larger multi-agency 

restroom at the Smithsonian Metro 

stop. 

• Provide supplemental lighting along 

Mall walkways in addition to the 

Olmsted lights.

• Redesign paving near refreshment 

stands to allow for expand service 

areas as needed. 

• Provide small restroom facilities 

near refreshment stands. 

• Add a playground. 

• To enhance the Mall increase 

pedestrian lighting and add floral 

displays. 

209
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

11.7 Visitor Amenities: 

Actions (cont.) 

• Near all refreshment stands emphasize a 

pleasant atmosphere with elements such as 

additional seating at tables, colorful umbrellas, flower boxes, or display fountains for 

enjoyment and comfort. 

• Construct a higher capacity restroom near 

12th Street (north of the central grass panel); 

design to be partially closed during lower use 

periods. 

• Construct a small, architecturally compatible 

visitor restroom with two to four potentially 

self-cleaning stalls near the Air and Space 

Museum refreshment stand. 

• Work with the National Gallery of Art and 

the Smithsonian Institution to improve access 

to food service and restrooms for National 

Mall visitors. 

11.8 Health, Public Safety, and Security 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The Mall is heavily used, and 

there have been public concerns about night lighting levels and safety. 

U.S. Park Police in vehicles frequently patrol the area. 

Actions • Continue to provide safe public 

experiences. 

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Add supplemental lighting. 

◦ Add emergency call stations. 

◦ Add interactive water features and 

consider temporary cooling misters. 

THE WASHINGTON MONUMENT 

12. WASHINGTON MONUMENT 

One of the five presidential memorials on the National Mall, the Washington Monument will continue to be a 

historic character-defining feature and the visual orientation point for Washington, D.C. The total area of the 

monument and grounds is approximately 106 acres. 

12.1 Tours Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): In the past tours were offered 

from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. daily, with free tickets available onsite. Visitors may order tickets online for a fee. Since summer 2008 hours have been extended to 10 p.m. seasonally. 

The interior of the monument includes 195 special commemorative stones that visitors may 

see as the elevator pauses on the way down, or during special walk-down tours. 

Actions • Extend hours at the Washington 

Monument to 10 p.m. year-round 

• Extend hours at the Washington Monument 

to 10 p.m. year-round. 

13. WASHINGTON MONUMENT GROUNDS 

The grounds of the Washington Monument extend from Constitution Avenue on the north to Maine Avenue on 

the south, and from 14th Street on the east to 17th Street on the west. The German-American Friendship Garden is 

at the north edge of grounds on Constitution Avenue, across from the Ellipse. The north grounds are highly used 

area for demonstrations, special events, national celebrations, civic activities, and recreation. The south grounds 

extend to the Tidal Basin. 

13.1 Vision Emphasis • Continue existing services (limited) on 

the Washington Monument grounds. 

• The grounds of the Washington Monument 

would continue to see high volumes of use, 

including large demonstrations and special 

events, but infrastructure would be provided 

to make them more sustainable. 

• A high-quality multipurpose facility would replace the Sylvan Theater, nearby restroom. 

• The condition of the German-American 

Friendship Garden would be improved. 

 

210
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — The Washington Monument 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

 

11.8 Health, Public Safety, and Security: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See 

facing page.

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Add supplemental lighting. 

◦ Add emergency call stations. 

◦ Add interactive water features 

and cooling misters.

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Add interactive water features 

and misters as landscape features/destinations to improve 

visitor health and safety.

THE WASHINGTON MONUMENT 

12. WASHINGTON MONUMENT 

 See facing page. 

12.1 Tours: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. 

13. WASHINGTON MONUMENT GROUNDS 

 See facing page. 

• The Washington Monument 

grounds would provide a highquality indoor facility for visitor 

services and food service. 

• The condition of the German-American Friendship Garden would be 

improved. 

• The grounds of the Washington 

Monument would continue to see 

high volume of use, including large 

demonstrations and special events, 

plus infrastructure to make them 

more sustainable. 

• A high-quality multipurpose facility 

would replace the Sylvan Theater 

and nearby restrooms. 

• The Washington Monument 

grounds would provide high-quality 

indoor/outdoor visitor services (food 

service, retail, restrooms), with 

views of the monument. A new 

entertainment venue would be 

provided at the Sylvan Theater. 

211
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

13.2 Historic Resources Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Monument Lodge has been 

recently renovated for visitor services. 

Survey Lodge is used as the main visitor contact station and for park operations. 

Actions • Continue present uses. • Continue to adaptively use Monument 

Lodge for visitor services. 

• Adaptively reuse Survey Lodge for increased 

visitor services. 

13.3 Demonstrations, 

Special Events, and 

National Celebrations 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The Washington Monument 

grounds north of Independence Avenue are highly used for demonstrations and special 

events, national celebrations, and civic activities, as well as recreation. 

Actions • Consistent with the First Amendment 

and federal regulations, continue to 

fully accommodate demonstrations. 

• Consistent with federal regulations, 

accommodate special events, national 

celebrations, and civic activities. 

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ In the northeast, northwest, and southwest corners of the north grounds develop infrastructure (utilities; space for 

portable restrooms, operations, and 

media) to support demonstrations, special 

events, and performances. 

13.4 Access and 

Circulation

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Maine Avenue SW, Independence Avenue SW, and Raoul Wallenberg Place SW, which border the south grounds, are 

major commuter roads where pedestrians frequently jaywalk. 

The south grounds are cut off by roadways from both the monument and the Tidal Basin. 

Commuter and recreational bicyclists share sidewalks with pedestrians, who travel at much 

slower speeds and are frequently focused on views. 

Tour bus drop-offs are provided on Independence Avenue SW. There are 8 parking spaces for 

visitors with disabilities, 9 tour bus spaces, and 1 taxi stand. Survey Lodge has 26 staff 

parking spaces. 

There is a visitor transit stop with seating, an orientation map, and a drinking fountain on the 

west side of Raoul Wallenberg Place SW. There are 10 tour bus drop-off locations on the 

east side of Raoul Wallenberg Place.

Trucks are restricted on 15th Street. 

Actions • Update the transit stop when the Visitor 

Transportation Study is implemented. 

• Maintain the tour bus drop-off area. 

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Improve the pedestrian environment with 

longer crossing times, expanded paving 

near major crosswalks, enhanced crosswalks, and better pedestrian signs (at 

Independence and Constitution avenues 

on 14th, 15th, and 17th streets). 

◦ Provide additional parking for visitors with 

disabilities at the new multipurpose facility 

and the Survey Lodge. 

◦ Redesign roads, parking, bicycle, and 

pedestrian circulation south of Independence Avenue to reconnect park areas, to 

improve safety and recreational opportunities, and to improve pedestrian 

connections between the Washington 

Monument grounds and the Tidal Basin, 

as well as to the southwest waterfront 

and East Potomac Park, and to highlight 

north-south views between the Jefferson 

Memorial and the White House. 

◦ Construct a separate dedicated bike trail. 

 

212
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — The Washington Monument 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

13.2 Historic Resources: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Continue to adaptively use Monument Lodge for visitor services. 

• Adaptively reuse Survey Lodge for 

increased visitor services. 

• Same as alternative B. 

13.3 Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing 

Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ In the northeast, northwest, and 

southwest corners of the north 

grounds develop infrastructure 

(utilities; space for portable restrooms, operations, and media) to 

support demonstrations, special 

events, and performances. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. 

13.4 Access and Circulation: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Construct pedestrian underpasses or bridges between 14th 

and 15th streets near Madison 

and Jefferson drives; expand 

paving near major crosswalks. 

◦ Improve crosswalks (Independence Avenue, Maine Avenue, 

and Raoul Wallenberg Place). 

◦ Provide additional parking for 

people with disabilities near the 

new multipurpose visitor facility. 

◦ If determined feasible by engineering, security, geotechnical, 

and economic studies, provide 

an underground paid parking 

facility below the south grounds 

recreation fields, with pedestrian 

access under Independence 

Avenue. 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Construct a 14th Street vehicular 

tunnel to create a larger pedestrian-only area. 

◦ Make crosswalks more visible to 

drivers, widen pedestrian waiting 

areas, and increase crossing 

times on 15th Street. 

◦ Redesign roads, parking, bicycle, 

and pedestrian circulation to 

reconnect park areas, improve 

safety and recreational opportunities, and connect to the 

southwest waterfront and East 

Potomac Park. 

◦ Construct a separate bike trail. 

◦ Provide a turfed surface over 

Maine Avenue to connect the 

monument grounds with the 

Tidal Basin area. 

213
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

13.5 Visitor Information, 

Education, and 

Enjoyment 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The National Park Service issues 

permits for league use of ballfields; no equipment, backstops, or bases are provided. 

Informal games and recreational activities take place around the grounds. Half of the area 

is rested every winter, preventing use. 

The south grounds have a multipurpose recreation field. 

The Sylvan Theater hosts concerts and performances; however, the facilities are outdated and 

are not well placed for hillside viewing. 

Actions • Continue to use the Sylvan Theater as a 

performance venue for an audience of 

several thousand people. 

• Continue informal games and 

recreational activities around the 

grounds, and league ball games on the 

north side of the grounds and on the 

south grounds fields. 

• Provide visitor information, education, and 

entertainment at multipurpose visitor facility. 

• Provide educational information about 

George Washington, the Washington 

Monument, the history of the National Mall, 

and the German-American Friendship 

Garden. 

• Provide exhibits at the Survey Lodge about 

the building’s history, and potentially add 

recreation equipment rentals (such as 

bicycles and kites). 

• Continue informal games and recreational 

activities around the grounds, and league 

ball games on the north side of the grounds. 

13.6 Visitor Amenities Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Survey Lodge is the main visitor 

contact station; it is off the main circulation routes, not easily identifiable, and hidden by 

overgrown vegetation. Monument Lodge offers a bookstore, ticketing, and restrooms. 

The outdated circular restroom near 15th Street and Independence Avenue SW is overwhelmed by high use, and the design is not in keeping with the site’s historic character. 

There are 95 benches, 134 trash cans, 11 drinking fountains, 6 phone booths, 4 bike racks. 

Food and retail are located in a temporary tent and must be relocated to allow for construction of the National Museum of African American History and Culture. The public was 

invited to comment about various locations during the initial review of alternatives. 

Contractual agreements are required for food and retail. 

Actions • Relocate food and retail services to a 

permanent location. 

• Replace facilities in the Sylvan Theater area 

with a new, high-quality, indoor/outdoor, 

multipurpose visitor service facility that 

would be a pleasant destination and a model 

of adaptable, convenient space capable of 

meeting the needs of early ticket morning 

queues, information, education, exhibits, 

food service, retail, restrooms sized for high 

volumes of use, office space, and various 

programs, events, performances, and entertainment. Locate below the level of roads; 

orient to muffle noise and provide views of 

the monument. For performances accommodate up to 3,000 people on the monument 

hillside. Keep facility open from early morning for monument ticketing until evening. 

• Remove the circular restroom. 

• Adaptively reuse the Survey Lodge for services for visitors with disabilities, information, 

and recreation equipment rentals. Improve 

the lodge’s parking, access, and visibility. 

 

214
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — The Washington Monument 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

13.5 Visitor Information, Education, and Enjoyment: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See 

facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Provide visitor information, education, and entertainment at a new 

multipurpose visitor facility. 

• Continue informal games and recreational activities around the 

grounds, and league ball games on 

the north side of the grounds. 

• Similar to the no-action alternative, 

except 

◦ Reconstruct and reorient the 

Sylvan Theater to improve 

viewing. 

13.6 Visitor Amenities: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Replace the circular restroom with a 

larger facility having a ranger 

information station. 

• Relocate food and retail services to 

a permanent, partially underground, grass-roofed facility 

between 14th and 15th streets. 

• Replace facilities in the Sylvan Theater area with a new, high-quality, 

indoor/outdoor, visitor service 

facility that would be a pleasant 

destination and a model of adaptable, convenient space capable of 

meeting the needs of early morning 

queues, office space, and various 

daytime programs, events, performances, as well as evening 

entertainment. 

• Remove the circular restroom. 

• Rehabilitate the Survey Lodge to 

provide services for people with 

disabilities. 

• Continue to provide ticketing and a 

contact station in the Monument 

Lodge. 

• Coordinate and improve park 

furniture. 

• Relocate food and retail services, 

plus the bookstore, to the new 

• Replace the circular restroom. 

• Install automated, self-cleaning 

restrooms near Constitution Avenue 

between 16th and 17th streets. 

• Relocate food and retail services to 

a permanent facility with a large 

restroom north of Independence 

Avenue between 14th and 15th 

streets. 

215
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

13.6 Visitor 

Amenities: 

Actions (cont.) 

• Relocate food and retail services, plus the 

bookstore, to the new destination, multipurpose facility (food service, stage, retail) on 

the northwest corner of 15th Street and 

Independence Avenue. 

• Continue to use Monument Lodge for visitor 

services and restrooms. 

13.7 Operations Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Ranger offices are located in the 

Survey Lodge. 

A heliport on the west side of the grounds (between existing walkways) is used for emergencies and occasionally for state arrivals. Walkways can accommodate only part of the 

helicopter wheels, and turf damage results. Heavier helicopters are expected to increase 

damage. 

Actions • Continue current conditions. • Provide ranger offices at the multipurpose 

facility; relocate primary offices to another 

facility off the National Mall. 

• Accommodate periodic helicopter landings 

by providing a landing surface in conjunction 

with upgrading the pedestrian circulation 

system and providing infrastructure for 

demonstrations and events. 

WEST POTOMAC PARK (NORTH OF INDEPENDENCE AVENUE) 

14. CONSTITUTION GARDENS 

Constitution Gardens (52 acres) was developed for the Bicentennial and was intended for event use. It is the site of 

the Memorial to the 56 Signers of the Declaration of Independence, which is located on an island in the lake, and it 

provides a pastoral setting for passive recreation and a respite as visitors travel between memorials. This area will 

continue to accommodate demonstrations and special events. 

14.1 Vision Emphasis • Constitution Gardens would continue 

as a pleasant respite for visitors walking 

between memorials. 

• Constitution Gardens would be a restful, 

high-quality, multipurpose visitor destination 

that would provide food service and 

opportunities for entertainment, enjoyment, 

and recreation. The area would be a pleasant 

place for visitors to relax as they tour the 

National Mall. Present conditions would be 

improved, and the pedestrian circulation 

system would be upgraded with coordinated 

paving and improved operational access. 

14.2 Historic Resources Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The Lockkeeper’s House at 17th 

and Constitution is one of the oldest structures in the city. Relocated to this site around 

1915, it is somewhat hidden by overgrown vegetation and interferes with visibility at the 

intersection, creating safety hazards for turning vehicles and pedestrians. It is used for 

storage. 

Actions • Continue to use the Lockkeeper’s 

House for storage. 

• Potentially relocate the canal Lockkeeper’s 

House away from the corner of 17th and 

Constitution Avenue NW and adaptively 

reuse in conjunction with a new multipurpose facility, and coordinate use with 

Potomac Park levee. 

 

216
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — West Potomac Park (North of Independence Avenue) 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

destination, multipurpose facility 

(food service, stage, retail) on the 

northwest corner of 15th Street and 

Independence Avenue. 

13.7 Operations: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Provide office space for rangers. 

• Accommodate periodic helicopter 

landings by providing a landing 

surface in conjunction with upgrading the pedestrian circulation 

system and providing infrastructure 

for demonstrations and events. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. 

WEST POTOMAC PARK (NORTH OF INDEPENDENCE AVENUE) 

14. CONSTITUTION GARDENS 

 See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Constitution Gardens would be a 

restful, high-quality, multipurpose 

visitor destination, with food service 

and opportunities for entertainment 

and enjoyment. The area would be 

a pleasant place for pedestrians to 

relax as they tour the National Mall. 

Present conditions would be improved, and the pedestrian circulation system would be upgraded 

with coordinated paving and 

improved operational access. 

• Constitution Gardens would be a 

restful, quality visitor destination, 

with food service. 

14.2 Historic Resources: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Keep the Lockkeeper’s House in its 

current location, preserve the 

building, but improve its visibility 

and appearance. 

• Reuse as a visitor information 

station. 

• Relocate the Lockkeeper’s House 

slightly away from the intersection 

for safety reasons. 

• Preserve structure and rehabilitate 

interior; staff for visitor information. 

• Improve pedestrian and vehicular 

movements at the intersection. 

• Same as alternative B. 

217
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

14.3 Natural Resources 

Soils and Vegetation Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Poor quality soils were used 

when the area was constructed, and some trees were encircled with asphalt pavement, 

which has stunted normal tree growth. 

Thousands of bulbs were planted but have been removed. 

Actions • Manage present soil and vegetation 

conditions as budgets and staffing 

allow. 

• Continue the bulb replanting program. 

• Rejuvenate soil and vegetation conditions. 

• Continue the bulb replanting program (same 

as the no-action alternative). 

Lake Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The concrete-lined shallow lake 

has water quality problems. Small pumps recirculate water in several areas to improve 

water quality. 

Geese and other waterfowl degrade the water and contribute to algae, unpleasant odors, 

and insect problems. 

Actions • Maintain the concrete-lined lake; 

address water quality problems as 

budgets and staffing allow. 

• Reconstruct the lake to be self-sustaining, 

and install circulating pumps and a filtration 

system. Explore a nonpotable water source 

for filling the lake. 

• Design the lake to be part of the stormwater 

retention system to control flooding from 

urban drainage. 

14.4 Demonstrations, 

Special Events, and 

National Celebrations 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): A limited number of events 

(primarily related to the Vietnam Veterans Memorial) occur. This area is large enough to 

accommodate more demonstrations and events. 

Actions • Consistent with the First Amendment 

and federal regulations, continue to 

fully accommodate demonstrations. 

• Consistent with federal regulations, 

accommodate special events. 

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Widen some walkways and intersections 

to create venues for smaller events 

(exhibits, tents, performances); also see 

row 14.7.

◦ Develop infrastructure (e.g., utilities and 

communication systems) to facilitate 

demonstrations and events. 

14.5 Access and 

Circulation 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The visitor transit stop for Constitution Gardens and the World War II Memorial is on Constitution Avenue NW. 

There are 3 tour bus drop-off spaces (during non-rush hours), 7 tour bus parking spaces, and 

7 parking spaces for visitors with disabilities. 

There are public bus stops. The Smithsonian–National Gallery of Art Circulator provides 

seasonal service on Independence and Constitution avenues west to 17th Street. 

Actions • Maintain present access and parking. • Same as the no-action alternative. 

Walkways Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Asphalt walks embedded with 

small rocks (to resemble gravel) are deteriorating and are difficult to maintain. Some areas 

do not meet requirements for visitors with disabilities. 

Actions • Repair walks. • Repave walks as part of a coordinated 

paving system for the National Mall. 

• Reconfigure some walks to accommodate 

the Potomac Park levee and provide 

accessible routes. 

 

218
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — West Potomac Park (North of Independence Avenue) 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

14.3 Natural Resources 

Soils and Vegetation: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Rejuvenate soil and vegetation 

conditions. 

• Continue the bulb replanting 

program (same as the no-action 

alternative).

• Same as alternative A. • Same as alternative A.

Lake: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Reconstruct the lake to be selfsustaining for plants; remove fish 

and do not restock. 

• Reconstruct the lake as a very 

shallow pool that could be drained 

for demonstrations and special 

events. 

• Reconstruct the lake to be self-sustaining for fish and plants; explore a 

nonpotable water source for filling 

the lake. 

• Design the lake to be part of the 

stormwater retention system to 

control flooding from urban 

drainage. 

14.4 Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing 

Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Redesign circulation and the lake 

to increase space for demonstrations and special events; also see 

row 0 under “Lake.” 

◦ Develop infrastructure (e.g., 

utilities and communication 

systems) to facilitate demonstrations and events. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. 

14.5 Access and Circulation: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. 

Walkways: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Repave walks. • Repave walks as part of a coordinated paving system for the 

National Mall. 

• Widen some walkways to create 

venues for smaller events (exhibits, 

tents, performances). 

• Similar to alternative B plus 

◦ Provide space for refreshment 

carts. 

219
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

14.6 Visitor Information, 

Education, and 

Enjoyment 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): This is a pleasant environment 

for relaxation. Requests have been received for additional entertainment venues. 

The lake was planned to accommodate model boats, but never has. 

The area is little used for recreation. 

Ice-skating is allowed on natural ice when conditions are safe. 

Actions • No planned entertainment or 

recreation.

• Through educational information address the 

history of the area (the Washington Canal 

and the Lockkeeper’s House), land reclamation in the Potomac Park, flood control, and 

the role and importance of the Declaration 

of Independence and the Constitution. 

• Provide visitor information, education, and 

opportunities for enjoyment at the new 

multipurpose facility at the east end of the 

lake, in conjunction with adaptively reusing 

the Lockkeeper’s House; consider providing 

themed food and entertainment. 

• Ensure that recreational activities would not 

conflict with commemorative experiences at 

nearby memorials. Explore additional 

recreational activities, such as fishing or 

model boating. Explore children’s play 

opportunities making use of natural 

elements, boulders, sculpture or interactive 

water features, and pavement patterns or 

educational activities and programs. 

14.7 Visitor Amenities Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The refreshment stand and 

circular restroom are outdated, not in a high use area, and difficult to maintain. 

There are 47 benches, 37 trash cans, and 1 drinking fountain. 

Actions • Maintain the present facilities 

(refreshment stand and retail), with no 

improvements. 

• Provide coordinated visitor facilities, including food service, retail, and restrooms, in the 

paved area at the east end of the lake. 

Potentially adaptively reuse the relocated 

Lockkeeper’s House (see actions for row 

14.2). 

• Provide a flexible performance space, stage, 

or gazebo in or near the east end of the 

lake, taking advantage of the nearby rolling 

terrain to accommodate an audience of 

several thousand. Provide utilities. Control 

sound levels from programs so as to ensure 

respect for the ambience of nearby 

memorials. 

• Replace the existing restrooms with a facility 

designed to be more sensitive to its 

surroundings. 

• Consider rehabilitating and adaptively 

reusing the existing refreshment stand. 

 

220
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — West Potomac Park (North of Independence Avenue) 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

14.6 Visitor Information, Education, and Enjoyment: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See 

facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Provide an outdoor entertainment 

stage (in the lake near a multipurpose facility), with informal 

seating around the lake for several 

thousand people. 

• Add recreation equipment rentals 

(model boats, chairs). 

• Add a children’s play area. 

• Add an informal interactive water 

feature. 

14.7 Visitor Amenities 

• Replace the refreshment stand and 

restrooms. 

• Develop a multipurpose facility in 

the paved asphalt area as previously 

designed, with a unique character 

that could accommodate approximately 130 people indoors and 200 

outside. 

• Develop a flexible, multi-use outdoor stage that could support performances of thematic entertainment (e.g., World War II era music, 

Latin American music). 

• Replace the existing restrooms. 

• Similar to alternative B, except 

remove the restroom and refreshment stand and replace with a food 

service facility and new restrooms. 

221
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

15. VIETNAM VETERANS MEMORIAL 

The 5.8-acre memorial honors those who served during the Vietnam War. As previously noted, an underground 

memorial center will be constructed by others west of Henry Bacon Drive. Except for official annual Memorial Day 

and Veterans Day commemorative ceremonies, federal regulations prohibit demonstrations and special events in 

certain areas of the memorial. 

15.1 Demonstrations, 

Special Events, and 

National Celebrations 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): First Amendment demonstration 

sites related to the Vietnam Veterans Memorial (small structures with displays) are present 

along the sidewalk of the Lincoln Memorial.

Actions • See actions for row 18.2. • See actions for row 18.2. 

15.2 Access and 

Circulation 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Access and circulation may need 

to revised as a result of the new Vietnam Veterans Memorial Center. 

Actions • Examine circulation patterns and related 

pedestrian amenities (lighting, name 

catalogs, post-and-chain fencing). 

• Examine circulation patterns and related 

pedestrian amenities (lighting, name 

catalogs, post-and-chain fencing). 

15.3 Visitor Information, 

Education, and 

Enjoyment 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The visitor contact station provides information, and rangers and volunteers lead programs. Catalogs listing names on 

the wall are provided in several locations. Wayside exhibits provide additional information. 

Actions • Continue living history and volunteer 

interpretation. 

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Provide educational information about the 

history of the memorial and its role on the 

National Mall.

Opportunities for 

Contemplation and Rest 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): No seating is provided close to 

the wall so older visitors can pause to read and contemplate the names. 

Actions • No further action. • Provide additional seating in the vicinity of 

the memorial. 

16. LINCOLN MEMORIAL 

One of the five presidential memorials on the National Mall, the Lincoln Memorial will continue to be a historic 

character-defining feature and the visual western terminus of the National Mall. The presidential memorial will 

remain a highly visited area also associated with civil rights history as well as the contributions of our 16th 

president. Demonstrations, special events, and national celebrations will continue on the grounds. The total area of 

the memorial and grounds is about 107 acres. 

16.1 Visitor Amenities 

Memorial Restrooms Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The memorial restrooms are not 

staffed, are frequently overwhelmed by demand (the heaviest use area in the park), and 

need to be updated. 

Actions • Renovate the memorial restrooms. • Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Expand the restroom within the building 

footprint; monitor for safety and cleanliness. 

Memorial Exhibits and 

Bookstore 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): A bookstore is located near the 

chamber. 

Exhibits and audiovisual presentations are on the lower level, along with the restrooms. 

Actions • Relocate the bookstore to the lower 

level. 

• Renovate and expand the exhibit area. 

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Upgrade exhibits, addressing Abraham 

Lincoln, the memorial’s development, and 

the role of the memorial in civil rights and 

First Amendment demonstrations, as well 

as National Mall and Washington, D.C., 

history.

 

222
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — West Potomac Park (North of Independence Avenue) 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

15. VIETNAM VETERANS MEMORIAL 

 See facing page. 

15.1 Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing 

Conditions) — See facing page. 

• See actions for row 18.2. • See actions for row 18.2. • See actions for row 18.2. 

15.2 Access and Circulation: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. 

15.3 Visitor Information, Education, and Enjoyment: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See 

facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. 

Opportunities for Contemplation and Rest: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing 

page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Provide additional seating in the 

vicinity of the memorial. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. 

16. LINCOLN MEMORIAL 

 See facing page. 

16.1 Visitor Amenities 

Memorial Restrooms: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Clean the restrooms more 

frequently during high-use times. 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Expand the restroom within the 

building footprint; monitor for 

safety and cleanliness. 

• Same as alternative A. 

Memorial Exhibits and Bookstore: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. 

223
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

17. LINCOLN MEMORIAL GROUNDS 

The Lincoln Memorial grounds include three component cultural landscapes: the Reflecting Pool, the Memorial 

Circle and radial roads, and the Watergate area on the west edge of the National Mall. (The reflecting pool area is 

being addressed through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.) 

17.1 Historic Resources Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The historic landscape design 

retains a great deal of integrity with existing plant materials, the elm walkways, and 

concentric plantings around the base of the memorial and at the Watergate steps. 

Concentric rows of elms affect where facilities (bicycle racks, etc.) can be located. 

The elm walkways, street tree grates, plantings around the base of the memorial, and the 

Watergate steps need to be rehabilitated or restored. 

Animal habitat needs to be addressed.

Actions • Preserve and protect the character of 

the historic landscape. 

• Implement recommendations of the 

Lincoln Memorial Cultural Landscape 

Report. 

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Implement recommendations of the 

Cultural Landscape Report. 

◦ Respect the integrity of historic planting 

plans. 

17.2 Demonstrations, 

Special Events, and 

National Celebrations 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The Lincoln Memorial 

Guidelines for Special Events and Demonstrations were developed in 1996 to supplement 

36 CFR 7.96 and to fulfill statutory obligations to protect the Lincoln Memorial and its 

heritage for future generations. The guidelines address topics such as public access and 

operations, deliveries, temporary resource protection measures and requirements, temporary utilities, vibration, height limits, and equipment. 

Actions • Consistent with the First Amendment 

and federal regulations, continue to 

fully accommodate demonstrations. 

• Consistent with federal regulations, 

continue to accommodate special 

events. 

• Revise the Lincoln Memorial Guidelines 

to reflect current conditions as the result of construction since 1996 (security 

perimeter and visitor facilities). 

• Consistent with the First Amendment and 

federal regulations, continue to fully accommodate demonstrations. 

• Consistent with federal regulations, continue 

to accommodate special events. 

• Expand the Lincoln Memorial Guidelines to 

address the availability and use of proposed 

infrastructure designed to facilitate demonstrations and events (utilities, communication 

systems). 

18. LINCOLN MEMORIAL GROUNDS: MEMORIAL CIRCLE AND RADIAL ROADS 

18.1 Historic Resources Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The historic landscape retains its 

integrity.

Actions • Rehabilitate the historic landscape. • Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Mitigate impacts on historic plantings 

when a restroom is constructed south of 

the memorial. 

18.2 Demonstrations, 

Special Events, and 

National Celebrations 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): First Amendment demonstration 

sites related to the Vietnam Veterans Memorial (small structures with displays) are present 

along the sidewalk, but do not block the east-west view. 

Also see row 17.2. 

Actions • Consistent with the First Amendment 

and federal regulations, continue to 

accommodate structures and displays 

related to the Vietnam Veterans 

Memorial. 

• Same as the no-action alternative except 

◦ Ensure that demonstrations are conducted 

in a manner and location that is consistent 

with improved circulation, security, and 

use.

 

224
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — West Potomac Park (North of Independence Avenue) 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

17. LINCOLN MEMORIAL GROUNDS 

 See facing page. 

17.1 Historic Resources: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Implement recommendations of 

the Cultural Landscape Report. 

◦ Respect the integrity of historic 

planting plans.

• Same as alternative A. • Same as alternative A. 

17.2 Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing 

Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative 

except 

◦ Expand the Lincoln Memorial 

Guidelines to address the availability and use of proposed infrastructure designed to facilitate 

demonstrations and events 

(utilities, communication 

systems). 

• Same as alternative B. 

18. LINCOLN MEMORIAL GROUNDS: MEMORIAL CIRCLE AND RADIAL ROADS 

18.1 Historic Resources: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Mitigate impacts on historic 

plantings when a restroom is 

constructed south of the 

memorial. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. 

18.2 Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing 

Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative • Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. 

225
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

18.3 Access and 

Circulation 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Multiple tour bus arrivals can 

result in crowding at the memorial during the peak season. 

There are 18 tour bus drop-offs, 8 parking spaces for visitors with disabilities, and 4 taxi 

stands. 

Elevator access for visitors with disabilities can be challenging. 

Actions • No further action. • Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Better define pedestrian crossings. 

18.4 Visitor Information, 

Education, and 

Enjoyment 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Staffed information stations are 

provided for the Korean War Veterans Memorial and the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. 

Actions • Continue staffed information stations. • Consider removing the Vietnam Veterans 

Memorial information station once the 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial Center has been 

completed. 

• Consider replacing the Korean War Veterans 

Memorial information station. 

18.5 Visitor Amenities 

South Concession 

Refreshment Stand 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The south concession refreshment stand (opened summer 2007) has food and retail but no restrooms. 

Actions • Retain the recently opened stand, 

which provides food and retail, but no 

restrooms. 

• Construct a small restroom in the vicinity 

designed to appear as if it were part of the 

original facility design while respecting 

historic planting patterns. 

North Concession 

Refreshment Stand 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The north concession building 

(opened fall 2006) has food and retail but no restrooms. 

The future Vietnam Veterans Memorial Center will have restrooms, an information desk, and 

a bookstore. 

Actions • Retain the recently opened concession 

refreshment stand, which provides retail 

and food, but no restrooms. 

• Retain the concession refreshment stand 

(restrooms at the planned Vietnam Veterans 

Memorial Center). 

19. LINCOLN MEMORIAL GROUNDS: WATERGATE AREA 

The Watergate area includes historic features and recreation areas (volleyball and softball). Adjacent to and north of 

Constitution Avenue is Braddock’s Memorial Rock Well, which is within intertwined nonhistoric access roads (Rock 

Creek Parkway, the Kennedy Center parking area, U.S. Highways 50 and 66, and Theodore Roosevelt Memorial 

Bridge). 

19.1 Historic Resources Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The Watergate steps were 

originally conceived as the ceremonial entrance to the city. Once used for concert seating, 

the steps are now used as a training site by runners. 

The belvedere is not identified as the terminus of Constitution Avenue (as envisioned by the 

McMillan plan). High stone-faced walls at this location are not overtopped by river 

flooding or debris. 

The John Ericcson Memorial is near 23rd and Independence Avenue SW. 

Other historic features include the Rock Creek Parkway entrance and abutments (flanked by 

the Arts of Peace statues), entrance to Arlington Memorial Bridge, walks, views, and trees. 

Actions • Maintain the Watergate steps, Constitution Avenue belvedere, John Ericcson 

Memorial, and Arts of Peace statues. 

Maintain Arlington Memorial Bridge 

and the Arts of War statues in cooperation with other national park units. 

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Use educational panels to enhance public 

understanding of the steps and the 

belvedere. 

◦ Develop a ceremonial use for the 

Watergate steps. 

 

226
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — West Potomac Park (North of Independence Avenue) 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

18.3 Access and Circulation: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Better define pedestrian 

crossings. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. 

18.4 Visitor Information, Education, and Enjoyment: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See 

facing page. 

• Rehabilitate both facilities. • Remove the Vietnam Veterans 

Memorial information station once 

the Vietnam Veterans Memorial 

Center has been completed. 

• Consider replacing the Korean War 

Veterans Memorial information 

station. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. 

18.5 Visitor Amenities 

South Concession Refreshemnt Stand: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Construct a nearby restroom 

facility. 

• Same as alternative B. 

North Concession Refreshment Stand: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Retain the refreshment stand (restrooms at the planned Vietnam 

Veterans Memorial Center). 

• Provide restrooms adjacent to the 

concession refreshment stand. 

• Same as alternative A. 

19. LINCOLN MEMORIAL GROUNDS: WATERGATE AREA 

 See facing page. 

19.1 Historic Resources: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Use educational panels to enhance public understanding of 

the steps and the belvedere. 

• Same as alternative A plus 

◦ Develop a ceremonial use for the 

Watergate steps. 

• Same as alternative A plus 

◦ Possibly accommodate water taxi 

stops at the Watergate steps, 

with a redesign of Ohio Drive for 

safe pedestrian access. 

227
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

19.2 Commemorative 

Sites 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The area has been identified in 

the NCPC Memorials and Museums Master Plan for several future national commemorative sites. This area is outside the Reserve that was designated by Congress. 

Actions • Accommodate future national 

memorials authorized by Congress, and 

reinforce this area as a commemorative 

landscape. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. 

19.3 Access and 

Circulation 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): This area on the northwest 

corner serves as a major vehicular gateway to the city and the National Mall from Virginia 

and Maryland. Access to the Potomac Freeway, I-66, Ohio Drive, and Rock Creek Parkway 

are prominent parts of the road network, which is scheduled to be redesigned and 

simplified, with planning, compliance, and construction done by others. There are 70 

public parking spaces along Parkway Drive. 

(See the Framework Plan for circulation and strengthening visual and physical connections to 

the Kennedy Center.) 

Actions • Accommodate road projects and 

circulation improvements by others to 

simplify traffic patterns and to improve 

pedestrian connections from the 

Kennedy Center and neighborhoods. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. 

Arlington Memorial 

Bridge / Rock Creek 

Parkway Access 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The nonhistoric off-ramp 

cloverleaf configuration dominates bridge access — the south off-ramp leads to Rock 

Creek Parkway and the north ramp onto Arlington Memorial Bridge. 

Actions • Maintain existing circulation. • Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Improve pedestrian crossings and access 

to Arlington Memorial Bridge. 

◦ Adapt access to accommodate future 

road network improvements. 

19.4 Visitor Enjoyment Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The area provides space for 

recreational activities such as volleyball and softball. 

Actions • Continue recreational activities. 

• Improve condition of volleyball courts 

and softball fields. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. 

19.5 Operations 

Jurisdictional Agreements Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Following 1960s road work that 

altered the historic character, jurisdictional boundary lines were not adjusted to conform to 

new circulation patterns. The National Park Service and the city have maintenance agreements for the area. The National Park Service takes care of the Braddock Memorial Rock 

Well and surrounding turf. 

Actions • Continue to maintain areas outside NPS 

jurisdiction through agreements with 

the city. 

• Make jurisdictional adjustments to 

correspond to new road and circulation 

improvements. 

Storage and Maintenance 

Facilities 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Storage and maintenance 

facilities have been built into the structures for the Rock Creek Parkway and the roads 

north of Constitution Avenue. Roadway realignments would affect these uses, and they 

might not be compatible with future memorial sites proposed for this area. 

Actions • Continue present storage and 

maintenance facilities. 

• Address storage and maintenance areas as 

roads are realigned. 

 

228
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — West Potomac Park (North of Independence Avenue) 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

19.2 Commemorative Sites: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. 

19.3 Access and Circulation: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. 

Arlington Memorial Bridge / Rock Creek Parkway Access: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) —

See facing page. 

• Remove the south ramp cloverleaf 

and redirect traffic to 23rd Street. 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Improve pedestrian crossings and 

access to Arlington Memorial 

Bridge. 

◦ Adapt access to accommodate 

future road network improvements. 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Reestablish a north ramp and 

access to Constitution Avenue. 

19.4 Visitor Enjoyment: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. 

19.5 Operations 

Jurisdictional Agreements: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Make jurisdictional adjustments to 

correspond to new road and 

circulation improvements. 

• Same as alternative A. • Same as alternative A. 

Storage and Maintenance Facilities: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Address storage and maintenance 

areas as roads are realigned. 

• Same as alternative A. • Same as alternative A. 

229
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

20. KOREAN WAR VETERANS MEMORIAL 

The Korean War Veterans Memorial commemorates the veterans and international coalition that fought the Korean 

War in the 1950s. Living history programs are provided, and annual special events take place at the memorial. 

20.1 Access and 

Circulation 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Narrow entry walks are 

frequently congested or may be inadequate for groups; changes in visitor walking patterns 

suggest pedestrians would like an east-side entry. 

Actions • Continue present circulation patterns, 

with the entry approach from the west. 

• On the west side widen the walks; improve 

pedestrian connections between the 

memorial, the Lincoln Memorial reflecting 

pool, and Independence Avenue to 

accommodate changing circulation patterns 

and group visitation. 

20.2 Visitor Information 

and Education 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): There is a visitor contact station 

with interactive computer displays (see row 18.4). 

Actions • Take no further action. • Provide educational information about the 

Korean War, commemoration, and National 

Mall history. 

21. ASH WOODS 

Ash Woods, which is between Independence Avenue and Ash Road, was planned to be a naturalized, thickly 

wooded area with little understory vegetation. The area contains the U.S. Park Police stables, a restroom, and 

recreation fields. 

21.1 Access and Circulation — Ash Road 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Ash Road, originally designed as 

a service road, provides pedestrian access between memorials and to recreation areas and 

facilities, as well as the U.S. Park Police stables. Visitor pedestrian traffic along this service 

road is likely to continue to increase when the Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial is built. 

Actions • Continue to provide access to 

recreation areas and facilities in 

addition to the U.S. Park Police stables. 

• Make Ash Road primarily a pedestrian walk 

with a secondary function as a service road 

(e.g., emergency, law enforcement, and 

maintenance access); provide amenities such 

as seating and lighting. 

21.2 Visitor Information, 

Education, and 

Enjoyment 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The multiuse JFK recreation 

fields are used daily and are closed during the off-season. They have been used 

infrequently for large events. 

Actions • Continue to maintain recreation fields 

and allow infrequent large events. 

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Soften the strong geometric edges of the 

JFK recreation fields. 

◦ Provide educational exhibits at the U.S. 

Park Police stables. 

◦ Make the horse paddocks part of the 

visitor experience, and provide information about the U.S. Park Police and 

horse patrols.

21.3 Visitor Amenities Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The restroom facility is outdated 

and difficult to maintain. 

Actions • Upgrade the restroom as funds become 

available. 

• Demolish the restroom facility and construct 

a new facility near the U.S. Park Police 

stables to better distribute restrooms, using 

the visitor services architectural style. 

• If feasible, provide nearby food service to 

meet expected increased visitation and 

changed circulation patterns when the 

Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial is finished. 

 

230
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — West Potomac Park (North of Independence Avenue) 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

20. KOREAN WAR VETERANS MEMORIALS 

 See facing page. 

20.1 Access and Circulation: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Assess changes in visitor use patterns due to the development of 

new memorials. 

• Provide additional east-side entry 

walks to accommodate changing 

circulation patterns. 

• Same as alternative B. 

20.2 Visitor Information and Education: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Replace and upgrade computer 

screens as technology improves. 

• Same as alternative A. • Same as alternative A. 

21. ASH WOODS 

 See facing page. 

21.1 Access and Circulation — Ash Road: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing 

page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Make Ash Road primarily a pedestrian walk with a secondary 

function as a service road (e.g., 

emergency, law enforcement, and 

maintenance access). 

• Same as alternative B. 

21.2 Visitor Information, Education, and Enjoyment 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Soften the strong geometric 

edges of the JFK recreation 

fields. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Upgrade recreation field conditions 

with backstops, etc., to avoid 

leagues leaving their equipment on 

the fields. 

• Make the horse paddocks part of 

the visitor experience, and provide 

information about the U.S. Park 

Police and horse patrols. 

21.3 Visitor Amenities 

• Replace the restroom facility. • Demolish the restroom and construct a new facility closer to the 

U.S. Park Police stables (halfway 

between the World War II and 

Lincoln memorials). 

• Same as alternative B. 

231
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

21.4 Operations — 

United States Park 

Police Stables 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The U.S. Park Police stables 

provide a necessary law enforcement facility. 

Utilitarian grapestake wood fencing, truck and horse trailer parking, and the mobile office at 

the U.S. Park Police facilities are not in keeping with the historic character of the National 

Mall. 

Actions • Maintain the stables in their current 

location, with access from Ash Woods 

road. 

• Reconstruct the stables to be compatible 

with the historic character and quality of the 

National Mall. 

• Redesign the area so that operational 

functions remain fairly inconspicuous on the 

south side. 

• Construct a new stables parking area and 

vehicle access road from Independence 

Avenue. 

WEST POTOMAC PARK (SOUTH OF INDEPENDENCE AVENUE) 

22. TIDAL BASIN AREA 

The Tidal Basin area, a designed water area of a little more than 100 acres, is the beautiful setting for several 

memorials, the cherry trees that were a gift from Japan, historic monuments, and visitor facilities. It provides 

spectacular views and reflected views of the Thomas Jefferson Memorial and the Washington Monument. The Tidal 

Basin area is used for demonstrations, national celebrations, and special events. 

22.1 Vision Emphasis • The Tidal Basin offers a pleasant 

strolling and viewing experience. 

• A sense of arrival at the Tidal Basin would be 

created by redesigning pedestrian circulation. 

• Around the Tidal Basin the highest quality 

recreational experiences would be provided, 

including strolling/sightseeing, bicycling, and 

boating. Improved circulation patterns, highquality paving, additional seating, and more 

pedestrian stopping points would enhance 

the strolling and viewing experiences. New 

visitor services would provide pleasant 

interludes for enjoyment. 

• Based on engineering recommendations, the 

Tidal Basin seawalls would be rebuilt above 

tidewater to retain the historic appearance 

while accommodating wider walks. 

22.2 Historic Resources Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The historic Tidal Basin has been 

altered in the past and was reduced by 4 acres to build the Thomas Jefferson Memorial. 

Inlet, Outlet, and Kutz bridges are historic resources. 

Actions • Maintain the Inlet, Outlet, and Kutz 

bridges as historic features within a 

naturalistic environment. 

• Widen and separate pedestrian/ bicycling 

walks near Inlet, Outlet, and Kutz bridges. 

22.3 Natural Resources 

Tidal Basin Function and 

Walls 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The Tidal Basin was designed to 

help flush the Washington Channel to support navigation. Over the last 100 years the 

flushing capability has been reduced and the basin has silted in. The Tidal Basin gates were 

replaced in 2007 to help restore the flushing function to the basin, but additional studies 

and improvements are needed. 

The Tidal Basin walls are deteriorating. High tides overtop the walls between the Jefferson 

Memorial to the north of Inlet Bridge and spill onto the walkways, resulting in social trails 

as visitors try to avoid the water. 

 

232
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — West Potomac Park (South of Independence Avenue) 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

21.4 Operations — United States Park Police Stables: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See 

facing page. 

• Renovate the U.S. Park Police 

stables. 

• Screen the stables with a wall or 

fence appropriate for the historic 

design of the National Mall. 

• Construct a new parking area and 

vehicle access road from 

Independence Avenue. 

• Reconstruct the stables to be compatible with the historic character 

and quality of the National Mall. 

• Construct a new parking area and 

vehicle access road from 

Independence Avenue. 

WEST POTOMAC PARK (SOUTH OF INDEPENDENCE AVENUE) 

22. TIDAL BASIN AREA

 See facing page. 

• The Tidal Basin area would be 

upgraded with improved paved 

walks and facilities to enhance 

strolling and viewing experiences. 

• The Tidal Basin area would be 

upgraded with high-quality, paved 

walks, improved circulation, 

furniture, facilities, and services to 

provide opportunities for more 

visitors to enjoy strolling and 

viewing experiences. 

• The Tidal Basin area would be 

upgraded with high-quality, paved 

walks, improved circulation, and 

facilities, as well as more 

recreational opportunities, to allow 

more visitors to enjoy strolling and 

viewing experiences. 

22.2 Historic Resources: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Reconfigure Kutz Bridge traffic 

lanes to widen walks on the south 

side. 

• Widen walks around the Tidal Basin 

and add pedestrian bridges near 

Inlet, Outlet, and Kutz bridges to 

reduce congestion. 

• Fill in the north lobe of the Tidal 

Basin for additional recreation 

space. 

22.3 Natural Resources 

Tidal Basin Function and Walls: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

233
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

Tidal Basin Function and 

Walls: Actions 

• Undertake engineering studies to 

improve Tidal Basin flushing and to 

ensure seawall stability. 

• Sign high-water conditions in areas 

overtopped by water. 

• Maintain the walls and make temporary 

repairs. 

• Implement the recommendations of 

engineering studies and rebuild the Tidal 

Basin seawalls to be above tidewater 

according and to allow wider walkways to 

protect the cherry trees. 

Soils and Vegetation Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Soils are compacted at the base 

of cherry trees and along some social trails that have been created either for convenience 

or to avoid high water. 

Actions • Address soil compaction and social trails 

as budgets and staffing allow. 

• Improve soil conditions, thwart social trail 

development, and address erosion / soil compaction under trees. 

Cherry Trees Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Thousands of cherry trees 

define the character of the Tidal Basin. Trampling by visitors spilling off narrow walkways 

causes soil compaction and erosion near tree roots and a decline in the health of the trees. 

Actions • Address adverse effects on cherry tree 

health as budgets and staffing allow. 

• Install post-and-chain fencing in some 

areas to reduce trampling, compaction, 

and erosion near cherry trees. 

• Increase stewardship messages about 

how to reduce damage to the trees. 

• Similar to the no-action alternative except 

◦ Reduce trampling of tree roots by 

widening walkways.

22.4 Demonstrations, 

Special Events, and 

National Celebrations 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The National Cherry Blossom 

Festival is the most attended annual event in the national park system. 

Actions • Consistent with the First Amendment 

and federal regulations, continue to 

fully accommodate demonstrations. 

• Consistent with federal regulations, 

continue to accommodate special 

events. 

• Continue to examine current operations 

and use best management practices to 

improve operations for demonstrations 

and special events. 

• Close the Tidal Basin parking lot during 

the National Cherry Blossom Festival; 

concentrate facilities on hard surfaces 

and outside the north-south viewshed. 

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Use more roving educational ambassadors 

during the National Cherry Blossom 

Festival and more educational signs to 

prevent resource damage. 

22.5 Access and 

Circulation 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Roads provide convenient 

access to the Tidal Basin area. Access to the Tidal Basin parking lot is from Independence 

Avenue SW by way of Maine Avenue; it has 132 parking spaces and 9 spaces for people 

with disabilities. 

Three facilities (paddleboat rental, refreshment stand, and public parking) in one small 

location result in periodic pedestrian / vehicular congestion. 

During the National Cherry Blossom Festival the parking area is closed to public parking to 

provide a location for temporary event facilities. 

 

234
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — West Potomac Park (South of Independence Avenue) 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

• Implement the recommendations of 

engineering studies and rebuild the 

basin walls in their current location 

so they are above tidewater. 

• Implement the recommendations of 

engineering studies and rebuild the 

basin walls to allow wider walkways 

to protect the cherry trees. 

• Seek a sustainable solution to 

comprehensively address hydrology 

and flooding in the Tidal Basin area. 

• Implement the recommendations of 

engineering studies and maximize 

the ability of the basin to flush and 

absorb tidal surges. Rebuild the 

basin walls to allow wider walkways, and eliminate the bay north 

of Kutz Bridge to provide additional 

recreation space. 

Soils and Vegetation: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Improve soil conditions, thwart 

social trail development, and address erosion / soil compaction 

under trees. 

• Same as alternative A. • Same as alternative A. 

Cherry Trees: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Similar to the no-action alternative 

except 

◦ Continually assess the effectiveness of tree protection 

measures and continue to implement the most effective. 

• Similar to the no-action alternative 

except 

◦ Reduce trampling of tree roots 

by widening walkways.

• Same as alternative B. 

22.4 Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing 

Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Utilize roving educational 

ambassadors and more 

educational signs to prevent 

resource damage. 

22.5 Access and Circulation: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

235
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

22.5 Access and 

Circulation: Actions 

• Continue parking lot access from Maine 

Avenue. 

• Close the Tidal Basin parking lot during 

the National Cherry Blossom Festival. 

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Redesign roads and parking areas for 

more efficient access and use. 

◦ Redesign circulation to separate bicyclists, 

pedestrians, and vehicles. 

Walkways Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Walkways continue to deteriorate, and they are too narrow for current use. Congested areas include Kutz, Inlet, and 

Outlet bridges. 

There is an opportunity to enhance the meandering, strolling experience through the area. 

Actions • Maintain walks as budgets and staffing 

allow. 

• Widen and repave walkways as part of a 

coordinated paving system for the National 

Mall, widen walkways for pedestrians and 

bicyclists near Inlet, Outlet, and Kutz bridges. 

22.6 Visitor Information, 

Education, and 

Enjoyment 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Seasonal paddleboat rentals are 

provided on the east side of the Tidal Basin. 

Private boat access is not allowed in the Tidal Basin. 

Visitor enjoyment is primarily informal recreation, such as enjoying views, picnicking, and 

strolling along the Tidal Basin walks. 

Actions • Continue current management for 

informal recreation. 

• Continue to provide seasonal 

paddleboat rentals. 

• Provide educational information about cherry 

tree history and the Tidal Basin, the 

development of the Potomac parks, as well 

as history of the National Mall. 

• Provide additional boat choices for visitors, 

such as rowboat and kayak rentals. 

• Consider providing boat service between the 

Thomas Jefferson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and 

Martin Luther King Jr. memorials, as well as 

the Tidal Basin parking lot. 

22.7 Visitor Amenities Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Seasonal refreshment and 

recreation equipment rental facilities near the Tidal Basin parking lot are outdated and are 

occasionally inadequate for demand. There are no restroom facilities. The appearance of 

some facilities is out of character with the National Mall. 

Actions • Retain the recreation equipment rental 

area with public parking and a 

refreshment stand, but without 

restrooms. 

• Replace the Tidal Basin refreshment stand 

with a stand similar to those on the Mall or 

at the Lincoln Memorial, including outdoor 

seating (some shaded) and a few restrooms. 

Design the new facility to blend with the 

historic character of the National Mall and to 

reduce congestion. 

• Add seating along walks. 

• Provide additional locations for visitors to 

enjoy views. 

• Install pedestrian lighting so that it would 

not impact the evening lighting ambience of 

memorials. 

• Replace the recreation equipment rental 

facilities. 

 

236
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — West Potomac Park (South of Independence Avenue) 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Remove the parking lot if and 

when new underground parking 

garage provided on the south 

Washington Monument grounds 

(see actions for row 13.4). 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Redesign roads and parking 

areas for more efficient access 

and use. 

◦ Separate bicyclists, pedestrians, 

and vehicles. 

Walkways: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Upgrade/rebuild walkways. 

• Widen sidewalks at Kutz Bridge by 

moving all traffic lanes to the north 

side. 

• Widen and repave walkways as part 

of a coordinated paving system for 

the National Mall, construct three 

pedestrian bridges near vehicular 

bridges to reduce congestion. 

• Install railings between the walkway 

and the water for visitor safety, 

particularly for evening walks. 

• Widen and repave walkways as part 

of a coordinated paving system for 

the National Mall, construct three 

pedestrian bridges near vehicular 

bridges to reduce congestion. 

22.6 Visitor Information, Education, and Enjoyment: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See 

facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Provide rowboat and sea kayak 

rentals as an additional choice of 

boating experiences for visitors. 

◦ Develop recreation fields when 

the north bay has been filled in. 

22.7 Visitor Amenities: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Redesign facilities to blend with the 

historic character of the National 

Mall and to reduce congestion. 

• Replace the recreation equipment 

rental and refreshment facilities; 

add restrooms. 

• Add seating. 

• Redesign facilities to reduce congestion and to complement the 

National Mall’s historic character. 

• Replace the refreshment stand with 

a multipurpose facility (small-scale, 

year-round facility with a unique 

character, indoor/outdoor seating, 

open views) with restrooms. 

• Provide additional locations for 

visitors to enjoy views. 

• Install pedestrian lighting so that it 

would not impact the evening 

lighting ambience of the memorial. 

• Upgrade the recreation equipment 

rental facilities. 

• Replace visitor facilities to complement the historic character of 

the National Mall and to reduce 

congestion. 

• Replace the refreshment stand; add 

restrooms. 

• Provide additional locations for 

visitors to enjoy views. 

• Install pedestrian lighting in a 

manner that would not impact the 

evening lighting ambience of the 

memorial. 

• Replace the recreation equipment 

rental facilities. 

237
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

23. FRANKLIN DELANO ROOSEVELT MEMORIAL 

One of five presidential memorials on the National Mall, this memorial tells important stories of mid-20th century 

history — the Great Depression, the Roosevelt presidential legacy, and World War II. The adjacent area to the north 

is the site of the future Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial. 

23.1 Access and 

Circulation 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): A visitor transit stop is provided. 

There are 18 tour bus drop-offs, 12 tour bus parking spaces, 10 parking spaces for visitors 

with disabilities, and 4 taxi stands. 

West Basin Drive will be realigned when the Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial is built. 

Actions • Provide access and parking in coordination with the plans for the Martin 

Luther King Jr. Memorial. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. 

23.2 Visitor Information, 

Education, and 

Enjoyment 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Room 4 is designed for 

programs. 

Actions • Room 4 not used for programs. • Undertake a comprehensive condition 

assessment of the memorial, including visitor 

use patterns. 

• Increase education and programs by using 

Room 4 as it was intended. 

23.3 Visitor Amenities Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Visitor facilities include an 

information station, bookstore, and two restrooms. 

Actions • Maintain present facilities; renovate 

restrooms as needed. 

• If warranted by demand, provide a small 

food service / restroom facility convenient to 

both the Franklin Delano Roosevelt and the 

future Martin Luther King Jr. memorials. Use 

an identifiable visitor services design, similar 

to the Lincoln Memorial refreshment stands, 

and consider providing themed food menus 

and space for programs and performances. 

24. WEST POTOMAC PARK RIVERFRONT 

Stretching south from the John Ericcson Memorial to the I-395 corridor, the Potomac Riverfront includes the First 

Airmail Flight Plaque, cherry trees, walks, views, and parking. This is primarily an informal area. Athletic fields are 

east of Ohio Drive SW. The riverfront trail system connects to Georgetown and East Potomac Park, as well as to the 

National Mall. 

24.1 Historic Resources 

(south of 

Arlington Memorial Bridge) 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Dry-laid stone river walls south 

of Arlington Memorial Bridge are deteriorating and are overtopped in some areas by 

tidewater and debris. 

Current riprap is an emergency repair. 

Actions • Continue to make stabilization repairs 

to the stone river walls. 

• Where feasible, establish a sustainable, 

vegetated shoreline; in other areas construct 

stone-faced river walls. 

24.2 Demonstrations, 

Special Events, and 

National Celebrations 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The recreation fields west of the 

Tidal Basin are regularly used for special events and for stages and seating. The area may 

be used as a staging area during runs, walks, and marathons. 

Actions • Consistent with the First Amendment 

and federal regulations, continue to 

fully accommodate demonstrations. 

• Consistent with federal regulations, 

continue to accommodate special 

events. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. 

 

238
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — West Potomac Park (South of Independence Avenue) 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

23. FRANKLIN DELANO ROOSEVELT MEMORIAL

 See facing page. 

23.1 Access and Circulation: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. 

23.2 Visitor Information, Education, and Enjoyment: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See 

facing page. 

• Undertake a comprehensive condition assessment of the memorial, 

including visitor use patterns. 

• Increase programming. 

• Undertake a comprehensive condition assessment of the memorial, 

including visitor use patterns. 

• Increase education and programs by 

using Room 4 as it was intended. 

• Same as alternative B. 

23.3 Visitor Amenities: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Provide food service that would 

also be convenient to the future 

Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial.

• Similar to alternative A except 

◦ Construct a refreshment stand 

without restrooms that would 

also be convenient to the future 

Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial. 

24. WEST POTOMAC PARK RIVERFRONT 

 See facing page. 

24.1 Historic Resources (south of Arlington Memorial Bridge) : Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing 

Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Restore the dry-laid stone river 

walls. 

• Reconstruct the river walls as 

higher, stone-faced structural walls 

so they are not regularly overtopped by tidewater and floating 

debris. 

• Where feasible, establish a sustainable, vegetated shoreline; reconstruct river walls where necessary; 

add trees; emphasize river views. 

24.2 Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing 

Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Develop a small staging area for 

demonstrations and events (grass 

pavement, utilities) south of 23rd 

and Independence Avenue. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. 

239
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

24.2 Demonstrations, 

Special Events, and 

National Celebrations: 

Actions (cont.) 

• Continue to allow the recreation fields 

to be occasionally used as staging for 

demonstrations, events, and filming; 

but limit other uses during recreation 

seasons. 

24.3 Access and 

Circulation 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): There are 170 public parking 

spaces along Ohio Drive. 

Actions • Continue to provide parking along Ohio 

Drive. 

• Limit access or the direction of traffic 

during some events. 

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Possibly reconfigure visitor parking areas 

for more efficient use but retain similar 

parking levels. 

Pedestrian and Bicycle 

Trails 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Recreational and commuter bike 

traffic use the riverfront. 

The Rock Creek Trail Plan calls for widening the trail and Parkway Drive. 

Actions • Continue to allow recreational and 

commuter bike traffic use. 

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Improve walks and provide additional 

seating (see actions for row 24.1). 

◦ Develop a system of separate bicycle lanes 

or trails along Ohio Drive and river walks. 

24.4 Visitor Information, 

Education, and 

Enjoyment 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Informal or passive recreation 

occurs, such as picnicking, play, and walking. 

Recreation ballfields west of the Tidal Basin are highly sought after for league and 

recreational games. The fields are occasionally used as staging areas for events and 

commercial filming.

Actions • Continue current use policies for 

recreation fields, including using areas 

as staging for demonstrations, special 

events, and filming. 

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Provide space for seating, fishing, and 

enjoyment of the river or perhaps nodes 

for water taxi service or the launching of 

small, hand-carried watercraft (such as 

canoes or kayaks). 

25. GEORGE MASON MEMORIAL 

The memorial to this Founding Father emphasizes the rights of citizens in a democracy and is built around an 

existing water feature. It contains perennial gardens. No additional actions other than routine maintenance are 

planned. 

25.1 Historic Resources Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The George Mason Memorial 

incorporated an existing historic fountain. 

Actions • Rehabilitate the historic fountain to 

improve water quality. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. 

26. THOMAS JEFFERSON MEMORIAL 

One of the five presidential memorials on the National Mall, the Thomas Jefferson Memorial will continue to be a 

historic, character-defining feature and the visual southern terminus for the National Mall. This memorial to our 

third president includes the terrace wall and related plantings, the circular terrace roadway, and the north plaza. It 

is the site for demonstrations, national celebrations, special events, and civic activity. 

26.1 Demonstrations, 

Special Events, and 

National Celebrations 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): The memorial plaza provides a 

stage for the National Cherry Blossom Festival and other events, and its hard surfacing 

make it a sustainable location for demonstrations, special events, and the media. 

Management changes in 2008 recommend that stages must be located so they do not block 

views between the White House and the memorial. 

 

240
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — West Potomac Park (South of Independence Avenue) 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

 

24.3 Access and Circulation: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. • Reexamine and redesign roads and 

parking as separate bike lanes are 

provided. 

Pedestrian and Bicycle Trails: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. • Provide separate bike and walking 

trails, and emphasize recreational 

trail connections to East Potomac 

Park and Rock Creek Park, as well 

as the southwest waterfront. 

24.4 Visitor Information, Education, and Enjoyment: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See 

facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Provide lockers for temporary 

personal storage. 

◦ Develop children’s play areas. 

25. GEORGE MASON MEMORIAL 

 See facing page. 

25.1 Historic Resources: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. 

26. THOMAS JEFFERSON MEMORIAL 

 See facing page. 

26.1 Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing 

Conditions) — See facing page. 

241
ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC OR AREA 

NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE — PROVIDE A 

QUALITY VISITOR EXPERIENCE, PROTECT 

THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE, AND 

ACCOMMODATE HIGH-USE LEVELS 

26.1 Demonstrations, 

Special Events, and 

National Celebrations: 

Actions 

• Consistent with the First Amendment 

and federal regulations, continue to 

fully accommodate demonstrations. 

• Consistent with federal regulations, 

continue to permit special events on the 

plaza and nearby areas. 

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Improve utilities on the plaza and south of 

the memorial for demonstrations and 

special events. 

◦ Allow no special event stage, roof, or 

walls to obstruct the view to the White 

House from the plaza. 

◦ Convert the southside parking area (now 

closed) to accommodate demonstrations 

and events; provide utilities.

26.2 Visitor Information 

and Education 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): There is a contact station on the 

chamber level, and exhibits and a short movie in the lower level. 

Actions • Continue to provide exhibits and 

information about Thomas Jefferson. 

• Update exhibits (focusing on Thomas 

Jefferson, the memorial’s development, and 

the history of the Tidal Basin, as well as the 

history of the National Mall). 

26.3 Visitor Amenities Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): A bookstore, retail area, and 

restrooms are located under the memorial. 

Actions • Continue bookstore and restrooms 

inside the memorial. 

• Same as the no-action alternative plus 

◦ Renovate and expand the restrooms in the 

memorial. 

27. THOMAS JEFFERSON MEMORIAL GROUNDS 

The memorial grounds include 19.2 acres immediately south of the Tidal Basin, with tall shade trees and cherry 

trees. 

27.1 Historic Resources Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): Plantings on the grounds (deciduous trees, including cherry trees) have historic integrity. 

Actions • Preserve historic plantings. • Same as the no-action alternative. 

27.2 Access and 

Circulation 

Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): There are about 300 public 

parking spaces in three lots a short distance from both the George Mason and Thomas 

Jefferson memorials. 

There are 8 tour bus parking spaces and 5 spaces for visitors with disabilities.

Actions • Retain the present tour bus drop-off 

area and public parking. 

• Improve sign system from parking lots 

A, B, and C. 

• Redesign the tour bus drop off to improve 

pedestrian circulation. 

• Improve sign system from parking lots A, B, 

and C. 

• Provide bicycle lanes or trails for safer or 

improved access near the memorial and to 

the I-395 bridges. 

27.3 Visitor Amenities Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions): A concession refreshment stand 

is near East Basin Drive. 

Actions • Continue the present concession 

refreshment stand. 

• Replace the concession refreshment stand 

with a new facility providing food, restrooms, and retail; consider traffic and circulation patterns, as well as views to and from 

the memorial, in siting the new facility. 

 

242
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 7 — West Potomac Park (South of Independence Avenue) 

ALTERNATIVE A — FOCUS ON THE 

HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND 

EDUCATION 

ALTERNATIVE B — FOCUS ON A 

WELCOMING NATIONAL CIVIC 

SPACE FOR PUBLIC GATHERINGS, 

EVENTS, AND HIGH-USE LEVELS 

ALTERNATIVE C — FOCUS ON 

URBAN OPEN SPACE, URBAN 

ECOLOGY, RECREATION, AND 

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES 

• Same as the no-action alternative. 

plus 

◦ Allow no special event stage, 

roof, or walls to obstruct the 

view to the White House. 

• Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Install utilities and infrastructure 

(e.g., power, microphones, tent 

anchors) on the plaza for use 

during demonstrations and 

special events. 

• Same as alternative B. 

26.2 Visitor Information and Education: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as alternative A. • Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Increase ranger programs. 

26.3 Visitor Amenities: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative 

plus 

◦ Renovate and expand the restrooms in the memorial. 

• Same as alternative B. 

27. THOMAS JEFFERSON MEMORIAL GROUNDS 

See facing page. 

27.1 Historic Resources: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. • Same as the no-action alternative. 

27.2 Access and Circulation: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Redesign the tour bus drop off to 

improve pedestrian circulation. 

• Improve sign system from parking 

lots A, B, and C. 

• Same as alternative A. • Same as alternative A. 

27.3 Visitor Amenities: Opportunities, Problems, and Concerns (Existing Conditions) — See facing page. 

• Same as the no-action alternative. • Replace the outdated refreshment 

stand. 

• Relocate the refreshment stand 

closer to primary bicycle, pedestrian 

routes, and the tour bus drop-off. 

243
ALTERNATIVES

TABLE 8: SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

NO-ACTION 

ALTERNATIVE 

PREFERRED 

ALTERNATIVE ALTERNATIVE A ALTERNATIVE B ALTERNATIVE C 

CULTURAL RESOURCES 

Impacts common to all alternatives: Long-term, negligible to minor, and beneficial as the result of protecting and preserving contributing 

features, along with actions at the Lincoln Memorial (regular preventive maintenance, renovation of the exhibit area and restrooms, 

and protection of associated features), protection of cherry trees at the Tidal Basin, and rehabilitation of the historic fountain at the 

George Mason Memorial. No impairment of cultural resources.

Direct and indirect impacts: Long-term, negligible to minor, and 

either adverse or beneficial. 

Cumulative impacts:

Long-term, major, and 

beneficial, with a very 

small contribution from 

this alternative. 

Direct and indirect impacts: Long-term, negligible to major, and 

adverse; and long-term, 

negligible to moderate, 

and beneficial. 

Cumulative impacts:

Long-term, major, and 

beneficial, with a 

noticeable contribution 

from this alternative. 

Direct and indirect impacts: Long-term, negligible to major, and adverse; and long-term, 

negligible to minor, and 

beneficial. 

Cumulative impacts:

Long-term, major, and 

beneficial, with a very 

small contribution from 

this alternative. 

Direct and indirect impacts: Long-term, minor 

to major, and adverse; 

and long-term, minor to 

moderate, and beneficial. 

Cumulative impacts: 

Long-term, major, and 

beneficial, with a small 

contribution from this 

alternative. 

Direct and indirect impacts: Long-term to 

permanent, negligible to 

major, and adverse, and 

long-term, negligible to 

moderate, and beneficial. 

Cumulative impacts: 

Long-term, major, and 

beneficial, with a noticeable adverse contribution from this 

alternative. 

NHPA section 106 summary: Potential adverse 

effects. 

NHPA section 106 summary: Potential adverse 

effects; further consultation required to make 

a final determination of 

effect and to identify 

appropriate mitigation 

measures.

NHPA section 106 summary: Potential adverse 

effects; further consultation required to make 

a final determination of 

effect and to identify 

appropriate mitigation 

measures.

NHPA section 106 summary: Potential adverse 

effects; further consultation required to make 

a final determination of 

effect and to identify 

appropriate mitigation 

measures.

NHPA section 106 summary: Potential adverse 

effects; further consultation required to make 

a final determination of 

effect and to identify 

appropriate mitigation 

measures.

NATURAL RESOURCES: WATER QUALITY

Impacts common to all alternatives: Long-term, negligible, and beneficial impacts from addressing water quality problems and algae 

growth in designed water features. Continued monitoring of conditions affected by global climate change (e.g., temperature, rainfall, 

and sea level) and development of strategies to mitigate the effects of climate change, especially sea level rise. No unacceptable 

impacts or resource impairment. 

Direct and indirect impacts: Continued shortand long-term, minor to 

moderate, adverse impacts on potable water 

use, groundwater, and 

surface water resources. 

Cumulative impacts:

Long-term, moderate, 

and adverse. 

Direct and indirect impacts: Short-term, moderate, adverse impacts 

during construction at 

the Tidal Basin and along 

the Potomac River, but 

long-term, minor, beneficial impacts on potable 

water use and on 

groundwater and surface 

water resources. 

Cumulative impacts:

Long-term, moderate, 

and adverse, with a 

slight beneficial contribution from this alternative. 

Direct and indirect impacts: Short-term, negligible, adverse impacts 

during construction of 

new Tidal Basin seawalls. 

Long-term, negligible to 

minor, beneficial impacts. 

Cumulative impacts:

Long-term, moderate, 

and adverse, with a 

slight beneficial contribution from this alternative. 

Direct and indirect impacts: Short-term, moderate, adverse impacts 

during construction at 

the Tidal Basin and along 

the Potomac River. Over 

the long-term, both adverse and beneficial impacts on groundwater 

and surface water resources, with combined 

impacts being neutral. 

Cumulative impacts:

Long-term, moderate, 

and adverse, with slight 

adverse and beneficial 

contributions from this 

alternative. 

Direct and indirect impacts: Short-term, moderate, adverse impacts 

during construction at 

the Tidal Basin and 

along the Potomac 

River. Long-term, negligible to minor, beneficial 

impacts on potable 

water use, and on 

groundwater and 

surface water resources. 

Cumulative impacts:

Long-term, moderate, 

and adverse, with a 

slight beneficial contribution from this alternative. 

NATURAL RESOURCES: SOILS

Impacts common to all alternatives: Long-term, moderate, and beneficial from restoring natural processes and functions. 

Direct and indirect impacts: Continued shortand long-term adverse 

impacts ranging from 

minor to major because 

of heavy daily foot traffic, recreational activities, 

and large events, affecting soil quality and 

productivity. 

Cumulative impacts:

Long-term, moderate to 

Direct and indirect impacts: Short-term, minor, 

and adverse from construction; and long-term, 

moderate, and beneficial 

from soil augmentation 

or replacement. 

Cumulative impacts:

Long-term, moderate to 

major, and adverse, with 

a modest adverse and 

beneficial contribution 

Direct and indirect impacts: Short-term, negligible, and adverse from 

construction; and longterm, moderate, and 

beneficial from soil augmentation or replacement. 

Cumulative impacts:

Long-term, moderate to 

major, and adverse, with 

a modest beneficial 

Direct and indirect impacts: Short-term, negligible, and adverse; and 

long-term, moderate, 

and beneficial from soil 

augmentation or replacement. 

Cumulative impacts:

Long-term, moderate to 

major, and adverse, with 

a modest beneficial 

contribution from this 

Direct and indirect impacts: Short-term, negligible, and adverse; and 

long-term, moderate, 

and beneficial from soil 

augmentation or 

replacement. 

Cumulative impacts:

Long-term, moderate to 

major, and adverse, with 

a modest beneficial 

contribution from this 

244
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 8: Summary of Environmental Consequences 

NO-ACTION 

ALTERNATIVE 

PREFERRED 

ALTERNATIVE ALTERNATIVE A ALTERNATIVE B ALTERNATIVE C 

major, and adverse, with 

a large adverse contribution from this alternative. 

Impacts considered unacceptable because they 

would continue to 

impede the attainment 

of the park’s desired 

future conditions for 

natural and cultural resources, but no impairment of a key park 

resource. 

from this alternative. 

No unacceptable impacts 

or resource impairment. 

contribution from this 

alternative. 

No unacceptable impacts 

or resource impairment. 

alternative. 

No unacceptable impacts 

or resource impairment. 

alternative. 

No unacceptable impacts 

or resource impairment. 

NATURAL RESOURCES: VEGETATION

Impacts common to all alternatives: Long-term, moderate, and beneficial due to improved appearance of vegetation. 

Direct and indirect impacts: Continuation of 

short- and long-term, 

major, adverse impacts. 

Cumulative impacts: 

Long-term, moderate to 

major, and adverse, with 

a large contribution from 

this alternative. 

Impacts considered severe 

enough to be unacceptable because of continued impedance to the 

attainment of desired 

future resource conditions and diminished 

opportunities for current 

or future generations to 

enjoy or be inspired by 

park resources. Impairment of a key park resource could result unless successful mitigating 

measures employed. 

Direct and indirect impacts: Long-term, minor, 

and adverse from new or 

widened sidewalks; and 

long-term, moderate, 

and beneficial from actions to improve growing 

conditions for park 

vegetation. 

Cumulative impacts: 

Long-term, minor, and 

adverse, with a modest 

adverse and beneficial 

contribution from this 

alternative. 

No unacceptable impacts 

or resource impairment. 

Direct and indirect impacts: Long-term, negligible, and adverse due 

to new construction; and 

long-term, moderate, 

and beneficial from actions to improve growing 

conditions for park 

vegetation. 

Cumulative impacts: 

Long-term, minor, and 

adverse, with a small 

beneficial contribution 

from this alternative. 

No unacceptable impacts 

or resource impairment. 

Direct and indirect impacts: Long-term, negligible, and adverse from 

new and widened sidewalks; potential longterm, major, and adverse 

from the continued use 

of the Mall elm tree 

panels if turf/root zones 

and soils not properly 

protected. Overall, longterm, moderate, beneficial impacts from improved growing conditions for park vegetation. 

Cumulative impacts: 

Long-term, minor, and 

adverse, with a slight 

beneficial contribution 

from this alternative. 

No unacceptable impacts 

or resource impairment. 

Direct and indirect impacts: Long-term, negligible, and adverse from 

new and widened 

sidewalks; and longterm, moderate, and 

beneficial from improved growing conditions for park vegetation. 

Cumulative impacts: 

Long-term, minor, and 

adverse, with a small 

beneficial contribution 

from this alternative. 

No unacceptable impacts 

or resource impairment. 

NATURAL RESOURCES: FISH AND WILDLIFE

Direct and indirect impacts: Continuation of 

long-term, moderate, 

adverse impacts to native 

and naturalized fish and 

wildlife populations. 

Cumulative impacts: 

Long-term, moderate, 

and adverse. 

No unacceptable impacts 

or resource impairment. 

Direct and indirect impacts: Long-term, minor, 

and beneficial from 

stewardship messages to 

visitors, a self-sustaining 

pond/ wetland ecosystem at Constitution 

Gardens Lake, higher 

seawalls along the Tidal 

Basin, and a naturalized 

Potomac River shoreline. 

Short- and long-term, 

negligible to moderate, 

and adverse from various 

projects throughout the 

National Mall. 

Cumulative impacts: 

Long-term, moderate, 

and adverse, with a 

slight but adverse contribution from this 

alternative. 

No unacceptable impacts 

or resource impairment. 

Direct and indirect impacts: Long-term, negligible to minor, and beneficial from actions at 

Constitution Gardens 

Lake and along the Tidal 

Basin; and short- and 

long-term, negligible to 

minor, and adverse from 

construction projects at 

other sites. 

Cumulative impacts: 

Long-term, moderate, 

and adverse, with a 

slight adverse 

contribution from 

alternative A. 

No unacceptable impacts 

or resource impairment. 

Direct and indirect impacts: Short- and longterm, negligible to 

minor, and adverse from 

a drainable lake at Constitution Gardens, 

modifications of the 

Tidal Basin, and various 

construction projects; 

long-term, minor, and 

beneficial from a more 

natural Potomac River 

shoreline in some areas. 

Cumulative impacts: 

Long-term, moderate, 

and adverse, with a small 

contribution from this 

alternative. 

No unacceptable impacts 

or resource impairment. 

Direct and indirect impacts: Long-term, negligible to minor, and beneficial from stewardship 

messages to visitors, a 

self-sustaining pond/ 

wetland ecosystem at 

Constitution Gardens 

Lake, and higher 

seawalls along the Tidal 

Basin. Short- and longterm, negligible to moderate, and adverse from 

various projects 

throughout the National 

Mall. 

Cumulative impacts: 

Long-term, moderate, 

and adverse, with a 

slight but adverse overall 

contribution from this 

alternative. 

No unacceptable impacts 

or resource impairment. 

245
ALTERNATIVES

NO-ACTION 

ALTERNATIVE 

PREFERRED 

ALTERNATIVE ALTERNATIVE A ALTERNATIVE B ALTERNATIVE C 

DEMONSTRATIONS, SPECIAL EVENTS, AND NATIONAL CELEBRATIONS 

Impacts common to all alternatives: No change in permit regulations under any alternative. Short- and long-term, minor to moderate, 

and beneficial or adverse impacts to public access depending on distance to public transportation. Short- to long-term, minor, adverse 

impacts on event organizers from periodic closings of areas for construction, restoration, or maintenance. 

Direct and indirect impacts: No change in impacts on demonstration 

and event participants 

and organizers from the 

continued use of current 

venues, including the 

Mall elm tree panels. 

Likely continued demand 

for space on the National 

Mall (particularly the 

Mall, the Washington 

Monument grounds, and 

the Lincoln Memorial) 

because of the status 

and visibility conferred 

on events due to the 

presence of national 

icons in the background. 

But long-term, moderate 

to major, adverse impacts because of inadequate venues and the 

lack of visitor facilities 

and amenities. 

Cumulative impacts: 

Long-term, moderate to 

major, and adverse because of increasingly 

inadequate venues and 

visitor services and 

amenities, with a substantial adverse 

contribution from this 

alternative. 

Direct and indirect impacts: Long-term, major, 

beneficial impacts because of changes in the 

permitting, scheduling, 

and management process; equitable requirements for all organizers; 

additional and more 

sustainable venues in 

highly desirable locations; conveniently located civic infrastructure 

to facilitate event operations; permanent visitor 

facilities such as restrooms; a redesigned 

Union Square that could 

accommodate larger 

crowds; a flexible multipurpose space at the 

Sylvan Theater location; 

and a new venue at 

Constitution Gardens. 

Long-term, major, adverse impacts on the few 

organizers who could no 

longer use the elm tree 

panels on the Mall for 

temporary event facilities 

(such as tents and 

stages). 

Cumulative impacts: 

Long-term, major, and 

beneficial for all organizers and participants, 

with a substantial beneficial contribution from 

this alternative. 

Direct and indirect impacts: Long-term, minor, 

and beneficial because 

of changes in the permitting, scheduling, and 

management process; 

somewhat improved 

venue conditions; and 

permanent small visitor 

facilities such as restrooms. However, no 

increase in user capacity 

of desirable venues, and 

fewer events in high 

visibility venues such as 

the Mall and the Washington Monument 

grounds because of 

mandated recovery time 

between events. Longterm, major, adverse 

impacts on the few 

organizers who could no 

longer use the elm tree 

panels on the Mall for 

temporary event facilities 

(such as tents and 

stages). 

Cumulative impacts: 

Long-term, moderate, 

and beneficial, with a 

small beneficial contribution from this 

alternative. 

Direct and indirect impacts: Long-term, major, 

and beneficial because 

of changes in the permitting, scheduling, and 

management process; 

more sustainable venues 

in highly desirable locations; conveniently 

located civic infrastructure to facilitate event 

operations; permanent 

visitor facilities such as 

restrooms; a redesigned 

Union Square that could 

accommodate larger 

crowds; a flexible multipurpose space at the 

Sylvan Theater location; 

and a new venue at 

Constitution Gardens. 

Cumulative impacts: 

Long-term, major, and 

beneficial, with a 

substantial beneficial 

contribution from this 

alternative. 

Direct and indirect impacts: Long-term, major, 

and beneficial because 

of changes in the 

permitting, scheduling, 

and management process, additional and 

more sustainable venues 

in highly desirable 

locations; conveniently 

located civic infrastructure to facilitate event 

operations; permanent 

visitor facilities such as 

restrooms; a redesigned 

Union Square that could 

accommodate larger 

crowds; a reoriented 

Sylvan Theater to 

improve viewing from 

the hillside; and a new 

venue at Constitution 

Gardens. Long-term, 

major, adverse impacts 

on the few organizers 

who could no longer use 

the elm tree panels on 

the Mall for temporary 

event facilities (such as 

tents and stages). 

Cumulative impacts: 

Long-term, major, and 

beneficial, with a 

substantial beneficial 

contribution from this 

alternative. 

ACCESS AND CIRCULATION 

Impacts common to all alternatives: Long-term, moderate to major, beneficial impacts from adding the National Mall name to the Smithsonian Metro station, continuing to redesign tour bus drop-offs and pickups, addressing trash impacts from tour bus passengers, and 

working with the city and local businesses to provide an appropriate amount of convenient parking for tour buses and visitors. 

However, temporary to long-term, minor to major, adverse impacts from constructing previously approved projects, which could interrupt the local transportation system. 

Direct and indirect impacts: No change to access and circulation, with 

long-term, moderate to 

major, adverse impacts 

from more difficult visitor 

access with increased 

use; a less desirable pedestrian environment 

from inadequate walkway surfaces and amenities and more traffic impacts; no improved bicycling facilities; and more 

traffic congestion. 

Cumulative impacts: 

Long-term, major, and 

Direct and indirect impacts: Long-term, major, 

and beneficial from a 

greater emphasis on a 

pedestrian-oriented 

environment; improved, 

safer, and more comfortable walking and 

bicycle environments; 

separate bicycle routes 

or lanes; improved 

roadway access in the 

southeast area of the 

Tidal Basin; and more 

options and access for 

people with disabilities. 

Cumulative impacts: 

Direct and indirect impacts: Long-term, moderate, beneficial impacts 

from increased crosswalk 

timing and additional 

pedestrian amenities; but 

long-term, moderate, 

adverse impacts on 

bicycle users because of 

continued unsafe riding 

conditions. 

Cumulative impacts: 

Long-term, major, and 

beneficial largely as a 

result of an improved 

visitor transportation 

service, as well as presDirect and indirect impacts: Long-term, major, 

and beneficial from 

improved access, underground parking garages, 

a safer pedestrian environment (including safer 

road crossings), and 

reduced conflicts with 

traffic. Long-term, moderate, and adverse impacts on bicycle users 

because of not meeting 

either the needs of bicyclists or local planning 

goals. 

Cumulative impacts: 

Direct and indirect impacts: Long-term, major, 

and beneficial due to 

improved access and 

parking, a greater 

emphasis on safer and 

pleasanter pedestrian 

and bicycling environments, and more options for families and 

people with disabilities. 

Cumulative impacts: 

Long-term, major, and 

beneficial due to better 

wayfinding aids for 

pedestrians, an improved visitor transpor-

 

246
Comparison of Alternatives: Table 8: Summary of Environmental Consequences 

NO-ACTION 

ALTERNATIVE 

PREFERRED 

ALTERNATIVE ALTERNATIVE A ALTERNATIVE B ALTERNATIVE C 

beneficial due to improved maps and wayfinding signs, an improved visitor transportation service, and better 

access to the National 

Mall for motorists, Metro 

users, and bicyclists, 

affecting a very large 

number of motorists, as 

well as bicyclists and pedestrians and offsetting 

adverse impacts under 

this alternative. 

Long-term, major, and 

beneficial because of 

better wayfinding aids, 

an improved visitor 

transportation system, 

future road improvements for motorists and 

Metro users, and more 

convenient access for 

pedestrians, bicyclists, 

families with children, 

and people with disabilities, with a substantial beneficial contribution from this alternative. 

ent and future projects 

occurring outside the 

National Mall with a 

small beneficial contribution from this alternative because of a somewhat improved pedestrian environment on the 

National Mall. 

Long-term, major, and 

beneficial from better 

wayfinding aids for pedestrians, an improved 

visitor transportation 

service, and future road 

improvements for motorists and Metro users, 

with a substantial beneficial contribution from 

this alternative. 

tation service, future 

road improvements for 

motorists and Metro 

users, and more convenient access for 

pedestrians, bicyclists, 

families with children, 

and people with disabilities, with a substantial beneficial contribution from this alternative. 

VISITOR EXPERIENCE

Impacts common to all alternatives: Long-term, moderate to major, and beneficial as a result of continued educational opportunities 

about First Amendment rights; cooperative efforts with local tourist organizations and the tour bus industry to ensure they have 

accurate information and to facilitate access to areas on the National Mall (affecting 20%–30% of visitors); and applying conservation 

zones and standards to ensure that visitor expectations are consistently met. 

Direct and indirect impacts: Continued longterm, moderate to 

major, and adverse 

despite the fact that 

visitors would continue 

to be inspired by the 

National Mall and its 

memorials. Visitor expectations for quality experiences not met because 

of the degraded condition of natural resources, 

inadequate information 

and education about 

park resources and opportunities, insufficient 

facilities (such as restrooms and food service) 

for present user volumes, 

and continued public 

health and safety challenges. 

Cumulative impacts: 

Long-term, major, and 

beneficial, with a slight 

adverse contribution 

from the no-action 

alternative. 

Direct and indirect impacts: Long-term, major, 

and beneficial due to 

well-maintained areas 

that would meet desired 

National Mall conditions, 

enhanced website information, a more welcoming atmosphere (including a welcome plaza on 

the Mall and daily interpretive program listings), 

more opportunities to 

understand core American values through expanded educational 

themes, well-dispersed 

and pleasant visitor facilities that are adequately 

sized to meet user 

needs, more food service 

choice, an improved 

pedestrian and bicycling 

environment, increased 

opportunities for informal enjoyment, additional recreational opportunities and improved 

playing fields, more 

shaded seating, additional pedestrian lighting, and an emergency 

notification system. 

Cumulative impacts: 

Long-term, major, and 

beneficial, with a substantial beneficial contribution from this 

alternative. 

Direct and indirect impacts: Long-term, moderate, and beneficial due 

to substantially improved 

resource conditions and 

the appearance of the 

National Mall, better 

website information, 

educational themes focused on memorials and 

the development of the 

capital city, improved 

visitor facilities supplemented by small visitor 

facilities and food service 

at refreshment stands, a 

better pedestrian environment, improved 

playing field conditions, 

and an emergency 

notification system. But 

the needs of high 

volumes of users not 

met. 

Cumulative impacts: 

Long-term, major, and 

beneficial, with a modest 

beneficial contribution 

from this alternative. 

Direct and indirect impacts: Long-term, major, 

and beneficial due to 

well-maintained areas 

that would meet desired 

conditions for the National Mall, better website information, educational themes focused on 

the memorials and the 

civic function of the 

National Mall, welldispersed and pleasant 

visitor facilities that are 

adequately sized to meet 

user needs, more food 

service choice, an 

improved pedestrian 

environment, increased 

opportunities for 

informal enjoyment as 

well as additional 

recreational opportunities and improved 

playing fields, more 

shaded seating, additional pedestrian lighting, and an emergency 

notification system. 

Cumulative impacts: 

Long-term, major, and 

beneficial, with a substantial beneficial contribution from this alternative. 

Direct and indirect impacts: Long-term, major, 

and beneficial due to 

improved conditions on 

the National Mall, better 

website information, 

educational themes 

focused on memorials 

along with stewardship 

and healthy lifestyles, 

well-dispersed and 

pleasant facilities that 

are adequately sized to 

meet user needs, more 

food service choice, an 

improved pedestrian and 

bicycling environment, 

increased opportunities 

for informal enjoyment, 

additional recreational 

opportunities and improved playing fields, 

more shaded seating, 

additional pedestrian 

lighting, and an emergency notification 

system. 

Cumulative impacts: 

Long-term, major, and 

beneficial, with a 

substantial beneficial 

contribution from this 

alternative. 

SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT

Impacts common to all alternatives: Long-term, minor, and beneficial on the local and regional economy from visitation to existing monuments and memorials on the National Mall, commercial business opportunities in and around the National Mall, as well as in the metropolitan area, new business opportunities for retail and food service near the National Mall, and ongoing use of businesses in nearby 

areas. Short-term, minor, beneficial impacts on the local and regional economy from the construction of previously approved projects. 

Direct and indirect impacts: Long-term, negliDirect and indirect impacts: Long-term, minor, Direct and indirect impacts: Long-term, minor, Direct and indirect impacts: Long-term, minor, Direct and indirect impacts: Long-term, minor, 

247
ALTERNATIVES

NO-ACTION 

ALTERNATIVE 

PREFERRED 

ALTERNATIVE ALTERNATIVE A ALTERNATIVE B ALTERNATIVE C 

gible, and beneficial 

because of slightly increased visitation levels 

to the National Mall and 

related visitor expenditures at commercial 

businesses. 

Cumulative impacts:

Long-term, minor, and 

beneficial due to increased visitation, plus 

business and construction opportunities, with 

a slight beneficial contribution from this alternative. 

and beneficial from 

longer visitor stays due 

to better resource conditions and new and improved visitor services 

and facilities, increased 

and diversified commercial business opportunities that would meet 

visitor needs on the 

National Mall and in 

surrounding areas, and 

minor increases in 

construction-related 

expenditures. 

Cumulative impacts:

Long-term, minor, and 

beneficial, with a slight 

beneficial contribution 

from this alternative. 

and beneficial from 

enhanced visitor experiences due to improved 

conditions of the historic 

landscape and vistas, but 

only slight increases in 

visitation. Slight increase 

in commercial business 

opportunities on the 

National Mall with improved food service 

facilities. Minor increase 

in construction-related 

expenditures. 

Cumulative impacts:

Long-term, minor, and 

beneficial, with a slight 

beneficial contribution 

from this alternative. 

and beneficial from 

longer visitor stays due 

to better resource conditions, improved services and facilities, increased and diversified 

commercial business 

opportunities that would 

meet visitor needs, and 

minor increases in construction-related expenses. Long-term, minor, adverse impacts of 

parking costs for underground garages (if determined feasible). 

Cumulative impacts:

Long-term, minor, and 

beneficial, with a slight 

beneficial contribution 

from this alternative. 

and beneficial from 

longer visitor stays due 

to better resource 

conditions, improved 

services and facilities, 

and more year-round 

recreational opportunities; diversified commercial business opportunities that would meet 

visitor needs; and minor 

increases in construction-related expenses. 

Cumulative impacts:

Long-term, minor, and 

beneficial, with a slight 

beneficial contribution 

from this alternative. 

PARK OPERATIONS

Impacts common to all alternatives: Short- and long-term, moderate to major, and beneficial due to written standards and criteria, visual 

quality and response teams to identify and address high-profile problems and concerns, staffing levels aligned with essential operations, 

less intrusive temporary fencing, a solid waste and recycling plan, and increased use of renewable energy sources and recycling

practices. Construction-related impacts on the National Mall would generally be short-term, minor to moderate, and adverse.

Direct and indirect impacts: Long-term, moderate to major, and adverse because of not 

meeting desired standards (including a deferred maintenance 

backlog; difficult-tomaintain landscapes, 

systems, and infrastructure; and lack of venues 

designed to accommodate intensive levels of 

use), inefficient operations, and unsustainable 

practices. Continued 

funding gap at about 

54% of need. Any benefits to park operations or 

sustainability from past, 

present, and future 

projects overwhelmed by 

additional facilities and 

ongoing high-priority 

demands because of the 

park’s highly prominent 

and visible location. 

Continued operational 

challenges despite the 

long-term, moderate to 

major, beneficial impacts 

of actions common to all 

alternatives. 

Cumulative impacts:

Long-term, major, and 

adverse, with a slight 

adverse contribution 

from this alternative.

Direct and indirect impacts: Long-term, major, 

and beneficial as a result 

of improved park conditions, a reduced deferred 

maintenance backlog, 

increased maintainability 

of mechanical systems 

and infrastructure, improved operational 

access, a streamlined 

permitting process for 

demonstrations and 

special events, a reduced 

funding gap between 

desired conditions and 

park budgets, appropriate staffing levels aligned 

to core operations, and 

exceedance of sustainability standards for 

development, renewable 

energy, and water use. 

Cumulative impacts:

Long-term, major, and 

adverse from past, 

present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions, plus 

long-term, major, and 

beneficial from the 

preferred alternative, 

resulting in long-term, 

moderate, beneficial 

cumulative impacts.

Direct and indirect impacts: Long-term, moderate, and adverse because impacts of high 

use not fully addressed, 

such as developing more 

sustainable venues for 

demonstrations, national 

celebrations, and special 

events or seeking sustainable water sources 

for large water features. 

However, long-term, 

moderate to major, 

beneficial impacts from 

actions common to all 

action alternatives 

because of better maintenance of desired park 

conditions, a reduced 

deferred maintenance 

backlog, a reduced funding gap between desired 

conditions and park budgets, some more efficient park operations, and 

some use of renewable 

energy sources. 

Cumulative impacts: 

Long-term, moderate, 

and adverse even though 

park operations improved and deferred 

maintenance addressed; 

no sustainable solutions 

for high-use areas or 

water features, resulting 

in a considerable beneficial contribution from 

this alternative. 

Direct and indirect impacts: Long-term, major, 

and beneficial as a result 

of improved park conditions, a reduced deferred 

maintenance backlog, 

increased maintainability 

of mechanical systems 

and infrastructure, improved operational 

access, a streamlined 

permitting process for 

demonstrations and 

special events, a reduced 

funding gap between 

desired conditions and 

park budgets, appropriate staffing levels aligned 

to core operations, and 

greater reliance on renewable energy sources. 

However, no measures 

taken to make water use 

more sustainable or to 

support local goals to 

encourage greater use of 

alternative modes of 

access. 

Cumulative impacts: The 

Long-term, moderate, 

and adverse as a result 

of treated water use and 

underground parking 

garages not meeting 

sustainability goals, with 

a large adverse contribution from this alternative. 

Direct and indirect impacts: Long-term, major, 

and beneficial as a result 

of improved park conditions, a reduced deferred maintenance 

backlog, increased 

maintainability of 

mechanical systems and 

infrastructure, improved 

operational access, a 

streamlined permitting 

process for demonstrations and special events, 

a reduced funding gap 

between desired conditions and park budgets, 

appropriate staffing 

levels aligned to core 

operations, and 

exceedance of sustainability standards for 

development, renewable 

energy, and water use. 

Cumulative impacts:

Long-term, major, and 

adverse from past, 

present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions, plus 

long-term, major, 

beneficial impacts from 

alternative C, resulting 

in long-term, moderate, 

beneficial cumulative 

impacts.

 

248
THE

MALL

THE

AFFECTED 

ENVIRONMENT

DRAFT 

NATIONAL MALL PLAN / 

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT

THE NATIONAL MALL

CONTENTS: THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT .................................................................................................... 249

Context for Planning and Development of the National Mall ...................................................................251

1790–1850..................................................................................................................................................251

L’Enfant Plan....................................................................................................................................251

Changes on the National Mall .......................................................................................................252

1850–1900..................................................................................................................................................253

The Downing Plan...........................................................................................................................253

Changes on the National Mall .......................................................................................................253

1900–1950..................................................................................................................................................254

The McMillan Plan..........................................................................................................................254

Changes on the National Mall .......................................................................................................256

Federal Legislation and Administration .......................................................................................256

1950 to 2000 ..............................................................................................................................................256

Federal Plans ....................................................................................................................................256

Changes on the National Mall .......................................................................................................257

Federal Legislation ..........................................................................................................................258

Current Conditions — 2000 to 2008......................................................................................................258

Federal Plans ....................................................................................................................................258

Changes on the National Mall .......................................................................................................259

Federal Legislation ..........................................................................................................................259

Cultural Resources ...........................................................................................................................................260

Memorials .................................................................................................................................................260

Historic Districts ......................................................................................................................................260

The Mall............................................................................................................................................260

East and West Potomac Parks........................................................................................................266

Federal Triangle Historic District .................................................................................................266

Northwest Rectangle.......................................................................................................................266

Pennsylvania Avenue Historic District .........................................................................................266

Downtown Historic District ..........................................................................................................266

Historic Properties and Cultural Landscapes ......................................................................................267

The National Mall ...........................................................................................................................267

The Mall............................................................................................................................................270

Washington Monument and Grounds .........................................................................................277

West Potomac Park (North of Independence Avenue) .............................................................281

West Potomac Park (South of Independence Avenue) ..............................................................288

Other Features Contributing to National Register Listings ...............................................................293

Roadways..........................................................................................................................................293

Natural Resources ............................................................................................................................................294

Water Resources.......................................................................................................................................294

Surface Water...................................................................................................................................294

Floodplains and Stormwaters ........................................................................................................296

Groundwater....................................................................................................................................297

Soils 297

Fill 297

Soil Conditions.................................................................................................................................298

Vegetation .................................................................................................................................................298

Elm Trees ..........................................................................................................................................299

Cherry Trees.....................................................................................................................................299

i
CONTENTS

Turfgrass ...........................................................................................................................................300

Fish and Wildlife ......................................................................................................................................301

Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations .....................................................................303

Background Information ........................................................................................................................303

The Importance of the Venue........................................................................................................303

Regulations .......................................................................................................................................303

Number and Size of Events ............................................................................................................303

Time Frame ......................................................................................................................................304

First Amendment Activities ....................................................................................................................304

National Celebrations..............................................................................................................................305

Special Events ...........................................................................................................................................305

Access and Circulation.....................................................................................................................................309

Public Access.............................................................................................................................................309

Road Network..................................................................................................................................309

Visitor Access ...................................................................................................................................311

The Pedestrian Environment..................................................................................................................315

Bicycling ....................................................................................................................................................316

Visitor Experience ............................................................................................................................................317

Visitor Use Characteristics......................................................................................................................317

Visitor Profiles .................................................................................................................................318

Visitor Activities...............................................................................................................................318

Visitation ...................................................................................................................................................319

Past Visitor Use Trends ..................................................................................................................319

Projected Visitor Use Trends.........................................................................................................321

Elements of the Visitor Experience .......................................................................................................322

Monuments and Memorials...........................................................................................................322

Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations....................................................325

Visual Experiences ..........................................................................................................................326

Sounds on the National Mall .........................................................................................................329

Information and Education ....................................................................................................................329

Orientation and Information .........................................................................................................329

Educational Information and Programs.......................................................................................330

Enjoyment and Recreation .....................................................................................................................331

Gardens.............................................................................................................................................331

Recreational Activities ....................................................................................................................331

Entertainment ..................................................................................................................................332

Visitor Facilities and Amenities..............................................................................................................333

Types of Facilities ............................................................................................................................333

Facilities in Specific Areas ..............................................................................................................337

Adequacy of Visitor Services and Amenities................................................................................338

Health and Safety .....................................................................................................................................340

Security..............................................................................................................................................340

Access for People with Disabilities and the Elderly ....................................................................340

Weather.............................................................................................................................................340

Drinking Water ................................................................................................................................340

Shade .................................................................................................................................................340

Socioeconomic Environment..........................................................................................................................341

Washington, D.C., Demographic Characteristics................................................................................341

Population ........................................................................................................................................341

Income ..............................................................................................................................................341

Employment .....................................................................................................................................341

ii
Contents 

Unemployment ................................................................................................................................342

Regional Communities ............................................................................................................................343

Visitor Spending Characteristics............................................................................................................343

Park Operations ................................................................................................................................................347

Park Organization ....................................................................................................................................347

Operations Background ..........................................................................................................................348

Operating Budget.............................................................................................................................348

Staffing Levels ..................................................................................................................................348

Park Asset Management Planning.................................................................................................348

Operations and Maintenance and Deferred Maintenance........................................................349

Additional Park Responsibilities and Special Demands.............................................................350

Energy and Water Use.............................................................................................................................350

National Mall and Memorial Parks...............................................................................................350

National Mall ...................................................................................................................................351

General Maintenance ..............................................................................................................................351

Signs...................................................................................................................................................351

Sites and Facilities............................................................................................................................352

Special Events...................................................................................................................................352

Waste Management and Recycling ...............................................................................................352

Communication Infrastructure .....................................................................................................353

Partnership, Business, and Jurisdictional Issues ..................................................................................353

Partnerships......................................................................................................................................353

Volunteers-in-Parks ........................................................................................................................353

Commercial Visitor Services ..........................................................................................................354

Jurisdictional Issues.........................................................................................................................354

PLAN MAPS 

National Register Historic Districts and Properties ................................................................................... 261

Cultural Landscapes........................................................................................................................................ 263

Important Vistas............................................................................................................................................... 268

Permitted Recreation ...................................................................................................................................... 331

FIGURES 

Figure 24: Plan of the City of Washington, 1791–92 ................................................................................... 251

Figure 25: The McMillan Plan ....................................................................................................................... 255

Figure 26: Extending the Legacy, 1997 ......................................................................................................... 257

Figure 27: Commemorative Areas, Washington, D.C., and Environs ...................................................... 259

Figure 28: The Great Cross Axes on the National Mall.............................................................................. 269

Figure 29: The NPS Washington Bench ....................................................................................................... 275

Figure 30: Bulfinch Gatepost.......................................................................................................................... 276

Figure 31: Joseph Henry Memorial ............................................................................................................... 277

Figure 32: Monument Lodge and Survey Lodge ......................................................................................... 278

Figure 33: Sylvan Theater ............................................................................................................................... 279

Figure 34: Potomac Park Levee...................................................................................................................... 282

Figure 35: Lockkeeper’s House ..................................................................................................................... 284

Figure 36: Vietnam Veterans Memorial........................................................................................................ 285

 iii
CONTENTS

Figure 37: The Watergate Steps ..................................................................................................................... 286

Figure 38: Constitution Avenue Belvedere................................................................................................... 286

Figure 39: Korean War Veterans Memorial ................................................................................................. 287

Figure 40: John Ericcson Memorial .............................................................................................................. 287

Figure 41: John Paul Jones Memorial............................................................................................................ 288

Figure 42: Impervious Surfaces, National Mall and Memorial Parks....................................................... 295

Figure 43: Landscape Conditions, April 2002.............................................................................................. 301

Figure 44: The Inauguration and Its Aftermath ........................................................................................... 308

Figure 45: Monthly Midday Exits at the Smithsonian Metro Station — 2008......................................... 313

Figure 46: Total Visitation at National Mall Sites — 1995–2008 ............................................................... 320

Figure 47: 20-Year Visitation Projections at National Mall Memorials ................................................... 321

TABLES 

Table 9: Average Annual Weekday Traffic Volumes in and around the National Mall — 

2002, 2006, and 2007................................................................................................................. 310

Table 10: Regular Mode Use — Percentages of Weekly Commuter Trips .............................................. 311

Table 11: Forms of Transportation Visitors Used between Their accommodations and the National 

Mall ............................................................................................................................................. 311

Table 12: National Mall Parking Locations.................................................................................................. 312

Table 13: Exits at the Smithsonian Metro Station by Time of Day — 2008 ............................................. 313

Table 14: Maximum Street Parking Capacity — National Mall and East Potomac Park....................... 314

Table 15: Trip and Visitor Characteristics — 2008 National Mall Visitor Study .................................... 318

Table 16: Primary Reason for Visiting the National Mall .......................................................................... 318

Table 17: Most Important Activity ................................................................................................................ 319

Table 18: Top 15 Destinations for National Mall Visitors ......................................................................... 319

Table 19: Recreational Visits to National Mall Sites — 2004–2008........................................................... 320

Table 20: NPS Public Facilities on the National Mall ................................................................................. 333

Table 21: Public Facilities adjacent to the National Mall ........................................................................... 335

Table 22: Desired Services / Activities for Future Visits — Day-trippers Compared to Overnight Guests

..................................................................................................................................................... 339

Table 23: Desired Services / Activities for Future Visits — Locals Compared to Nonlocal Visitors.... 339

Table 24: Visitor Needs for Services and Amenities Identified during Public Scoping ......................... 339

Table 25: Desired Services and Activities for Future Visits........................................................................ 339

Table 26: Population Characteristics of Washington, D.C. ....................................................................... 341

Table 27: Income Characteristics .................................................................................................................. 341

Table 28: Earnings by Industry, 2007 ............................................................................................................ 342

Table 29: Employment by Industry, 2007..................................................................................................... 342

Table 30: Unemployment Rates..................................................................................................................... 342

Table 31: Activities that Visitors Completed during their Visits to National Mall ................................. 343

Table 32: Percentage of Visitors Reporting Expenditures by Category and Area .................................. 343

Table 33: Average per Party Expenditures — All Visitors .......................................................................... 344

Table 34: Average per Party Expenditures — Day-Trippers Only ............................................................ 344

Table 35: Average per Party Expenditures — Overnight Guests Only ..................................................... 345

Table 36: Average per Party Expenditures — Nonlocal Visitors Only ..................................................... 346

Table 37: Average per Party Expenditures — Local Visitors Only............................................................ 346

Table 38: NAMA Park Asset Management Plan (December 2008) .......................................................... 349

Table 39: Difference between Annual Maintenance Requirements and Budgets, 

National Mall and Memorial Parks ........................................................................................ 349

Table 40: Volunteer Hours, October 2008–July 2009 ................................................................................. 354

iv
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 

 249
This page has been left blank intentionally. 
CONTEXT FOR PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT 

OF THE NATIONAL MALL

The following discussion of planning for and 

development of the National Mall refers to some 

adjacent areas because of their common history. 

For example, the White House and President’s 

Park are within the Reserve, but are not part of 

the National Mall. 

1790–1850 

L’Enfant Plan 

Toward the end of the 17th century, tobacco 

plantations were laid out in both Virginia and 

Maryland in the vicinity of present-day Washington, D.C. Alexandria, Virginia, was established in 1749 as a port for the shipment of 

tobacco, followed shortly by Georgetown, 

Maryland, across the river. By 1790, when 

George Washington selected the site for the 

national capital, plantation owners were struggling to farm the exhausted tobacco fields. 

President Washington selected Major Pierre 

Charles L’Enfant to plan the new capital, which 

he modeled after plans of European capitals and 

the royal estates of European monarchs. Using 

plans of European cities he borrowed from 

Thomas Jefferson, L’Enfant envisioned a grand 

city built around a great open space that would 

establish the relationship between important 

FIGURE 24: PLAN OF THE CITY OF WASHINGTON, 1791–92

This 1792 engraving by Andrew Ellicott is based on Pierre L’Enfant’s plan of 1791, with some changes. Andrew Ellicott was hired by 

Washington in 1791 to survey the site of the future city. L’Enfant was let go from his post in 1792. 

251
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

functions of government. L’Enfant’s plan shows 

the “Presidential Palace” and the “Congress 

House” on two high pieces of ground connected 

by a broad boulevard, what would become 

Pennsylvania Avenue. A mile-long Grand Avenue would run west from the Congress House — 

a great open space lined by the ministries and 

houses of statesmen, with expanses of plantings 

and gardens. The central garden of this area, 

now known as the Mall, would contain a water 

feature and be bordered by dense groves of 

trees. An equestrian statue of George Washington would be at the west end of the avenue, near 

today’s 17th Street, on the axis south of the 

Presidential Palace and west of the Congress 

House. Tiber Creek would become the Washington Canal, with a towpath for barges to bring 

supplies to the city’s commercial establishments. 

The plan consisted of a coordinated system of 

radiating avenues, parks, and vistas overlaid on a 

grid of streets. Wide diagonal boulevards would 

create additional visual connections, and squares 

and circles where the grid system and the diagonal boulevards intersected would become the 

focus of residential neighborhoods and civic 

buildings and would provide appropriate sites for 

monuments to the nation and its heroes. By 1800 

enough of L’Enfant’s plan had been implemented 

that the seat of government was transferred from 

Philadelphia. 

Changes on the National Mall 

Little was done to advance the development of 

the Mall* for many years, and the area that was 

 

* The first use of the name “Mall” to refer to the axis 

extending west from the Capitol appeared in 1802 on 

a map, Washington City, in S. S. Moore and T. W. 

Jones, The Travellers’ Directory . . . of the Main Road 

from Philadelphia to Washington (Philadelphia: 

Mathew [sic] Carey, 1802; in Reps 1991:60–61). The 

map shows a formal Mall lined by nonexistent trees. 

The name “Mall” came from the French game Paille 

Maille, meaning “ball-mallet,” a game that resembled a 

cross between golf and croquet and was played on a 

long, narrow lawn lined with walls or trees. Imported 

into England in the 17th century and renamed “Pall 

Mall,” where it was played in St. James’ Park by 

Charles II. A nearby road was renamed Pall Mall, and 

the word “mall” took on the connotation of a pleasure 

drive. 

to become the Mall was much smaller in the 

L’Enfant plan than it is today. In 1796 the city’s 

first commissioners advised Washington to 

construct an “elegant building” on the Mall to 

spur its use. Washington requested that streets, 

squares, lots, and parcels shown in the city plan 

be transferred to the three city commissioners 

for the use of the federal government. He noted 

that the Mall was to provide “for the health and 

ornament of the city.” Despite Washington’s 

urging, however, decades passed before the Mall 

began to take shape.

Almost nothing of L’Enfant’s vision for the Mall 

was realized in the 19th century. In the first half 

of that century Congress ceded federal rights 

over parcels of land on the Mall to private entities. Two new roads were created to separate the 

new lots from the Mall — Missouri Avenue, 

parallel to Pennsylvania Avenue, and Maine 

Avenue, parallel to Maryland Avenue. Other 

land on the Mall was used for private purposes. 

People raised produce in small gardens, grazed 

livestock, and stored lumber, firewood, and 

trash. Just north of the Mall, the triangular area 

bounded by Pennsylvania Avenue, 15th Street, 

and B Street North became known during the 

war as Hooker’s Division, home to many saloons 

and brothels. Just south of the Mall was a large 

slave market. 

The Potomac waterfront was just west of what is 

now the Washington Monument. Tiber Creek 

entered the city just south and west of the White 

House. It later was straightened and became the 

Washington City Canal, connecting the Potomac 

River with the Anacostia River south of the Capitol. 

In the early 1830s, when the Washington City 

Canal was connected to the newly constructed 

Chesapeake and Ohio Canal, a Lockkeeper’s 

House was constructed at the connection site. 

Although moved from that location, the 

structure still exists on the Mall near the intersection of 17th Street and Constitution Avenue. 

Planning for a monument to George Washington was begun shortly after Washington took 

office. L’Enfant had called for an equestrian 

monument at the cross-axis of lines south from 

the White House and west from the Capitol. In 

1848 Congress granted the Washington 

Monument Society a 37-acre site encompassing 

252
Context for Planning and Development of the National Mall: 1850–1900 — Changes on the National Mall 

the crossing of the two axes. The cornerstone 

was laid on July 4, but the location of the monument was moved to the east to provide better 

construction footing. Construction began the 

following year but was stopped by 1855 because 

of political agitation and lack of money; the shaft 

had risen to 156 feet. Construction resumed in 

1876 and the monument was finally completed 

in 1884. 

1850–1900 

The Downing Plan 

By the middle of the 19th century there was a 

renewed interest in making the Mall the nation’s 

public park. In 1850 a group of businessmen 

approached President Millard Fillmore about 

landscaping the Mall, and the following year 

landscape designer Andrew Jackson Downing 

was hired. His objectives were threefold: 

• form a federal park that would be an 

ornament to the capital city 

• provide an example of the natural style of 

landscape gardening 

• form a living museum of trees and shrubs 

A proponent of the English romantic garden tradition, Downing prepared a plan that turned the 

Mall and the green south of the White House 

into a series of landscaped “rooms” or gardens. 

Downing was killed in a steamboat accident in 

1852, and only his plans for Lafayette Park north 

of the White House, the Ellipse, and seven 

gardens on the Mall were completed. In subsequent years, the circles and squares were landscaped roughly following the initial principles 

developed by Downing. Today, only glimpses of 

his designs can be seen in Lafayette Park, the 

Ellipse, and some of the circles. 

Changes on the National Mall 

The Smithsonian Institution, which had been 

established by Congress in 1846, set the precedent for public educational and cultural institutions on the Mall. The cornerstone of the 

original building on the south side of the Mall, 

known as the Castle, was laid in 1847, and the 

building was completed in 1855. 

In February 1835 Congress granted permission 

to the Baltimore & Ohio (B&O) Railroad to run 

its line into the city. The railroad’s first depot 

stood by the canal, at Pennsylvania Avenue and 

2nd Street NW. A later depot was built 

somewhat farther north, at New Jersey Avenue 

and C Street. In 1855, Congress allowed the 

Alexandria & Washington Railroad to lay tracks 

along First Street, at the western foot of Capitol 

Hill, heading to the B&O depot. Related railroad 

sheds and tracks crossing the Mall at about 5th 

Street were built during the Civil War. 

One of the largest incursions on the Mall was the 

construction of the Baltimore & Potomac Depot 

in 1872. Congress gave the railroad free use of a 

site on the Mall itself, and construction of a 

temporary wooden depot allowed passenger 

service to begin on July 2, 1872, and a new, 

permanent depot was probably in use by late 

December 1873. Up to 30 deaths occurred 

annually because of the surface railroad crossing. (The station was also the site of the assassination of President James Garfield in 1881.) 

An armory was constructed on the Mall near the 

Smithsonian Institution in 1855, and the National Museum was completed in 1881 (now the 

Arts and Industries Building). The Washington 

City Canal was covered over about 1881, with a 

portion becoming Constitution Avenue.

The Department of Agriculture occupied a new 

office building on the Mall in 1868. Later a conservatory and cultivated gardens were developed 

on the Mall. A successor Department of Agriculture complex was built on the south side of the 

mall in 1905. 

Construction of a causeway and bridge over the 

Potomac in the 1830s had resulted in extensive 

mud flats and navigation shoals. Flooding required the bridge to be continually rebuilt and 

often caused damage to the Mall. In 1882 Congress allocated money to provide better flood 

control, to eliminate areas where malariaspreading mosquitoes bred, and to create land 

from excessive silt that had built up along the 

Potomac River. Over the next 20–30 years approximately 740 acres of new land were created, 

one of the largest civil engineering projects of its 

time. This project extended the city to its current 

boundary on the Potomac River. 

 253
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

The Washington Monument was dedicated in 

1885, and the monument was completed in 1888. 

An associated boiler house / Survey Lodge was 

constructed in 1885–6, and a Monument Lodge 

was opened in 1888. 

In 1897 President Grover Cleveland signed the 

Potomac Park law, which was prompted by 

citizens’ effort and stated that the land was to be 

“forever held as a public park for the recreation 

and pleasure of the people.” In 1901 the Potomac Railroad Bridge was constructed by the U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers and subsequently became the boundary between East and West 

Potomac parks. (East Potomac Park is outside 

the study area.) 

1900–1950 

The McMillan Plan 

By 1900 the historic city center was in need of 

refurbishment. The success of the City Beautiful 

movement following the 1893 World’s Columbian Exposition in Chicago led to a growing 

sentiment that the City of Washington needed to 

be renewed. In 1898 the American Institute of 

Architects (AIA) called for a redesign of the 

capital, whose centennial was approaching. At 

the 1900 AIA annual meeting, landscape architect 

Frederick Law Olmsted Jr. stated that a formal 

character for Washington, D.C., was appropriate 

and proposed treating the Mall as a compound, 

or multi-street, boulevard. There was a new 

appreciation of the vision in L’Enfant’s plan. 

In March 1901 the Senate created the Senate Park 

Commission, also known as the McMillan Commission. Senator James McMillan was chair of 

the Senate Committee on the District of Columbia. Members included architects Daniel Burnham (appointed chairman) and Charles McKim, 

and sculptor Augustus St. Gaudens, along with 

Frederick Law Olmsted Jr. The subsequent 

“Report of the Senate Committee on the District 

of Columbia on the Improvement of the Park 

System of the District of Columbia” (Senate 

Report No. 166, 57th Congress, 1st Session, 1902) 

included not only the printed document, but an 

exhibition of models, drawings, and paintings. 

The commission’s report, which became known 

as the McMillan plan, built on the L’Enfant plan. 

It referenced the L’Enfant plan’s vision in its 

formality, its concept of public spaces, and its 

concern with spatial relationships and civic art, 

but the McMillan plan expanded the vision for 

the central public spaces of the city. The McMillan plan emphasized the Mall as the city’s 

ceremonial core, and the Mall would be extended onto the newly reclaimed land to the 

west and south. 

The formal vistas that L’Enfant had intended 

along the axes between the primary buildings 

around the Mall had been gradually lost during 

the 1800s. For example, the view along Pennsylvania Avenue between the Capitol and the White 

House — one of the two critical vistas in the 

L’Enfant plan — was soon hidden by the construction of the south wing of the Treasury 

Building in 1855–60. The McMillan plan sought 

to redesign the central Mall area, reinforcing the 

axes and the vistas of L’Enfant’s plan. The 

McMillan plan incorporated a five-point kite 

shaped design that would create a view of fairly 

open parkland. Two new monuments would be 

built, one to the west of the Washington Monument and in line with the Capitol, and one to the 

south, inline with the White House; these new 

monuments would form the south and west 

points of the kite. A ceremonial bridge would 

extend across the Potomac to symbolically reconnect the North and South. Subsequent plans 

further defined and incorporated many of the 

McMillan plan’s underlying ideas. 

The McMillan plan called for removing the 

naturalistic gardens of the Downing plan and 

creating a more ceremonial, geometric, largescale landscape, as favored by L’Enfant. The 

plan differed from L’Enfant’s by replacing the 

grand processional avenue in the center of the 

Mall with a 300-foot-wide expanse of grass lined 

on either side by symmetrical rows of American 

elms. 

Using the principles of the City Beautiful 

movement and its promotion of the Beaux Arts 

style of architecture, the plan recommended 

locations for public museums lining the Mall 

east of the Washington Monument and federal 

offices centralized within the city core. In addition to recommending that the White House be 

restored to its original appearance, the plan also 

recommended that a series of parks be developed throughout the city. 

254
Context for Planning and Development of the National Mall: 1900–1950 — The McMillan Plan 

FIGURE 25: THE MCMILLAN PLAN

Oblique view of the McMillan plan, which reflected the tenets of the City Beautiful movement. 

McMillan plan view, which shows locations for the future Lincoln and Jefferson memorials to complete the western portion of the

National Mall. 

 255
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Changes on the National Mall 

One of the first actions under the McMillan plan 

that affected the Mall was the relocation of the 

railroad terminal to the new Union Station, 

which was constructed in 1908 north of the U.S. 

Capitol. Other development included the 

following: 

• In 1912 some 1,800 cherry trees that were a 

gift from Japan were planted around the 

Tidal Basin. The Thomas Jefferson 

Memorial was finished in 1939, completing 

the view from the White House, as 

envisioned by the McMillan plan. 

• The Sylvan Theater was constructed south 

of the Washington Monument in 1917 to 

provide a venue for plays, concerts, and 

other outdoor presentations. 

• The Lincoln Memorial was dedicated in 

1922. The proposed cruciform-shaped 

reflecting pool proposed in the McMillan 

plan was modified to a rectangular form to 

accommodate temporary military buildings 

that had been erected during World War I. 

• The Ulysses S. Grant Memorial was 

dedicated in Union Square in 1922.

• Rows of American elms were planted on 

both sides of the Mall, and four boulevards 

were laid out down the Mall, two on either 

side of the center lawn. 

Between 1900 and 1950 active recreational 

facilities were incorporated into the National 

Mall for the first time. During the early part of 

the 20th century swimming facilities, athletic 

fields, and other recreational amenities were 

provided in open spaces. National Capital Parks 

maintained its own recreation division until 

1942, when the District Recreation Board was 

created. The 1949 “Memorandum of Agreement 

between the National Park Service and the 

District of Columbia” formally recognized that 

certain areas of the National Mall were part of 

the D.C. recreation system. 

Federal Legislation and 

Administration 

To ensure that the visions of the L’Enfant plan 

and the new McMillan plan were protected, Congress created the United States Commission of 

Fine Arts in 1910 to advise on the location of 

statues, fountains, and monuments in the public 

areas in the District of Columbia. Later that year 

President William Howard Taft signed an executive order giving the commission authority to 

advise on plans for public federal buildings 

erected in the District. 

In 1924 the National Capital Park and Planning 

Commission (later the National Capital Planning 

Commission) was formed to develop a comprehensive, consistent, and coordinated plan for the 

parks of the national capital and its environs in 

Maryland and Virginia. Its mission was expanded to purchase lands for future development and 

to devise strategies for preventing pollution in 

Rock Creek and the Anacostia and Potomac 

rivers. 

In 1930 the Shipstead-Luce Act gave the Commission of Fine Arts authority to review the 

designs of private construction projects within 

certain areas of the national capital, specifically 

construction that fronts or abuts the grounds of 

the Capitol, the grounds of the White House, the 

portion of Pennsylvania Avenue extending from 

the Capitol to the White House, and the Mall 

park system, as well as Rock Creek Park, the National Zoo, the Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway, the southwest waterfront, and Fort McNair. 

In 1933 federal parks in Washington, D.C., were 

consolidated under the management of the 

National Park Service. 

1950 TO 2000 

Federal Plans 

No plans for the National Mall were undertaken 

in the 1950s. In the 1960s and 1970s master plans 

for the Washington Mall area were prepared by 

Skidmore, Owings and Merrill. They followed 

the general layout of the L’Enfant and McMillan 

plans, while attempting to accommodate national 

prosperity and address the congestion caused by 

automobile traffic. The whole National Mall area 

would be pedestrian friendly. Commercial and 

personal vehicle traffic, as well as vehicle parking, 

would be removed from the Mall, and all northsouth roadway crossings would be tunneled 

under the Mall. A hop-on and -off visitor bus 

service would be provided on designated lanes. 

Bicycle use would be encouraged. Underground 

256
Context for Planning and Development of the National Mall: 1950 to 2000 — Changes on the National Mall 

FIGURE 26: EXTENDING THE LEGACY, 1997 

The National Capital Planning Commission’s Extending the Legacy plan offers proposals for transportation, community revitalization, 

public building, and open space in the monumental core. Courtesy of the National Capital Planning Commission.

parking would be provided at the Ellipse and 

Constitution Gardens. 

The 1976 U.S. Bicentennial Celebration provided 

the motivation for planning to accommodate 

large numbers of expected visitors to the nation’s 

capital. A number of major memorials were 

added to the National Mall throughout this 

period, further underscoring its importance as 

the home to the great symbols of our country. 

The 1997 National Capital Planning Commission’s Extending the Legacy plan provides a 

framework for change that builds on the past, 

plans for the future, and focuses on the use of 

transit rather than expanded automobile access.

Changes on the National Mall 

Proposals that were implemented included the 

following: 

• Roads were tunneled under the Mall at 9th 

and 12th streets NW/SW and I-395 

(between 1st and 3rd street NW/SW). 

Washington and Adams drives were 

converted to gravel walkways as planned, 

but Madison Drive NW and Jefferson Drive 

SW were not closed to traffic, and parking 

was not removed as planned.

 257
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

• The Capitol Reflecting Pool was constructed over the I-395 tunnel, and the Botanic Garden was relocated to the current 

area south of the Mall. 

• Constitution Gardens was dedicated in 

1976. It is an oasis in the midst of the city, 

but its proposed function as an area for 

programmed activities, restaurants, events, 

concerts, and celebrations was never 

achieved, nor was underground public 

parking developed.

• The temporary military buildings on the 

grounds of the Washington Monument and 

on either side of the Lincoln Reflecting 

Pool were removed in 1971. 

• At the Washington Monument 15th Street 

NW/SW was redesigned as a symmetrical 

curve. The monument was restored in the 

1990s, and physical security improvements 

were completed in 2005. 

The Vietnam Veterans Memorial was added in 

1982, the Korean War Veterans Memorial in 

1995, and the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial in 1997. These actions made West 

Potomac Park more commemorative in 

character and less recreational. 

Federal Legislation 

Congress passed the Commemorative Works 

Act in 1986. Its purposes are 

(1) to preserve the integrity of the comprehensive design of the L’Enfant and 

McMillan plans for the Nation’s Capital; 

(2) to ensure the continued public use and 

enjoyment of open space in the District of 

Columbia and its environs, and to encourage the location of commemorative 

works within the urban fabric of the 

District of Columbia; 

(3) to preserve, protect and maintain the 

limited amount of open space available to 

residents of, and visitors to, the Nation’s 

Capital; and 

(4) to ensure that future commemorative 

works in areas administered by the National Park Service and the Administrator 

of General Services in the District of Columbia and its environs— 

(A) are appropriately designed, constructed, and located; and 

(B) reflect a consensus of the lasting 

national significance of the subjects 

involved. 

CURRENT CONDITIONS — 2000 TO 

2008 

Following the terrorist attacks on September 11, 

2001, a new round of security planning and 

construction was undertaken by the National 

Park Service, the National Capital Planning 

Commission, the District of Columbia, and 

federal agencies. NPS perimeter security 

projects have been completed or are underway 

for the Washington Monument, the Lincoln 

Memorial, and the Thomas Jefferson Memorial. 

Museums lining the Mall also have perimeter 

security projects underway or completed. The 

new security climate has resulted in public concerns about achieving an appropriate level of 

protection while retaining the open access and 

freedom of movement expected in a democracy. 

Federal Plans 

The National Capital Planning Commission 

adopted a Memorials and Museums Master Plan 

in 2001, which stems from the Extending the

Legacy plan and guides the selection of sites for 

future memorials and museums. 

To relieve pressure on the National Mall, the 

National Capital Planning Commission and the 

U.S. Commission of Fine Arts have developed 

the Monumental Core Framework Plan to 

enhance the areas surrounding the National 

Mall (NCPC 2009). This plan will help provide 

accessible, inviting, and attractive places for 

public commemoration, participation, and celebration beyond the National Mall. The plan will 

• provide ways to seamlessly extend desirable 

qualities of the National Mall to surrounding areas 

• reestablish vistas of national importance, 

and create important new places for 

cultural and commemorative attractions 

• improve access and connections to popular 

places around the city 

258
Context for Planning and Development of the National Mall: Current Conditions — 2000 to 2008 — Federal Legislation 

FIGURE 27: COMMEMORATIVE AREAS, WASHINGTON, D.C.,

AND ENVIRONS

Changes on the National Mall 

Two new memorials were dedicated — the 

George Mason Memorial in 2002, and the 

World War II Memorial in 2004. The World 

War II Memorial on the east-west axis of the 

National Mall between the Washington Monument and the Lincoln Memorial was built 

around a reconstructed Rainbow Pool to ensure 

that the historic vistas between the existing 

memorials would be retained. 

Federal Legislation 

In 2003 Congress amended the Commemorative 

Works Act to strengthen and clarify its purpose. 

Congress designated the Reserve area (see 

Figure 27), which includes the National Mall 

and the White House, stating that 

(1) the great cross-axis of the [National] Mall in 

the District of Columbia, which generally 

extends from the United States Capitol to 

the Lincoln Memorial, and from the White 

House to the Jefferson Memorial, is a substantially completed work of civic art; and 

(2) to preserve the integrity of the [National] 

Mall, a reserve area should be designated 

with the core of the great cross-axis of the 

Mall where the siting of new commemorative works is prohibited. 

A commemorative work is defined as 

any statue, monument, sculpture, memorial, 

plaque, inscription, or other structure or landscape feature, including a garden or memorial 

grove, designed to perpetuate in a permanent 

manner the memory of an individual, group, 

event or other significant element of American 

history. 

• National Museum of African American 

History and Culture — to be located on the 

northeast section of the Washington Monument, the area bounded by Constitution 

Avenue NW, Madison Drive NW, and 14th 

and 15th streets NW. 

Congress also redesignated Areas I and II, where 

additional memorials could be erected in the 

future (see Figure 27). 

The authorization for a fourth memorial on the 

National Mall — Black Revolutionary War Patriots — expired before its sponsor met all the re- The Reserve contains park quirements of the Commemorative Works Act. land formerly in Area 

I, including the National Mall, however, the 

2003 amendments to the Commemorative 

Works Act provided for the placement of those 

projects that had already been approved for the 

National Mall, assuming that they met the requirements of the Commemorative Works Act 

or other applicable laws. These final projects are 

Memorials within what is now Area 1 that have 

been authorized include a memorial to President 

Dwight D. Eisenhower, which will be on the 

south side of Independence Avenue SW near the 

National Air and Space Museum. A memorial to 

President John Adams has been proposed, but a 

site has not been identified. A memorial to 

American Veterans Disabled for Life is planned 

for Area II south of the National Mall. 

• Vietnam Veterans Memorial Center 

• Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial 

 259
CULTURAL RESOURCES

Archeological resources, ethnographic resources, American Indian trust resources, and 

museum collections have been dismissed from 

further consideration. The cultural resources 

considered here include historic districts, 

historic properties, cultural landscapes, and 

memorials. 

The resources of the National Mall and Memorial Parks are covered by numerous listings on 

the National Register of Historic Places in 

compliance with section 106 of the National 

Historic Preservation Act. 

MEMORIALS

While several major memorials are individually 

listed on the National Register of Historic Places 

(the Washington Monument, the Lincoln Memorial, and the Thomas Jefferson Memorial), 

other memorial are not yet historic (that is, they 

are not 50 years old). These newer memorial 

may be listed on the national register as contributing resources to a historic district, such as 

the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial, the 

Korean War Veterans Memorial, and the 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial. All memorials are 

managed pursuant to the laws and regulations 

that may be specific to them, and changes may 

require congressional authorization. 

Commemorative works are otherwise generally 

subject to review, and in some instances approval by the National Capital Planning Commission and the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, 

and possibly by the D.C. Historic Preservation 

Office. This would depend on whether the memorial is historic or located within the historic 

landscape or is affecting other historic features. 

The Commemorative Works Act also provides 

protection for existing memorials from encroachment by new memorials. 

As a result of the 2003 amendments to the 

Commemorative Works Act, no new memorials 

will be added to the National Mall; however, 

memorials could be placed in area I adjacent to 

the National Mall. 

No structures or properties have been designated as world heritage sites by the United 

Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural 

Organization. Additional details of the resources 

described below are included in appendix C. 

The planning and development history of the 

National Mall is discussed in the previous chapter, “The Context for the Plan.” Historic structures, historic districts, and cultural landscapes 

that could be affected by the implementation of 

any alternative are described in this chapter. 

HISTORIC DISTRICTS

The following historic districts are listed on the 

National Register of Historic Places and are 

shown on the National Register Historic 

Districts and Properties map. 

The Mall 

The Mall, encompassed by Constitution and 

Pennsylvania avenues on the north, 1st Street on 

the east, Independence and Maryland avenues 

on the south, and 14th Street on the west, is 

slightly over 1 mile long and 1,500 feet wide, but 

narrowing to approximately 500 feet at its 

eastern terminus. The Mall is significant as the 

central axis of the city’s monumental core as 

designed by L’Enfant in 1791. The Mall was to 

be the foremost avenue of the city, the so-called 

“Grand Avenue,” running west from the Capitol 

to a point directly south of the President’s 

House, where its terminus would be crowned by 

an equestrian statue of George Washington. 

According to L’Enfant’s plan, the Mall was to be 

“four hundred feet in breadth, and about a mile 

in length, bordered by gardens, ending in a slope 

from the houses on each side.” Although 

L’Enfant was dismissed as the capital architect in 

1791, his grand plan for the city was retained.

During the 19th century L’Enfant’s formal 

design for the Mall was largely forgotten. In 

1851 Andrew Jackson Downing was hired to 

design a landscape plan for the Mall, but as 

previously discussed, his plans were never 

implemented. During the Civil War, the Mall 

grounds were used for military purposes, and 

 

260
Cultural Resources: Historic Districts — The Mall 

National Register Historic 

Districts and Properties 

11x17 

 261
This page has been left blank intentionally. 
Cultural Resources: Historic Districts — The Mall 

Cultural Landscapes 

11x17 

 263
This page has been left blank intentionally. 
Cultural Resources: Historic Districts — The Mall 

the Baltimore and Potomac Railroad built a 

depot on a 14-acre tract at 6th and B streets in 

1872. The Smithsonian Castle was the earliest 

building on the Mall and was designed by James 

Renwick and built in 1847–55. The Arts and 

Industries Building, a national historic landmark, was designed by Cluss and Schulze, with 

Montgomery C. Meigs and built in 1879–81. 

This is a well-preserved example of 19th century 

“exposition” type of architecture. It was built to 

house the international exhibits left over from 

the Philadelphia Centennial Exhibition of 1876 

and is a fanciful construction of polychrome 

brick. 

By 1900 the Mall was a hodgepodge of public, 

private, and commercial structures loosely connected by the overgrown remnants of Downing’s naturalistic design. When the Senate Park 

Commission submitted its report to Congress, 

the plan called for the restoration, development, 

and supplementation of the “Grand Avenue” 

ideal proposed by L’Enfant. The core of the Mall 

was to be a broad grass carpet, typical of those in 

Europe, 300 feet wide and running the entire 

length of the Mall grounds, bordered on each 

side by four rows of American elm trees. Public 

buildings were to border the whole, separated 

from the elms by narrow roadways. The railroad 

station was removed from the area in 1909. 

The Department of Agriculture was built in 1905 

and designed by Rankin, Kellogg and Crane. 

This was the first building constructed on the 

Mall after the issuance of the McMillan Commission report. It took the intervention of 

President Theodore Roosevelt to keep the 

building from the middle of the Mall. 

The National Museum of Natural History was 

designed in 1911 by Hornblower and Marshall 

and the wings were added in 1965 (designed by 

Mills, Petticord and Mills). This neoclassical 

building is the first building on the north side of 

the Mall to comply with the strictures of the 

McMillan Commission. 

The Freer Gallery of Art was designed in 1923 by 

Charles A. Platt and is a neoclassical building 

housing Charles Lang Freer’s collection of the 

painting and sculpture of Asia and 20th century 

American artists. 

The National Museum of American History, 

designed in 1964 by Steinman, Cain and White 

houses a fascinating variety of exhibits. 

The Joseph Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture 

Garden was designed in 1974 by Skidmore, 

Owings & Merrill. Lester Collins designed the 

sculpture garden in 1981. This round, concrete 

building, 231 feet in diameter houses one of the 

country’s greatest collections of contemporary 

sculpture and painting. The garden, which is 

sunken, provides a pleasant oasis for viewing 

more of the collection. 

The National Air and Space Museum was 

completed in 1976 and designed by Hellmuth, 

Obata and Kassabaum. This is a monumental 

glass and granite building which contains 

200,000 square feet. In 1988 a restaurant designed by the same firm was added to the east 

side of the building. 

The Quadrangle Museums Project was designed 

in 1987 by Shapely, Bullfinch, Richardson and 

Abbot. The quadrangle opens south from the 

Smithsonian Castle and contains two small 

buildings which are staging areas for two 

underground museums, the Sackler Gallery of 

Asian Art and the National Museum of African 

Art. Another smaller kiosk-like building provides the entrance for the S. Dillon Ripley Center. The buildings are placed in the Enid A. 

Haupt Garden, which is centered on a diamondshaped 19th century parterre. 

The National Gallery of Art (West Building) was 

designed by John Russell Pope in 1941. This 

neoclassical building relates well to both the 

Natural History Museum and the Federal 

Triangle. The Sculpture Garden located to the 

west of the Museum and designed by the Olin 

Partnership, opening in the spring of 1999. The 

National Gallery of Art (East Wing) was 

designed in 1978 by I. M. Pei and Partners. This 

elegant building is based on a triangular module. 

The marble used on the building is from the 

same quarry as the West Building. 

Adjacent to the Mall along 14th Street, can be 

found the Auditors Main Building (now used by 

the U.S. Forest Service) designed in 1880 by 

James G. Hill. This dark red-brick building 

provides a strong contrast to the neoclassical 

buildings in the vicinity. The U.S. Holocaust 

 265
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Memorial Museum, designed in 1993 by Pei 

Cobb Freed and Partners, is between the 

Auditor’s Main Building and the Bureau of 

Printing and Engraving. 

East and West Potomac Parks 

The area of East and West Potomac parks, situated roughly between the Potomac River and the 

grounds of the Washington Monument, were 

created as a result of lowland areas being filled 

by the Army Corps of Engineers in the late 

1800s. In 1897 President Grover Cleveland 

signed the Potomac Park law, which said this 

land was to be “forever held as a public park for 

the recreation and pleasure of the people.” The 

parks are part of the collection of national parklands in Washington, D.C., and nearby Maryland and Virginia that are collectively referred to 

as the National Capital Region of the National 

Park Service. 

The two parks have a combined area of approximately 730 acres — nearly 400 acres in West 

Potomac Park, and 330 acres in East Potomac 

Park. Together, they comprise a large portion of 

the city’s monumental core, providing recreational space for residents and tourists alike. East 

and West Potomac Parks are characterized by 

broad expanses of open space framed by mature 

landscape plantings and by views of the National 

Mall’s major memorials. 

Federal Triangle Historic District 

The Federal Triangle lies between Pennsylvania 

Avenue, Constitution Avenue, and 15th Street 

NW and is part of the Pennsylvania Avenue 

National Historic Site. It is comprised of a unified group of 10 important federal office buildings designed by different architects. Two of the 

structures, the Old Post Office and the District 

Building, were constructed between 1899 and 

1908. The rest were constructed between 1926 

and the 1930s except for the Ronald Reagan 

Building and International Trade Center, which 

was constructed in the 1990s. 

The 1926 Public Buildings Act, which permitted 

the federal government to hire private architects 

to design federal buildings, heralded the beginning of the country’s largest public buildings 

construction program. The planning for the 

Federal Triangle was one of the last City Beautiful efforts on such a monumental scale in the 

nation. 

Northwest Rectangle 

From the time of the McMillan plan the area to 

the west of the Ellipse was planned for monumental buildings that would frame the newly 

extended National Mall. The growing federal 

government led by the 1930s to the need for 

more office space, and a formal plan was conceived for a monumental complex of federal 

buildings that would balance the Federal 

Triangle on the east side of the Ellipse. 

Called the Northwest Rectangle, this area soon 

saw a large complement of federal buildings, 

including the Public Health Service (1931–33), 

the Interior Department (1936), and the Federal 

Reserve (1937). Later government buildings in 

the area, including the Department of State 

(1957–60), the Civil Service Commission (1960s), 

and the Federal Reserve Annex (1970s), reflect 

modernist rather than classical designs. 

Pennsylvania Avenue Historic 

District 

Pennsylvania Avenue is among the world’s most 

famous streets. On September 30, 1965, the 

Secretary of the Interior designated Pennsylvania Avenue National Historic Site, which 

encompasses the avenue from the Capitol to the 

White House and a number of blocks around it. 

Congress created the Pennsylvania Avenue 

Development Corporation on October 27, 1972, 

to plan and implement the avenue’s revitalization. Congress directed that the avenue be 

developed, maintained, and used “in a manner 

suitable to . . . the historic relationship to the 

legislative and executive branches of the Federal 

Government and to the governmental buildings, 

monuments, memorials, and parks in or adjacent 

to the area.” 

Downtown Historic District 

The 800 block of F Street NW is representative 

of the earliest development of this area as the 

commercial core of Washington, D.C. Surrounded by such monumental buildings as the 

266
Cultural Resources: Historic Properties and Cultural Landscapes — The National Mall 

old Patent Office (now the National Portrait 

Gallery) and the General Post Office, this block 

introduces a varied facade that enhances the 

qualities of these buildings and the L’Enfant plan 

itself. 

HISTORIC PROPERTIES AND 

CULTURAL LANDSCAPES

Some cultural resources are covered in multiple 

national register nominations — for the National 

Mall, East and West Potomac Parks, the 

L’Enfant Plan of the City of Washington, D.C., 

Civil War Monuments in Washington, D.C., and 

American Revolution Statuary. Historic districts 

and properties listed on the National Register of 

Historic Places are shown on the National 

Register Historic Districts and Properties map. 

Documented cultural landscapes within the National Mall are shown on the Cultural Landscapes map. 

Buildings facing the Mall and belonging to the 

National Gallery of Art, the Smithsonian Institution, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture 

are all individually listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Two Smithsonian Institution buildings on the National Mall — the 

Smithsonian Castle and the Arts and Industries 

Building — have also been designated by the 

Secretary of the Interior as national historic 

landmarks. The United States Capitol and the 

White House were also designated national 

historic landmarks on December 19, 1960. 

In compliance with section 110 of the National 

Historic Preservation Act, the National Park 

Service maintains inventories of it cultural resources. The List of Classified Structures is the 

inventory for all structures and objects of historic significance under NPS jurisdiction. These 

resources are listed, or have been determined to 

be eligible for listing on the National Register of 

Historic Places, either as a part of a larger district 

or multiple resource nomination, or as individual listings. Some resources on the List of Classified Structures have not yet been evaluated for 

listing on the national register, but are managed 

as a historic resource. Cultural landscapes are 

documented on the NPS Cultural Landscapes 

Inventory. All resources listed below are included in the List of Classified Structures or the 

Cultural Landscape Inventory (unless otherwise 

noted). 

The following discussion first focuses on the 

National Mall in its entirety, followed by descriptions for each area (presented in the same 

order as for the alternatives): 

• the Mall (1st to 14th Streets), including 

Union Square from 1st to 3rd streets, and 

the Mall from 3rd to 14th streets 

• the Washington Monument and grounds 

• West Potomac Park north of Independence 

Avenue, including the World War II Memorial, Constitution Gardens, the Vietnam 

Veterans Memorial, the Lincoln Memorial, 

the Korean War Veterans Memorial, the 

D.C. War Memorial, and Ash Woods 

• West Potomac Park south of Independence 

Avenue, including the Tidal Basin, the 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial, the 

West Potomac Park riverfront, the George 

Mason Memorial, and the Thomas 

Jefferson Memorial 

The National Mall 

The National Mall is essentially a large-scale 

cultural landscape in the nation’s capital, made 

up of smaller, nationally significant cultural 

landscapes, such as Union Square, the Mall, the 

Washington Monument grounds, the Thomas 

Jefferson Memorial, the Lincoln Memorial, and 

Constitution Gardens. The character-defining 

features of the National Mall cultural landscape 

include: 

• Views and Vistas — Views and vistas date 

from the L’Enfant plan, which laid out the 

great cross axes, with east-west and northsouth vistas, and the McMillan plan, which 

added to the L’Enfant plan by extending 

views to the west and south, thus creating 

the kite-shaped character of the National 

Mall today, extending from the U.S. Capitol 

to the Lincoln Memorial, and from the 

White House to the Thomas Jefferson 

Memorial, with the Washington Monument 

in the center (see the Important Vistas 

map). 

• Spatial Organization — The spatial organization of the National Mall is derived 

 267
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

directly from the L’Enfant and MacMillan 

plans, and modified by later plans. 

• Circulation Patterns — Circulation patterns originated in the L’Enfant plan and 

were enlarged and modified first by the 

McMillan plan and then by highway and 

mass transit construction for the nation’s 

Bicentennial. 

• Vegetation Patterns — Vegetation patterns 

originated in the L’Enfant plan and were 

modified by designs by Frederick Law 

Olmstead Jr. in the early 20th century. 

• Constructed Water Features — Constructed water features originated in the 

McMillan plan and were expanded in later 

plans. They include the Tidal Basin, the 

Lincoln Reflecting Pool, the Capitol Reflecting Pool in Union Square, the Rainbow 

Pool, Constitution Gardens Lake, and 

various fountains and water features. 

• Land Use Patterns — Land use patterns 

originated in the L’Enfant plan and were 

modified in the McMillan plan. 

• Monuments, Memorials, and Plaques —

Presidential monuments and memorials 

include the Washington Monument, the 

Lincoln Memorial, the Thomas Jefferson 

Memorial, the Ulysses S. Grant Memorial, 

Important Vistas 

268
Cultural Resources: Historic Properties and Cultural Landscapes — The National Mall 

FIGURE 28: THE GREAT CROSS AXES ON THE NATIONAL MALL

Looking west from the U.S. Capitol toward Union Square and the Washington 

Monument (above) and east from the Washington Monument (right). 

Looking east from the 

Lincoln Memorial (left) and 

west from the Washington 

Monument to the World 

War II Memorial and Lincoln 

Memorial (below). 

Looking 

north to the 

White House 

from the 

Washington 

Monument 

grounds and 

south to the 

Thomas 

Jefferson 

Memorial. 

 269
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

 and the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial. War memorials include the World War 

II Memorial, the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, and the Korean War Memorial. 

Memorials to individuals include the John 

Paul Jones Memorial the John Ericcson 

Memorial, and the George Mason Memorial. There are a number of plaques and 

other commemorative markers. 

• Topography — The topography of the 

National Mall reflects the L’Enfant design 

for the city on two hills — one for the White 

House and the other for the Capitol, with a 

knoll constructed for the Washington 

Monument. 

• Small-scale Features — Small-scale features include lighting, benches, the 

Japanese pagoda, and other furnishings 

originating in the Olmstead plan and 

subsequent plans. 

• Building and Structures — Building and 

structures include the Lockkeeper’s House, 

Monument Lodge, and the Survey Lodge. 

• Cluster Arrangement — The cluster 

arrangement of the National Mall was 

influenced by the McMillan plan. Elements 

include the Smithsonian Institution 

buildings, the National Gallery of Art, and 

other adjacent monumental buildings that 

frame and define the character of the 

National Mall’s cultural landscape. 

• Archeological Features — Archeological 

features, such as Tiber Creek, the train 

station, and other earlier features exist on 

the present site of the National Mall. 

The Mall 

Union Square, 1st to 3rd Streets 

The focal point of Union Square is the Ulysses S. 

Grant Memorial, with the Capitol Reflecting 

Pool and plaza to the west. The following description of resources is based on the “Cultural 

Landscape Inventory” for Union Square (NPS 

2006b). 

Grant Memorial 

The Ulysses S. Grant Memorial overlooks Union 

Square, below the west grounds of the Capitol. 

The memorial is a large sculptural grouping consisting of three elements: On the north is a cavalry grouping of seven horsemen in a dramatic 

charge (erected in 1912), in the center an equestrian statue of General Grant protected by four 

lions at each corner (erected in 1922), and on the 

south is an artillery grouping depicting three 

soldiers and a horse-drawn limber carrying 

cannon (erected in 1916). The Grant statue is the 

second largest equestrian statue in the world. 

The memorial is listed on the National Register 

of Historic Places as a contributing feature of 

Civil War Monuments of Washington, D.C., and 

on the National Mall national register nomination. It is also on the NPS List of Classified 

Structures. 

Spatial Organization 

The Capitol Reflecting Pool is a 6-acre wedgeshaped pool with stone coping west of the 

Ulysses S. Grant Memorial. Occupying over half 

of Union Square, the pool was built in 1969–71 

when the center leg of the Inner Loop Freeway 

was constructed, which passes underneath 

Union Square along the axis of 2nd Street. 

Sunken walks flank the north, west, and south 

sides of the pool, and a wide plaza lies to the 

west. Three broad steps lead down to walks, 

which are sunk about a foot below ground level; 

the pool’s coping rises to about this height, so 

that the surface of the pool is near ground level. 

North and south of the Grant Memorial are 

narrow flights of steps leading down to the pool. 

In plan view the pool’s longer west end has a 

convex curve, and the shorter east end has a 

concave curve that is broken by a rectangular 

recess in the center, on line with the Grant 

Memorial and the center line of the Mall. The 

pool’s angled sides parallel the axes of Pennsylvania and Maryland avenues. The pool’s 

footprint is actually somewhat asymmetrical, 

probably to compensate for the fact that the 

Grant Memorial was centered on the Capitol’s 

west facade, rather than on the dome, with the 

result that the memorial is several feet off the 

true center line of the Mall. Further consultations are needed with the D.C. Historic Preservation Office to determine the reflecting pool’s 

eligibility for listing on the National Register of 

Historic Places. 

270
Cultural Resources: Historic Properties and Cultural Landscapes — The Mall 

Views and Vistas 

From Union Square the view to the north is of 

large, modern office and governmental buildings, and to the northeast the Taft Carillon is 

visible above the trees of the Capitol grounds. 

To the southeast, the Botanic Garden Conservatory dominates the view, and beyond it the huge 

Rayburn House Office Building. Southwest of 

the conservatory is a fenced-off staging area and 

across Independence Avenue the massive concrete 1960s Health and Human Services Building. These buildings create a framework for the 

square that is similar, except in architectural 

style, to the surroundings envisioned by the 

McMillan Commission. 

Pennsylvania and Maryland avenues are critical 

in defining views from Union Square. The major 

vista down Pennsylvania Avenue to the White 

House, an essential feature of the L’Enfant plan, 

was lost when the south wing of the Treasury 

Building was constructed in the 1850s. However, 

the vista from the Capitol down the avenue to 

the Treasury remains one of the most important 

vistas in the city, if not the country. This view is 

severely compromised by the discordant visual 

clutter of the parking lot that occupies the avenue for its entire extent between 1st and 3rd 

streets. 

Constructed Water Features 

L’Enfant had planned to divert the waters of the 

Tiber Creek into a canal falling into a cascade 

and pool at the foot of Capitol Hill; this would 

have been the most important among the numerous water effects with which the designer 

intended to embellish the city. The cascade and 

pool were planned in the area that is now Union 

Square. Andrew Ellicott simplified this design 

somewhat but retained it. 

When the Washington Canal was built in 1815, 

none of L’Enfant’s basins or cascades was 

incorporated. The canal ran down 3rd Street 

and crossed over the Botanic Garden site, but it 

soon became a notorious sewer and was 

channeled into a sewer line in the early 1870s. 

The first Botanic Garden, 1820–37, had one or 

more artificial ponds, which no long remain. 

The concept of the McMillan plan, inspired by 

European cities, particularly Rome and Versailles, was a Mall that would be amply furnished 

with reflecting pools and splashing fountains to 

cool visitors during summer. The plan depicted 

eight fountains in Union Square, all placed off 

the center axis, and a large pool along the Mall’s 

center panel from 3rd to midway between 4th 

and 5th streets. 

Frederick Law Olmsted Jr.’s final plan for Union 

Square in the 1930s did not include any pools or 

other water features. However, the plans of 

Skidmore, Owings and Merrill, from 1966 to 

1974, revived the McMillan plan’s concept of a 

Capitol Reflecting Pool to complement the 

Lincoln Reflecting Pool. 

Vegetation 

Most or all of the larger trees growing in Union 

Square probably date from the Botanic Garden 

planting. Specimens include a variety of exotics 

and rare native species, as well as typical eastern 

trees. Frederick Law Olmsted Jr. designed the 

lines of trees in Union Square to connect with 

the Mall elms and to visually merge with the 

trees growing on the west Capitol grounds, 

where the landscape design by Frederick Law 

Olmsted Sr. focused views on the Capitol’s west 

facade. In Union Square Olmsted Jr. lined walks 

and roads with elms, clustered trees closely 

around the Meade (which was later relocated to 

Pennsylvania Avenue) and future Navy memorial sites, and placed groups of trees behind the 

Grant Memorial to frame it, while leaving the 

central vista open. 

The construction of the Capitol Reflecting Pool 

in 1969–71 affected the integrity of the Olmsted 

design. Many trees were removed from the 

middle of the site, and the continuity of the lines 

of trees was interrupted. Today, isolated groups 

of trees occupy the square’s four corners. Many 

large horse chestnuts and buckeyes grow in the 

northwest panel and an old, rare zelkova and an 

old gingko can be found in the southwest. When 

trees die in Union Square, they are typically 

replaced in kind and in the same location. 

Olmsted’s original landscape plan included six 

beds arranged symmetrically in three identical 

pairs around the Grant Memorial, and a 1935 

plan depicts shrubs (boxwood and yews) massed 

in all the beds. Currently, large, spreading yews 

are massed with a few small boxwoods at the 

 271
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

northeast and southeast corners of the Grant 

Memorial. They frame the monument and 

soften the transition between the structure and 

its surroundings, and they also help block views 

of traffic on 1st Street. In the southeast huge 

yews overshadow smaller boxwoods. Young oak 

trees have been planted within the inside edges 

of the south and north hedges. Though overgrown, these shrubs are remnants of the 

Olmsted planting and retain historic integrity. 

The lawns flanking the Grant Memorial curve to 

the north and south around the west plaza. 

Along the east side of 3rd Street is a grass planting strip between the walk and the street curb. 

No street trees are growing here. 

Small-Scale Features 

Union Square has only a few types of small-scale 

features. Contributing features include benches, 

streetlights, and curbs. Except for the curbs, 

these features conform to the standards published in the Streetscape Manual (Interagency 

Initiative for National Mall Road Improvement 

Program 1992), which covers benches, trash 

receptacles, light standards, drinking fountains, 

fire hydrants, post-and-chain fencing, and bike 

racks. It also discusses standards for curbs, 

sidewalks, and wheelchair ramps. 

The benches used in Union Square are the same 

as those used on the Mall. They are black and 

have cast-iron frames and wood-slat backs and 

seats. 

All of the streetlights in Union Square are the 

double lamp designed by Henry Bacon (architect of the Lincoln Memorial) in 1923 to provide 

a standard street light for the city and known as 

the Bacon Twin or Twin-Twenty lights. The 

Streetscape Manual designates these lights for 

major thoroughfares in the District, and they are 

placed around the entire perimeter of the paved 

area in Union Square. 

A row of cylindrical concrete bollards stands at 

the west end of the plaza in front of the reflecting pool. Single bollards are located at the 

northeast and southeast corners of the pool at 

the top of the steps. 

Two low semicircular retaining walls are located 

northwest and southwest of the Grant Memorial, where the low rise in the ground is cut back 

for the walk along the east side of the pool. The 

walls curve from the steps on one side into the 

sloping ground on the other. 

Low, flat curbs of both granite and concrete 

with square end blocks surround the plaza. The 

planting beds at the ends of the memorial have 

curved concrete copings with corner blocks. 

There are granite curbs and brick gutters along 

1st Street. 

Nearby Memorials 

James Garfield Monument. The James Garfield 

Monument stands on the grounds of the United 

States Capitol in the circle at 1st and Maryland 

Avenue SW. It consists of a standing figure of the 

assassinated president on a pedestal surrounded 

by three figures representing his careers as 

scholar, soldier, and statesman. The monument 

is under the jurisdiction of the Architect of the 

Capitol. 

Naval Peace Monument. The Naval Peace 

Monument, which sits in the circle at 1st and 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW, is dedicated to the 

naval personnel who died during the Civil War. 

It consists of two allegorical female figures and a 

large fountain. It is listed on the National 

Register of Historic Places as a contributing 

feature of the Civil War Monuments in 

Washington, D.C. The monument is under the 

jurisdiction of the Architect of the Capitol. 

The Mall, 3rd to 14th Streets 

The Mall extends from Union Square on the east 

to the Washington Monument on the west. It is 

framed on either side by lines of elm trees. The 

landscape of the Mall and the views along it are 

integral to its spatial organization, and all elements are interdependent. This interdependence defines the fundamental integrity of the 

design. The following information is from the 

“Cultural Landscape Inventory” (NPS 2006a). 

Spatial Organization 

The Mall encompasses 135 acres, between 3rd 

and 14th Streets, and Madison and Jefferson 

drives. The landscape is composed of flat grass 

panels, which are bordered on the north and 

south sides by four rows of American elms, 

272
Cultural Resources: Historic Properties and Cultural Landscapes — The Mall 

which delineate the vista between the Capitol 

and the Washington Monument. 

Behind the rows of elm trees are the museum 

buildings of the Smithsonian Institution and the 

National Gallery of Art, which represent 

Victorian, Beaux-Arts, classical, and modern 

styles. Along the Mall beneath the elms is a more 

filtered space, regularly defined by the ranks of 

trunks but permeable, allowing physical passage 

between the trees and filtered views of the 

buildings. 

The 8th Street cross-axis was given particular 

importance in the L’Enfant plan, where a site for 

a national church was shown several blocks 

north of the Mall and a large turning basin was 

located at the canal. The significance of the axis 

was retained in the McMillan and the 1930s 

Olmsted plans. This importance is noted now in 

the landscape by the omission of elms and the 

resulting open views of the Hirshhorn and 

National Gallery of Art sculpture gardens, as 

well as the National Archives. The Smithsonian 

Castle is only 300 feet from the Mall’s centerline, 

and the section of Jefferson Drive in front of the 

Castle intrudes into the tree panel, narrowing it 

so that in front of the Castle there is only one 

row of elms. 

Views and Vistas 

The Mall is defined by its primary view — the 

grand vista between the Capitol and the Washington Monument. This vista was integral to 

L’Enfant’s plan for a Grand Avenue or promenade extending west from the Capitol building 

to the proposed equestrian monument to 

George Washington, which would have been 

placed near the Potomac River, at the point 

where the east-west Capitol axis intersected the 

north-south White House axis. L’Enfant placed 

other features — residences, buildings, walks, 

and gardens — along this promenade to frame 

and reinforce the visual corridor. 

The McMillan plan adapted this idea of the 

visual corridor reinforced by larger buildings 

and landscaping. Retaining L’Enfant’s axial 

promenade, the McMillan plan placed institutional buildings in near symmetry on each side 

of the central corridor. The essential features of 

the 1930s version of the McMillan plan — the 

grass panels or tapis verte, the four rows of elm 

trees along the north and south sides, and the 

orthogonal disposition of walks and buildings — 

all direct the eye to and from the Capitol and the 

Washington Monument. There are also important views from the east end of the Mall to 

Union Square and the Grant Memorial at the 

foot of Capitol Hill. 

The McMillan Commission members and the 

planners in the 1930s had to work with the 

Washington Monument, which had been placed 

southeast of the actual intersection of L’Enfant’s 

original axes, making it out of alignment with the 

cardinal directions. They adjusted the axis of the 

Mall, canting it to the southwest so that the 

Washington Monument would be directly in line 

with the Capitol. The Mall as a result is slightly 

off a true east-west alignment. 

Topography 

The generally level topography of the presentday Mall is a result of much grading that was 

done in the 1930s, especially between 9th and 

14th streets, under the direction of Frederick 

Law Olmsted Jr. Today the Mall grade rises 

slightly from east to west. Between 12th and 14th 

streets there is a discernible downward slope 

from south to north, with a particularly steep 

slope at the northwest corner. The land north of 

the Mall, beyond Madison Drive and its north 

sidewalk, slopes down to Constitution Avenue, 

and the National Museum of American History 

(1964) and the National Museum of Natural 

History (1904) were built into this slope, so that 

their entrances on Madison Drive on the Mall 

are higher than the exposed basement stories on 

Constitution Avenue. 

Vegetation 

Currently, there are 585 elm trees on the Mall, 

planted 50 feet on center. At any point in time a 

few tree spaces may be vacant as dead trees are 

replaced. A few dozen elms remain from an early 

planting in the 1920s, and some portion of the 

rest date from the major planting in 1935. Others 

are replacements planted since the 1930s, and 

there are a few other cultivars or varieties as 

well, plus several trees of other species. The trees 

are now of various sizes because the total 

number of original trees was planted over a 

period of about 40 years, and also because of the 

periodic replacement of dead or diseased trees. 

 273
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Original designs by Frederick Law Olmsted Jr. 

and others likely anticipated greater uniformity. 

The American elm tree was specified for use in 

the McMillan plan and in the 1930s revised 

plans because of its growth habit. The columnar 

trunks of this native species and the arching, 

spreading branches were believed to form a 

natural equivalent of an architectural arcade, 

giving a pleasing combination of formal regularity and a picturesque openness. Even though 

other tree species or a combination of species 

was suggested in the 1930s, Olmsted strongly 

defended the original choice of the American 

elm. Elms are also drought tolerant and able to 

withstand urban conditions and limited soil 

compaction. 

Some of the Mall elms are a cultivar of the 

American elm called ‘Augustine Ascending.’ 

These trees have an upright, fan-shaped form, 

distinctly different from and taller than the 

surrounding elms. They were replacement trees 

purchased in the 1960s or earlier; it was probably not known what their ultimate form would 

be. They are highly susceptible to Dutch elm 

disease, and when they die, they are replaced 

with Ulmus americana or disease-resistant 

cultivars such as ‘Jefferson’ or ‘Princeton.’ Along 

the alignment of 12th Street are four rows on 

each side of European elms. These were installed as part of the construction of the 12th 

Street underpass, probably to plant elms on the 

Mall that were less susceptible to Dutch elm 

disease. They have a rounder crown than 

American elm trees. 

The rows of elms are broken along the 8th Street 

axis, in front of the Smithsonian Castle, in front 

of the National Museum of Natural History, at 

the Mall’s southwest corner along 14th Street, 

and at the base of the Joseph Henry statue. Five 

bald cypress trees grow in front of the Natural 

History Museum, in an irregular pattern, somewhat interrupting the regularity of the tree lines. 

The only other planting variation occurs at the 

end of the Mall, in the grass strip along 14th 

Street, where two red oak trees grow. Based on 

historic photographs and surveys, these oaks do 

not appear to have been retained from the 

original Mall planting, but were probably 

planted by the city as street trees in the 1940s. 

They will not be replaced when they die. 

Each building or site facing the Mall has its own 

landscaping scheme. Many of the landscapes 

were designed in relation to the Mall landscape. 

The Department of Agriculture landscape, 

designed by Frederick Law Olmsted Jr., was 

conceived to complement the Mall design. 

Similar intentions motivated the original 

landscape plan of the National Gallery of Art 

West Building. 

Constructed Water Features 

The concept of the McMillan plan, inspired by 

European cities, particularly Rome and Versailles, was a Mall that would be amply furnished 

with reflecting pools and splashing fountains to 

cool visitors during summer. In addition to eight 

fountains in Union Square, the plan also depicted a large pool along the Mall’s center panel 

from 3rd Street to midway between 4th and 5th 

streets. This pool was never constructed. 

Circulation 

The Mall landscape is overlaid with a grid of 

walks and crosswalks. Four asphalt-paved roadways mark the Mall’s boundaries — 3rd Street 

on the east (two-way traffic), Madison Drive on 

the north (one-way going west), 14th Street on 

the west (two-way traffic), and Jefferson Drive 

on the south (one-way going east). Each drive is 

35-feet wide on average and provides access to 

many museums. Single or paired gravel and 

concrete walks follow the routes of most crossaxial streets, except 11th Street. Two streets — 

4th and 7th — cross the Mall on the surface, 

while 9th and 12th streets are tunneled beneath 

it. Because 9th and 12th streets are tunneled, the 

entire area stretch of the Mall from 7th to 14th 

streets is unbroken. All streets have granite 

curbs; handicap curb cuts are also granite. Cross 

streets such as 3rd, 4th, and 7th streets have D.C. 

parking meters, and parked vehicles affect the 

vistas (see NPS 2006a). 

The current Mall walk system dates from the 

1930s. The original walks were concrete. Wide 

sidewalks run along all the streets. Those along 

the north-south streets are exposed aggregate 

concrete, and grassed tree planting strips separate the sidewalk from the street. Jefferson and 

Madison drives have wider sidewalks, paved for 

half their width in gravel, half in exposed aggregate concrete. The former Adams and Wash274
Cultural Resources: Historic Properties and Cultural Landscapes — The Mall 

ington drives, which ran parallel to Jefferson and 

Madison drives, were closed to traffic in 1975 

and replaced with wide graveled walkways that 

run along the inner edges of the rows of American elms. Walks also follow the alignments of all 

cross axes created by the city’s grid of numbered 

streets, except for the 11th Street axis, which has 

no walk. 

FIGURE 29: THE NPS WASHINGTON BENCH

In front of the Smithsonian Castle are two 

curved gravel walks, leading from concrete 

aprons at the sidewalks that run down the slope 

to the Mall walk. On each side of the Joseph 

Henry statue are triple flights of steps leading 

from the sidewalk down to the Mall walk. The 

stairs, and the area of sidewalk immediately 

behind the statue, have a polychrome design 

made of red granite diamonds and bands on a 

field of buff limestone. Several eroded social 

trails also cross this slope in front of the Castle. 

In some areas, other social trails run through the 

grass or tree panels immediately parallel to the 

east-west walks. The corners and edges of many 

of the grass panels are worn and eroded, particularly near the Metro entrance on the 12th Street 

alignment. In these places the gravel has spread 

into the lawns, eroding the formal distinction 

between walks and panels. 

Buildings and Structures 

The Mall itself has no contributing buildings or 

structures. Large buildings help define the edges, 

but within the park’s boundaries, the only 

buildings are small utilitarian structures. The 

Joseph Henry statue stands in front of the 

Smithsonian Castle, and the carousel is in front 

of the Arts and Industries Building. Other structures include the Metro entrance, four food 

service stands, Tourmobile ticket booths, the 

carousel ticket booth, and the Hirshhorn 

Sculpture Garden. 

Small-Scale Features 

The Mall has only a few types of small-scale 

features, including benches and streetlights. 

These features conform to the standards published in the Streetscape Manual (Interagency 

Initiative for National Mall Road Improvement 

Program 1992). The manual covers benches, 

trash receptacles, light standards, drinking 

fountains, fire hydrants, post-and-chain fencing, 

and bike racks. It also discusses standards for 

curbs, sidewalks, and wheelchair ramps. Other 

features include four small food service stands, 

tables and chairs, and short sections of postand-chain fencing. A few constructed areas 

interrupt the continuity of the lines of elms, but 

they do not detract from the monumental 

landscape. 

All benches used on the National Mall are the 

same as those used at Union Square and reflect 

the standard developed for the National Capital 

Parks in 1934–35. The black cast-iron benches 

with wood-slat backs and seats are located along 

the Mall’s east-west axes (along the outer walks 

beside Madison and Jefferson drives and along 

the inner walks next to the inner row of elms). 

All benches face the center of the Mall, except 

for those on either side of the carousel food 

pavilion grouping, which is perpendicular to the 

main axis. No benches are located on the 8th 

Street axis. 

The Mall streetlights were designed especially 

for this area as part of the 1930s reconstruction.* 

The lights have cast-iron bases, with a 21-foot 

steel fluted post topped by a cylindrical cast-iron 

luminaire suspended from two supports attached to either side of the domed cap. The 

streetlight is on the NPS List of Classified 

Structures. 

Street lights were to be aligned with the Mall 

lights, and no lights were to have been directly in 

 

* Although commonly referred to as “Olmsted lights,” 

the design is by J. W. Gosling, a designer employed by 

General Electric laboratories. The design was approved by the Commission of Fine Arts. 

 275
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

the vista. Some posts along Madison and Jefferson drives have cross arms attached for hanging 

banners. 

FIGURE 30: BULFINCH GATEPOST

One of the eight remaining Bulfinch gateposts. 

Historic American Buildings Survey, Library of Congress.

The existing lighting system consists of highpressure sodium lamps and mercury bulbs on 

the outside roads (multi-vapor type lamps), as 

well as incandescent on the inside walks. New 

lamps on the Madison and Jefferson drives 

consist of fluorescent lamps; incandescent lamps 

are still used on the inside walks. 

Few barriers of any kind are used on the Mall. 

Varying lengths of post-and-chain fencing 

(black vinyl-coated steel posts topped by acorn 

caps, with vinyl-coated steel chains between the 

posts) are erected in certain areas to discourage 

crossing turf areas, for example, at the corners of 

some grass panels, along the walk leading to the 

Metro station entrance from Jefferson Drive, 

along walks leading to food service stands, and 

along the parking strip on 14th Street. Temporary fencing is sometimes used to protect newly 

seeded or sodded lawns or to channel pedestrian 

traffic. 

Signs on the National Mall are generally confined to the edges of streets and walks or are set 

within the elm panels so as not to disrupt views 

and vistas. A Metro pylon stands near the 

station. A location map of the National Mall area 

is being replaced. 

One of the few anomalous features on the Mall 

is a small bronze plaque on a granite base set on 

the west side of 4th Street. The 1951 plaque 

marks the historic Department of Agriculture 

propagating gardens, where the National Grange 

of the Patrons of Husbandry was founded in 

1867. 

Circular edgings of tan-colored bricks flush with 

the ground are used around some elm trees 

growing in gravel walks rather than lawn. Handicap-accessible drinking fountains that conform 

to the Streetscape Manual standards are placed 

along Madison and Jefferson drives. 

Some metal bicycle racks were installed in 2008 

by street curbs on the Mall sides of Madison and 

Jefferson drives. Movable metal café tables and 

chairs are placed along the wide concrete walks 

leading to refreshment stands. 

Other Cultural Resources 

Carousel. A carousel has occupied a location on 

the Mall near the Smithsonian Castle since 1967, 

when Smithsonian Secretary S. Dillon Ripley 

arranged for the placement of a portable carousel. In 1981 a larger carousel (an additional 10 

feet in diameter) replaced the previous one. The 

present carousel has an extra row of horses. The 

carousel’s 60 horses were built in 1947 by the 

Allan Herschell Company of North Tonowanda, 

New York. Unlike the earlier one, the current 

carousel is covered with a canvas top and sides 

(Smithsonian Institution Research Information 

System). 

Bulfinch Gatepost. This gatepost was one of 

only 8 remaining of the 24 original gateposts of 

the Capitol. Located at 1st Street and Constitution Avenue, it was moved from its original location in 1874. The Bulfinch gateposts are listed on 

the National Register of Historic Places. The 

gateposts also contribute to the cultural landscape of the Mall. 

276
Cultural Resources: Historic Properties and Cultural Landscapes — Washington Monument and Grounds 

FIGURE 31: JOSEPH HENRY MEMORIAL

The Joseph Henry Memorial stands in front of the Smithsonian 

Castle. 

Downing Memorial Urn. A white Carrara 

marble urn was designed to honor Andrew 

Jackson Downing, landscape designer who in 

the 1850s began a redesign of the Mall. The 

memorial was moved off the Mall to the Enid A. 

Haupt Garden south of the Smithsonian Castle. 

It is a contributing element of the L’Enfant Plan 

of the City of Washington, D.C., and the national 

register nomination for the National Mall. 

Joseph Henry Memorial. The Joseph Henry 

Memorial honors the first secretary of the 

Smithsonian Institution, who was also widely 

recognized for his scientific achievements in the 

field of electromagnetic and inducted current. 

The bronze statue in front of the Smithsonian 

Castle is a contributing feature of the L’Enfant 

Plan of the City of Washington, D.C., as well as 

the national register nomination for the National 

Mall. 

Washington Monument and 

Grounds 

The Washington Monument grounds is a cultural landscape within National Mall. It comprises U.S. Reservation 2. Containing approximately 106 acres, the inventory unit is bounded 

by 14th Street to the east, Constitution Avenue 

to the north, 17th Street to the west, and the 

Tidal Basin to the south. 

According to the recently completed “Cultural 

Landscape Inventory” (NPS 2009b), contributing landscape characteristics identified for the 

Washington Monument grounds are views and 

vistas, buildings and structures, circulation, 

vegetation, topography, land use, spatial 

organization, and small-scale features. 

Spatial Organization 

Before the Washington Monument was constructed, the site (U.S. Reservation 2) was 

designated by L’Enfant for an equestrian statue 

of George Washington. The statue was to have 

been at the intersection of the White House to 

the north and the Capitol to the east, effectively 

establishing the location as the symbolic center 

of the city. 

The 1901 McMillan plan reemphasized and 

expanded the role of the monument grounds as 

the center of the city’s monumental core. The 

plan expanded the central axis west to the 

Lincoln Memorial and south to what would be 

the Thomas Jefferson Memorial. 

The south monument grounds (south of Independence Avenue) have served as a continuation 

of park grounds, as well as a connection between 

the Washington Monument, the Thomas Jefferson Memorial, and the Tidal Basin. 

Views and Vistas 

The views that connect the Washington Monument to prominent buildings, landscapes, monuments, and memorials in the city are defining 

aspects of the Washington Monument grounds. 

L’Enfant’s 1791 plan for the new city included 

open vistas from the U.S. Capitol and the White 

House to the intersection of their respective 

axes. L’Enfant designed an open promenade 

between the Capitol and what would be the 

monument grounds, with buildings on both 

sides of the promenade to reinforce the visual 

corridor. President’s Park was placed between 

the monument grounds and the White House, 

leaving a view unobstructed by buildings along 

the north-south axis. The eventual construction 

of the Washington Monument, begun in 1848, 

placed the obelisk just southeast of the crossaxis. 

The McMillan plan expanded the monumental 

core to include park land and locations for 

 277
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

memorials to the south and west of the Washington Monument. The plan also called for 

unobstructed views of the Washington Monument and the U.S. Capitol across the Mall. The 

McMillan plan vistas emphasized the great cross 

axes between the U.S. Capitol and the site of the 

Lincoln Memorial, and between the White 

House and the site of the Thomas Jefferson 

Memorial, with the Washington Monument 

serving as a pivotal element in the design. 

Eventually, the hallmark emphasis on the main 

axes of the McMillan plan was achieved. Planning for the Lincoln Memorial took into consideration the fact that the Washington Monument had been constructed to the southeast of 

the axial crossing, and the axis of the Mall was 

adjusted so that the Washington Monument 

would align with the U.S. Capitol and the same 

axis would continue to the Lincoln Memorial. 

The completion of the Lincoln Memorial in 

1921 and the reflecting pool in 1924 added the 

western focal point for the east-west axis 

envisioned by the McMillan Commission. The 

World War II Memorial, constructed on the site 

of the Rainbow Pool and completed in 2004, was 

design to frame rather than block the view 

between the two monuments. 

The construction of the Thomas Jefferson 

Memorial from 1939 to 1943 completed the 

cross-axial plan envisioned by the McMillan 

plan. The Thomas Jefferson Memorial was not 

built on axis with the Washington Monument, 

but with the original north-south alignment of 

the White House and the Jefferson Pier Marker. 

To the north, the White House is visible from 

the Washington Monument plaza. The designed 

vista along the north-south axis — between the 

White House, the Jefferson Pier Marker, and the 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial — is unobstructed. 

The views from the city and the vistas looking 

outward from the Washington Monument have 

been faithfully maintained, retaining the strong 

visual corridors established by the L’Enfant and 

McMillan plans. 

Buildings and Structures 

The Washington Monument is constructed of 

white marble ashlar blocks backed by blue 

gneiss. The obelisk stands 555 feet, 5-1/8 inches 

high. The base is 55 feet wide, with 13-foot-thick 

masonry walls at the base and one-foot-thick 

walls at top. The interior lobby is 23 feet wide 

and the elevator cab is 9 feet wide. The interior 

wall contain 193 commemorative stones that 

were placed starting at the 30-foot level and 

continuing to the 450-foot level. 

Two buildings constructed on the Washington 

Monument Grounds during the 19th century —

Monument Lodge and Survey Lodge — survive, 

although their uses have been modified. 

Monument Lodge 

Monument Lodge is rectangular, constructed of 

rusticated ashlar stone, approximately 25 feet by 

30 feet. It is flat roofed, with one story and a 

partial basement. The building was opened to 

the public in January 1889 as a point of arrival 

for visitors. It was to be used as a waiting room 

for tours of the monument, with public restrooms. The restrooms were enlarged in 1931 to 

include an area formerly occupied by the office 

and store room. In 1942 the interior was again 

FIGURE 32: MONUMENT LODGE AND SURVEY LODGE

Monument Lodge is east of the Washington Monument. 

Survey Lodge is southwest of the Washington Monument. 

278
Cultural Resources: Historic Properties and Cultural Landscapes — Washington Monument and Grounds 

remodeled to house a display featuring materials 

related to George Washington’s life, and to 

provide space for concessioner operations. It is 

listed on the National Register of Historic Places 

as a contributing element of the Washington 

Monument nomination; it is also on the NPS 

List of Classified Structures. 

FIGURE 33: SYLVAN THEATER

The Sylvan Theater is south of the Washington Monument. 

Survey Lodge 

Survey Lodge was originally designed as a boiler 

house to supply power to the Washington 

Monument elevator. The two-story structure 

was built in 1885 of waste stock granite and 

white marble that was used to construct the 

monument. The building acquired the name 

Survey Lodge after its use by NPS survey crews 

in the 1930s. The building was rehabilitated, 

including a complete renovation of the interior, 

from 1989 to 1993 (NPS 2009b). It is listed on 

the Washington Monument’s national register 

nomination and on the NPS List of Classified 

Structures. 

Bulfinch Gateposts 

Several pairs of gateposts, once located on the 

west grounds of the U.S. Capitol, were moved to 

a series of intersections along Constitution 

Avenue (then B Street North) in 1874, including 

a pair that was placed to flank the 15th Street 

entrance to the monument grounds. The design 

of the gateposts is generally attributed to Charles 

Bulfinch, who was commissioned to do the U.S. 

Capitol restoration in 1814. The gateposts, 

which are approximately 11 feet tall by 4 feet 

wide, are constructed of Aquia Creek sandstone. 

Seawall 

The Tidal Basin seawall, including the portion 

within the Washington Monument grounds, was 

constructed from April 1895 through September 

1896, the last portion to be completed. The 

seawall around the other portions of reclaimed 

land was completed in 1894. The wall was built 

on a footing that was already in place, and it was 

6 feet high from that footing, 4 feet wide at the 

base, and 2.5 feet wide at the top. The portion of 

seawall along the south monument grounds has 

remained relatively unchanged, even though 

walks and safety rails (similar in design to those 

in place today) were constructed by 1919. 

Sylvan Theater 

The Sylvan Theater is located 150 yards southeast of the Washington Monument. The theater 

began as an earthen stage in 1917. A 1931 plan of 

the theater and its landscaped surroundings 

shows a stand of trees behind the stage and steps 

leading down either side of the front of the stage. 

The significance of Sylvan Theater, recognized 

in the national register listing for the Washington Monument and grounds, is in its continued 

use as an event and public gathering space. 

Circulation 

Circulation features of the Washington Monument grounds include most of the perimeter 

roads, the Independence Avenue extension 

through the south monument grounds, a few 

walks, and one set of steps. Two graphic sources 

indicate circulation features associated with the 

Washington Monument. The interior curvilinear 

roadways present when the site opened to the 

public are thought to have been inspired by A. J. 

Downing’s mid-19th century design for the Mall. 

Some of these continued to exist after the 

adoption of the more formal McMillan plan in 

the beginning of the 20th century, but most were 

removed in the 1930s and 1940s. By the 1890s 

the old 14th Street entrance near the Agriculture 

Department had been abandoned and new 

entrances to the grounds were in place at 15th 

Street and 14th Street along the northeastern 

edge of the grounds. Several of the planned 

carriage roads were in place by this time as well. 

Curving drives surrounding the knoll highlighted the monument’s object-like quality. 

 279
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Circulation within the grounds remained little 

altered until the 1930s. Although road widening 

and regrading have occurred, Constitution 

Avenue and 14th Street have anchored the 

northern and eastern boundaries of the grounds 

since they were first delineated in the 19th 

century. Likewise, a paved plaza has existed at 

the base of the Monument since 1889. In 1931 

Constitution Avenue was widened and its 

original flagstone sidewalks displaced. 

The north end of 15th Street appears to have 

provided an entry to the Washington Monument grounds by 1889. While B Street (Constitution Avenue), 14th Street, and 17th Street are 

shown lined with trees on the 1901 McMillan 

plan, 15th Street apparently never received the 

same treatment, indicating that it may have been 

considered a secondary roadway. The alignment 

and function of 15th Street has shifted perhaps 

more than any other associated with the site. In 

1936, in conjunction with the Mall plan proposed by Frederick Law Olmsted Jr., connections to Madison and Jefferson drives were 

established from 15th Street. 

During the early 1940s a new road system was 

constructed through the south monument 

grounds and West Potomac Park. Independence 

Avenue was extended to the Lincoln Memorial 

while Maine Avenue was extended to 17th 

Street. The dual highway system was designed to 

preserve the northern neck of the Tidal Basin, 

views of the area, and as many trees as possible; 

all roads were one-way. The design included a 

bridge (later named Kutz Bridge) carrying 

eastbound Independence Avenue traffic over 

the north end of the Tidal Basin. Westbound 

traffic on Independence Avenue passed north of 

the Tidal Basin on a separate roadway. An overpass was constructed where eastbound lanes of 

Independence Avenue passed over the westbound lanes of Maine Avenue. 

There has been a level paved area at the base of 

the Washington Monument since the completion of its construction, although the plaza has 

evolved over the years. Formal paving was added 

after 1906 to address complaints of wind-blown 

dust. The plaza remained without significant 

changes, although access roads to the plaza 

changed. 

Most of the pedestrian circulation system on the 

site today has been added in recent years. While 

some existing circulation follows the general 

alignment of historic paths, the grading and 

materials of the walks have changed and been 

replaced numerous times. The many changes to 

pedestrian circulation in the western portion of 

the grounds reflect the various uses of the area. 

Vegetation 

The defining vegetative feature of the Washington Monument grounds is the open lawn that 

defines the ground plane of the site. Other 

predominant types of vegetation are street trees 

that delineate the perimeters of the grounds, 

groves of canopy and cherry trees, cherry trees 

along the Tidal Basin, and foundation plantings. 

The use of street trees on the monument 

grounds dates to the 19th century, during the 

early monument construction period. Groves of 

canopy trees appear to have been planted on the 

north grounds since the mid 20th century. 

Beginning in the early 20th century, trees were 

planted south of Independence Avenue. The 

construction of the Independence Avenue 

extension was planned to minimize the removal 

of trees there. 

Mulberry trees southwest of the monument may 

be the only naturally occurring vegetation on the 

site. Ornamental vegetation was planted on the 

grounds as early as 1886. The first extensive 

planting of cherry trees along the Tidal Basin did 

not occur until 1912. 

The German-American Friendship Garden was 

designed by Wolfgang Oehme and installed in 

1987–88. The garden plantings originally flanked 

the entrance to the 16th Street oval parking lot. 

When the 16th Street parking lot was removed 

during grounds improvements in 2004–5, the 

former entrance to the lot between the two 

sections of the garden was seeded with grass. 

The garden continues to be characterized by the 

same plants as in the original planting plan. It is 

managed as a cultural resource and is listed on 

the NPS List of Classified Structures. 

Topography 

The existing topography of the Washington 

Monument grounds is the result of massive and 

numerous manipulations of the natural ground 

280
Cultural Resources: Historic Properties and Cultural Landscapes — West Potomac Park (North of Independence Avenue) 

plane. Thousands of cubic yards of fill have 

transformed the site and resulted in a man-made 

ground plane. The most significant feature 

resulting from this manipulation, the knoll that 

serves as a base for the monument, was designed 

to stabilize it and provide an attractive approach. 

This gentle rise in grade has undergone a 

number of minor alterations since 1889 as 

circulation patterns have been changed. 

Land Use 

The primary land use for the Washington 

Monument grounds has always been commemorative. In 1848 President Polk officially 

designated the same site as the location for a 

monument to be built by the Washington 

National Monument Society. Construction 

began later that year, and the monument has 

been a popular commemorative icon since its 

completion in 1884. 

Since the late 1800s the monument grounds have 

been used extensively for commemorative 

events, including a ceremony for Abraham 

Lincoln after he died and a celebration after 

Charles Lindbergh completed the first transAtlantic flight in 1927. Independence Day 

festivities have been held there annually since 

before the Washington Monument was completed. Groups have been gathering on the site 

since the 1920s. Notable events include the 

Bonus March of 1932, the 1963 Civil Rights 

March, anti-Vietnam War marches in the 1970s, 

the Million Man March in 1995, and protests 

against war in Iraq during the 2000s. 

From the early to mid 20th century, recreation 

facilities for swimming, tennis, baseball, 

basketball, soccer, football, archery, and golf 

were located on the grounds. Most of these 

major building facilities were removed by 1936. 

While none of the constructed recreational 

features established during the period of significance remain, a rugby field was constructed 

along Raoul Wallenberg Place sometime after 

the propagating garden buildings were removed 

in 1962. In addition to rugby, recreational 

activities that take place on the grounds today on 

designated recreational fields include kickball 

and softball. Other non-competitive recreation 

or passive uses include Frisbee, jogging, dogwalking, kite-flying, and sun-bathing. Residents 

and visitors use the lawns and parklike setting to 

relax and enjoy the outdoors. 

Established in 1917, the Sylvan Theater provides 

a permanent public performance space on the 

site. 

Small-Scale Features 

Most of the small-scale features on the monument grounds appear to be of relatively recent 

origin. A few features, such as the cobblestone 

gutters near the Survey Lodge and a few bench 

and lightpost types, may survive from the period 

of significance. Other features, such as the 

flagpoles that ring the memorial plaza, while not 

historic, are consistent with the site’s historic 

character and design intent. 

The elevation obelisk, placed on the site in 1898 

by the Coast and Geodetic Survey, was intended 

to serve as a benchmark for the Washington 

Monument. It was placed in a manhole 150 feet 

south of the monument for the purpose of 

calculating the settlement of the monument. 

West Potomac Park (North of 

Independence Avenue) 

West Potomac Park was created as a result of 

dredging to improve navigation on the Potomac 

River, and 739 acres of land were added to the 

south of the Washington Monument grounds. In 

1897 Congress passed legislation making the 

entire area a public park. The McMillan plan 

incorporated this area into designs for the Mall 

and identified locations for the future Lincoln 

Memorial and Thomas Jefferson Memorial. 

The addition of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial 

(1982), the Korean War Veterans Memorial 

(1995), and the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial (1997), West Potomac Park has become 

more commemorative in character and less 

recreational. Constitution Gardens, dedicated in 

1976, is an oasis in the midst of the city, but its 

proposed function as an area for programmed 

activities, restaurants, events, concerts, and 

celebrations was never fully achieved, nor was 

underground public parking developed. 

 281
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

World War II Memorial 

The World War II Memorial honors the service 

of 16 million members of the U.S. Armed Forces, 

the support of countless millions on the home 

front, and the ultimate sacrifice of 405,399 

Americans. Granite, bronze, and water elements 

harmoniously blend with the lawns, trees, and 

shrubbery of the surrounding landscape. The 

spirit of the L’Enfant Plan for the City of 

Washington is reflected through successful 

integration of the memorial into the openness of 

the National Mall. Great vistas endure toward 

the Washington Monument, the Thomas 

Jefferson Memorial, and the Lincoln Memorial. 

The 24 bronze bas-relief panels flanking the 

ceremonial entrance illustrate the human 

experience of war at home and overseas. A wall 

of 4,048 Gold Stars silently pays solemn tribute 

to those who sacrificed their lives. 

Fifty-six granite columns, split between two 

half-circles that frame the rebuilt Rainbow Pool 

with its celebratory fountains, symbolize the 

unprecedented wartime unity among the 48 

states, 7 federal territories, and the District of 

Columbia. Bronze ropes tie the columns together, while bronze oak and wheat wreathes represent the nation’s industrial and agricultural 

strengths. Two 43-foot tall pavilions proclaim 

American victory on the Atlantic and Pacific 

fronts — on land, at sea, and in the air. Several 

hidden treasures appear as well, such as representations of the famous “Kilroy was here”

graffiti familiar to every veteran of the Second 

World War. 

Constitution Gardens 

The 43.1-acre Constitution Gardens was completed in 1976 for the nation’s Bicentennial. The 

park’s rolling topography and its relative 

seclusion encourage recreational activities, and 

there is a small food service pavilion. The 

following description is based on the “Cultural 

Landscape Inventory” for the gardens (NPS 

2008a). 

Spatial Organization 

Constitution Gardens was designed by the architectural firm Skidmore, Owings and Merrill in 

the early 1970s to provide a pleasant walking 

environment between the Lincoln Memorial and 

the Washington Monument, contrasting with 

the formal elm walks along the Lincoln Memorial reflecting pool. The park is somewhat 

hidden from view by grade changes and vegetation. The flood control levee for the city, an 

earthen berm constructed in the 1930s and 

1940s, runs along the park’s south boundary. A 

low berm runs along Constitution Avenue on the 

north and was maintained in the Skidmore, 

Owings and Merrill design. The Vietnam 

Veterans Memorial was built in a meadow at the 

west end of Constitution Gardens. 

Topography and use divide the space of Constitution Gardens into east and west sections. On 

the east, the ground slopes to a low plane at the 

central lake. On the west, the Vietnam Veterans 

Memorial occupies a large central clearing. In 

both areas, trees massed thickly around the 

perimeter define interior space, with openings 

between massings to allow views of structures 

and areas beyond the boundaries. The tree 

massings become thinner and more open as they 

move towards the site’s interior, their inner line 

advancing and retreating down the slopes. The 

trees are arranged to create several large clearings down the central spine of the park. Lines of 

trees along the outside edges of walks create a 

linear element curving throughout the park, an 

open, porous wall that defines the act of passage 

through the site and highlights its importance as 

a route between two important monuments. The 

landscape treatment associated with the memorials was designed to coordinate with the existing Skidmore, Owings and Merrill design. 

FIGURE 34: POTOMAC PARK LEVEE

The Potomac Park levee (seen here from near the Lincoln 

Memorial) runs along the south boundary of Constitution 

Gardens. 

282
Cultural Resources: Historic Properties and Cultural Landscapes — West Potomac Park (North of Independence Avenue) 

The eastern half of Constitution Gardens gently 

slopes down to a 6.75-acre lake that has a continuously curving shoreline. The lake is visible 

from most areas within the gardens, and it forms 

the dominant feature of the eastern section of 

the gardens. Overlooking the lake at its east end 

is a large paved terrace. Three stone-walled 

terraces, designed for outdoor restaurant seating, descend the slope from the plaza to the lake 

and are the only components that were built for 

an approved restaurant. 

At the northeast corner of the site stands the 

historic Lockkeeper’s House, built when the 

Washington City Canal was joined to the 

Chesapeake & Ohio Canal in the 1830s. 

Topography 

Constitution Gardens has an entirely constructed topography that consists of gently 

rolling slopes and long berms surrounding a 

central depressed area occupied by a small lake 

and a slope descending to the partially sunken 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial. The highest 

elevation is 26 feet above mean sea level, the 

height of the crown of the knoll, and the flood 

control levee has a design height of 19.1 feet. 

The lake lies below the level of the park’s 

surroundings. The flood control levee was 

incorporated into the design of Constitution 

Gardens and generally forms the southern 

boundary of the gardens. 

Views and Vistas 

Constitution Gardens is a pastoral landscape, 

designed to offer a series of more varied, 

intimate, and restful views than is typical for the 

Mall landscape. Views of the Washington 

Monument, in particular, are prominent 

throughout the gardens, and other structures, 

including the Lincoln Memorial, the Old Post 

Office tower, the Thomas Jefferson Memorial, 

the U.S. Capitol dome, and the buildings of 

Federal Triangle, are visible. Landmarks are 

partly glimpsed between trees or rising above the 

tree line. The Washington Monument is the only 

structure serving as the focal point of a dominant vista. It is prominent to the east from 

throughout Constitution Gardens, usually seen 

across the lake and mirrored in its reflective 

surface. One of the most striking views of the 

monument occurs from the walk ascending the 

eastern arm of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, 

which is aligned with the monument, and from 

which it is seen rising above the prominent 

central knoll of Constitution Gardens. 

Similarly, the Vietnam Veterans Memorial 

comes into view from the crown and western 

side of the knoll. This reciprocity of views 

between important monuments was a key theme 

of the L’Enfant and McMillan plans. The Three 

Servicemen statue and the Vietnam Women’s 

Memorial were situated to provide sightlines to 

the Vietnam Veterans Memorial and link it with 

Constitution Gardens. 

Similar views of the park’s landscape can be seen 

from the island in Constitution Gardens Lake, 

where visitors are first led to the plaza that forms 

the central feature of the memorial. This vantage 

point offers perhaps the most dramatic vista of 

the Washington Monument. Visible to the south 

is the Atlantic archway into the World War II 

Memorial. Visible from walks on the south, and 

from the levee, are filtered views to the elms 

along the Lincoln Reflecting Pool, the pool itself, 

and glimpses of the Lincoln Memorial. 

Vegetation 

Almost 2,000 trees grow in Constitution Gardens. A large percentage of the original trees 

died because of poor soil conditions, and many 

of the existing trees are replacements. Trees are 

planted regularly around the park’s perimeter, 

creating a gradual transition from the formal 

lines of trees surrounding the park (the European elms along the reflecting pool on the south, 

and the American elms lining the streets on the 

north and east). 

Buildings and Structures 

56 Signers of the Declaration of Independence. On a 0.5-acre island near the north shore 

of the lake and accessible by a wooden pedestrian bridge is a memorial landscape dedicated 

to the 56 Signers of the Declaration of Independence. A granite walk leads to a paved semicircular plaza that opens to the south shore and 

is lined on the north side by 56 granite blocks 

inscribed with the signatures of the signers of the 

Declaration of Independence. The blocks are 

organized into 13 groups, representing each of 

the original states. The island is landscaped with 

 283
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

trees and plantings. The memorial is on the NPS 

List of Classified Structures. 

Lockkeeper’s House. The Lockkeeper’s House, 

built in 1832–33, is the only remnant of the 

Chesapeake and Ohio Canal extension, which 

connected the C&O Canal to Washington City, 

leading from the Potomac River at 17th Street to 

the Anacostia River. The extension was intended 

to ensure that the city would benefit from 

commerce along the major canals. The structure 

was converted for park purposes in 1903, and it 

was moved 49 feet west and 6 feet north from its 

original location in 1915 to accommodate the 

extension of 17th Street. It is listed on the National Register of Historic Places, and it is a 

contributing element of the East and West 

Potomac parks nomination. It is also on the NPS 

List of Classified Structures. 

Circulation 

In contrast to the formal, rectilinear system 

comprising the majority of the National Mall’s 

circulation, Constitution Gardens is laid out 

with a network of winding, curving walks (see 

NPS 2008a). About 2 miles of meandering walks 

through the park are designed for use by pedestrians and bicyclists. The walks connect Constitution Gardens to other areas of the National 

Mall, as do views and vistas. The park’s location 

off the central visual axis between the Washington Monument and the Lincoln Memorial, and 

its partial screening from view of the Lincoln 

Memorial grounds by the flood control levee, 

allowed greater freedom in design. 

FIGURE 35: LOCKKEEPER’S HOUSE

The Washington City Canal Lockkeeper’s House, built in 

1832–33, predates the development of West Potomac Park 

and is a remnant of early 19th century Washington, D.C. 

The circulation system has three major features: 

two loop walks and a large paved plaza, known 

as the overlook terrace. Narrower subsidiary 

walks run across lawns and slopes, linking 

different areas within the park and leading to 

adjoining sites. The two major walks of the park 

are long loops having the general shape of a 

figure eight. They are oriented east to west, and 

each occupies roughly half of the site. The 

eastern loop walk is immediately adjacent to the 

lake and thus follows its contours. The western 

loop curves around the large knoll and then 

circles the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. 

Walks lead from the 17th Street sidewalk to the 

overlook terrace’s northeast and southeast 

corners and along a north-south line to the 

midpoint of the terrace on the north and south. 

The north walk runs between the Constitution 

Avenue sidewalk and the terrace; the south walk, 

slightly offset to the west from the alignment of 

the north walk, runs between the terrace and the 

World War II Memorial. On the west side of the 

terrace, three walled stone terraces flanked by 

broad stairways descend the slope to the lake, 

where they join with the lake’s perimeter walk. 

Narrow walks parallel to the stairs lead from the 

north-south axial walk to the lake walk. 

Numerous social trails have been cut across the 

lawns of Constitution Gardens, especially over 

the flood control levee, leading to the Lincoln 

Memorial grounds and the reflecting pool, and 

over the north boundary berm to the Constitution Avenue sidewalk. Social trails also run 

immediately parallel to many of the walks. Two 

walks run parallel to Constitution Avenue, both 

under NPS jurisdiction. A narrow concrete “step 

out” runs immediately adjacent to the curb of 

Constitution Avenue. South of this, separated by 

planting areas planted with grass and American 

elms, a wide asphalt sidewalk was built in 2003 

to replace the Tourmobile access road. 

Small-Scale Features 

The benches in Constitution Gardens are of the 

standard 1930s style, with black cast-iron frames 

and wood-slat backs and seats. 

284
Cultural Resources: Historic Properties and Cultural Landscapes — West Potomac Park (North of Independence Avenue) 

Constitution Gardens was the first area located 

within the National Mall to have interior pedestrian lighting. All the lights along walks in 

Constitution Gardens are the variety known as 

the Washington Standard. The fluted classical 

post has a flared, molded base and capital, and 

supports a single Washington Globe lamp. 

FIGURE 36: VIETNAM VETERANS MEMORIAL

The Three Servicemen and the Vietnam Women’s Memorial 

(below) were located to provide views of the Vietnam Veterans 

Memorial. 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial 

The main feature of this memorial, completed in 

1982, is a black granite wall on which the names 

of those who gave their lives, or who remain 

unaccounted for, are carved. Later, two sculpture groups with additional landscaping were 

added south of the memorial: the Three 

Servicemen in 1984, which includes a flagpole as 

part of its design, and the Vietnam Women’s 

Memorial in 1993. The “In Memory” plaque was 

added adjacent to the Three Servicemen in 2004. 

These statues were placed to provide views from 

specific locations of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. The memorial is listed on the National 

Register of Historic Places and the NPS List of 

Classified Structures. 

A large-diameter bronze flagpole bearing an 

exceptionally large American flag is set within 

the walk a short distance southwest of the Three 

Servicemen statue. The flag is lit so that it can be 

flown at night. 

Lighting at the memorial consists of lights set 

flush in the granite directly in front of the wall. 

Five bronze “locators” (stands to hold directories that give the locations of names on the 

wall) are placed at either end of the walk leading 

past the memorial. The locators were designed 

to match the look and character of the other 

sculptural objects at the site. 

The Vietnam Veterans Memorial attracts large 

numbers of daily visitors. Numerous annual 

ceremonies take place on Memorial Day, 

Veterans Day, Mothers Day, Fathers Day, and 

when new names are added to the wall. 

The Lincoln Memorial 

The Lincoln Memorial was conceived as the 

formal terminus of the Mall under the McMillan 

plan. The memorial opened in 1922 and rises 

above monumental steps. It is on the National 

Register of Historic Places, is listed on the 

national register nominations for East and West 

Potomac parks, and is on the NPS List of 

Classified Structures. 

Spatial Organization 

Three distinct landscapes compose the Lincoln 

Memorial grounds overall, as documented in the 

NPS Cultural Landscape Report (NPS 1999a). 

They include the reflecting pool area, the Lincoln Circle and radial roads, and the Watergate 

area. In addition, the relationship between the 

buildings and structural features within the 

landscape cannot be separated. Therefore, the 

 285
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Lincoln Memorial, Arlington Memorial Bridge, 

Watergate plaza and steps, Parkway Drive, the 

reflecting pool, and the Rainbow Pool are also 

considered contributing features to the historic 

landscape. The landscaping for the Lincoln 

Memorial grounds was designed and planted 

between 1921 and 1932. 

Constructed Water Feature 

The Lincoln Reflecting Pool was constructed in 

1922 to be an important feature of West 

Potomac Park between the Lincoln Memorial 

and Washington Monument. The landscape 

plan called for two rows of elm trees to be 

planted in parallel lines along the north and 

south sides of the reflecting pool. At the 

Rainbow Pool, elm trees were designed in a 

curved line to complement the circular sections 

of the geometric outline. The reflecting pool is 

listed as a contributing feature of the national 

register nomination for East and West Potomac 

parks and is on the NPS List of Classified 

Structures. 

Vegetation 

The planting plan for the Lincoln Memorial 

circle and radial roads featured a double row of 

elm trees planted in opposite positions on both 

sides of the radial roads. When the plan was 

implemented, the proposed double row of 

oppositely planted trees on the radial roads were 

scaled back to planting in alternative positions. 

The circular band of trees was followed for the 

eastern half of the circle. The western half of the 

outer circle consisted of the single circular band 

of trees that edged the curb, but the rest of the 

circle, outside the sidewalk, was completed with 

a double band of elms. 

The landscape plan for the inner circle was 

designed to contrast the radial roads and consisted of two plans. The first plan consisted of 

two rectangular planting beds with various 

plants lining the outer edges of the pavement 

along the entire length of the approachway. At 

the base of the raised terrace wall, groups of 

boxwood and yews were planted. Some dwarf 

boxwoods were planted in front of some of 

these groupings. At the corners of the terrace 

walls, plantings extend out from the wall into the 

grass lawn of the circular terrace. Specimens of 

American holly, common boxwood, and English 

yew were added to the north and south sides. 

The second plan depicted plantings for the west 

side of the memorial. Plantings consisted of 

broadleaf evergreen trees, American holly, and 

southern magnolia. This arrangement projected 

the landscape from the corners of the terrace 

walls, as done on the east side. The distinct 

formal landscaped grounds were initially 

envisioned by the McMillan plan based on its 

adaptation of the L’Enfant plan. 

Other Features 

Watergate Area and Steps. The Watergate 

steps are a broad curved flight of steps descending from the Lincoln Memorial Circle to the 

Potomac River. Designed as a ceremonial river 

entrance to the Lincoln Memorial and the city, 

they are contributing features of the national 

FIGURE 37: THE WATERGATE STEPS

Looking south from the Watergate Steps to Ohio Drive SW and 

Arlington Memorial Bridge.

FIGURE 38: CONSTITUTION AVENUE BELVEDERE

The belvedere overlooks the Potomac River north of the 

Lincoln Memorial. 

286
Cultural Resources: Historic Properties and Cultural Landscapes — West Potomac Park (North of Independence Avenue) 

register nominations of the Lincoln Memorial 

and East and West Potomac parks. The Constitution Avenue belvedere, Parkway Drive, and 

the Potomac River walls, as well as the 

Watergate Steps, are on the NPS List of 

Classified Structures. 

FIGURE 40: JOHN ERICCSON MEMORIAL

The John Ericcson Memorial sits on a parcel in the middle of 

Ohio Drive SW. 

Arlington Memorial Bridge. The Arlington 

Memorial Bridge marks the western terminus of 

the Mall and symbolically links the two parts of 

the Union — the North, symbolized by the 

Lincoln Memorial, and the South represented by 

Arlington House (Robert E. Lee Memorial). 

Two gilded bronze equestrian statues depict The 

Arts of War. The bridge is listed individually on 

the National Register of Historic Places and is a 

contributing feature in the East and West 

Potomac Parks Historic District and the 

L’Enfant Plan of the City of Washington, D.C. 

Rock Creek Parkway Terminus. The Rock 

Creek and Potomac Parkway terminus was 

constructed at the same time as the Arlington 

Memorial Bridge and Lincoln Memorial Circle. 

Two sculptures depicting The Arts of Peace are 

on the NPS List of Classified Structures. 

John Ericcson Memorial. The John Ericcson 

Memorial commemorates the Swedish immigrant and designer of the U.S.S. Monitor. It was 

sculpted by Charles Fraser and installed in 1926. 

It sits south of the Lincoln Memorial on Ohio 

Drive. The memorial is listed on the National 

Register of Historic Places as a contributing 

feature of the East and West Potomac Parks 

Historic District. 

Korean War Veterans Memorial 

The Korean War Veterans Memorial, southeast 

of the Lincoln Memorial, honors the patriotism, 

devotion to duty, and courage of Korean War 

veterans. Nineteen larger-than-life stainless steel 

sculptures stand silently under the watchful eye 

of a sea of faces upon a granite wall. At the upper 

end of the memorial is a flagpole, quotations, 

and a Pool of Remembrance, with shade trees 

and bench seating. Low walls list all the international participants, and casualties are listed near 

the pool. Along the south side of the memorial 

are polished granite walls with laser photo 

images that define the edge of the memorial and 

help create a quiet setting. The memorial, which 

opened in 1996, is listed on the National Register 

of Historic Places. 

FIGURE 39: KOREAN WAR VETERANS MEMORIAL

The reflecting pool at the apex of the Korean War Veterans 

Memorial. 

D.C. War Memorial 

The D.C. War Memorial was constructed of 

Vermont marble in 1931 to honor D.C. citizens 

who served in World War I. It was originally 

designed to function as both a memorial and a 

bandstand. A domed roof is supported by 12 

fluted Doric columns (NPS 2009a). The memorial is listed on the National Register of Historic 

 287
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Places as a contributing feature of the East and 

West Potomac Parks Historic District. 

Ash Woods 

Ash Woods is a densely wooded area between 

Independence Avenue and Ash Road. It was 

planned to be a naturalized, thickly wooded area 

with little understory vegetation. The U.S. Park 

Police stables, a restroom, and recreation fields 

are located in the area. Ash Woods currently is 

not listed as a contributing element on any 

national register nomination. However, it is 

within the viewshed of the Lincoln Memorial 

and other resources of the National Mall. 

Additional study will be conducted on this site. 

Other Cultural Resources in West 

Potomac Park (North of Independence) 

John Paul Jones Monument 

The John Paul Jones Monument to the naval 

hero of the Revolutionary War is listed as a 

contributing feature of the national register 

nominations for East and West Potomac Parks 

and American Revolution Statuary. It is also on 

the NPS List of Classified Structures. 

FIGURE 41: JOHN PAUL JONES MEMORIAL

The John Paul Jones Memorial is at the intersection of 17th 

Street and Independence Avenue SW. 

West Potomac Park (South of 

Independence Avenue) 

Tidal Basin 

The Tidal Basin was constructed in 1885 as part 

of the reclamation of the Potomac Flats and the 

creation of Potomac Park. Water enters the 

Tidal Basin from the Potomac River under Inlet 

Bridge (1909) and exits through tidal gates at the 

Outlet Bridge (1889) to the Washington 

Channel, helping to flush the channel of silt. 

Historically recreation around the Tidal Basin 

included swimming, boating, and especially 

riding, driving, and parading around circular 

walk. During the Independence Avenue 

extension project Kutz Bridge was constructed 

(1943) to carry eastbound traffic over the north 

bay of the Tidal Basin. The Tidal Basin, and 

Inlet, Outlet, and Kutz bridges, are listed on the 

National Register of Historic Places as contributing to the East and West Potomac Parks 

Historic District. 

First Cherry Tree Planting Plaque 

The plaque commemorating the first cherry 

trees planted as a gift from Japan in 1912 is on 

the NPS List of Classified Structures. 

Japanese Lantern and Japanese Pagoda 

A 300-year-old Japanese lantern was given to the 

United States by Japan in 1954 to commemorate 

the visit of Commander Perry to Japan. The 

same year a stone pagoda was given to the U.S. in 

commemoration of the Treaty of Yokohama. 

Both are listed on the National Register of 

Historic Places as contributing features of the 

East and West Potomac parks nomination, and 

they are also on the NPS List of Classified 

Structures. 

First Airmail Flight Marker 

The marker commemorates the airfield that 

once existed in West Potomac Park and the first 

airmail flight from Washington, D.C. The marker is a contributing feature of East and West 

Potomac Parks Historic District. 

288
Cultural Resources: Historic Properties and Cultural Landscapes — West Potomac Park (South of Independence Avenue) 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial 

The Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial 

(dedicated in 1997) is a series of four outdoor 

galleries, each representative of one of the 

president’s four terms in office. Red granite 

walls, plantings, water cascades, and pools 

define the spaces. Quotations from the president 

are carved into the walls. Sculptural groupings 

and bronze panels depict aspects of each term in 

office. After the memorial was completed a 

sculpture of the president in a wheelchair was 

added to the forecourt. The memorial is listed 

on the National Register of Historic Places and 

the NPS List of Classified Structures. 

George Mason Memorial 

The George Mason Memorial honors Mason’s 

advocacy for the addition of the Bill of Rights to 

the U.S. Constitution. Dedicated in 2002, the 

memorial is located near the Thomas Jefferson 

Memorial. The memorial consists of a bronze 

sculpture of George Mason seated on a marble 

bench beneath a pergola, along with inscriptions 

of quotations by George Mason or about his 

legacy related to the Bill of Rights. The memorial 

was designed around a historic fountain –

(Fountain 4) and planting beds. The fountain, 

constructed in 1906, is the last of four fountain 

basins built in an evergreen nursery and garden 

established in 1905. The fountain is listed on the 

National Register of Historic Places. 

West Potomac Park Riverfront 

The West Potomac Park riverfront was created 

as a result of dredging the Potomac River in the 

late 1800s. The plant species that would have 

grown on the banks and the Potomac River 

floodplain before reclamation do not occur in 

the vicinity today. The dry-laid stone walls along 

the river are a contributing feature of the West 

Potomac Park national register nomination. 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial 

The Thomas Jefferson Memorial on the south 

shore of the Tidal Basin anchors the south end 

of the north-south axis developed by the 

McMillan plan. Designed by noted architect 

John Russell Pope, the memorial is constructed 

of Vermont white marble in a Neoclassical style, 

with a rotunda. It rests on a granite terrace. The 

memorial is listed on the National Register of 

Historic Places and as a contributing feature of 

the East and West Potomac parks nomination. It 

also is on the NPS List of Classified Structures. 

The following information is from the “Cultural 

Landscape Inventory” (NPS 1998a). 

The Memorial 

The Jefferson Memorial, located on the southeast shore of the Tidal Basin, was constructed 

between 1939 and 1943, and was dedicated in 

1943. A circular open-air structure modeled 

after the Roman Pantheon, the memorial features a shallow dome, a circular peripheral 

colonnade composed of 26 un-fluted Ionic 

columns, 12 additional Ionic columns supporting the north portico, and 4 identical columns in 

each of memorial’s four monumental openings. 

A flight of granite and marble stairs and platforms, flanked by granite buttresses, leads from 

the Tidal Basin. 

The interior of the memorial features a bronze 

statue of Jefferson that is centered in the chamber on a black Minnesota granite pedestal, 

which is inscribed with the dates of Jefferson’s 

birth and death (1743–1826). The dome’s 

interior is divided into two parts; the lower 

section has a coffered surface containing lights 

that illuminate the statue, and the upper section 

has a smooth, uninterrupted surface. The only 

other structure on the memorial grounds is an 

octagonal refreshment kiosk with a tent-like 

copper, standing seam roof. The stand is 

southwest of the memorial at East Basin Drive. 

Spatial Organization 

The Jefferson Memorial occupies the fifth and 

last of the cardinal sites as detailed in the 

McMillan plan. The memorial is situated on the 

south bank of the Tidal Basin at the southeast 

corner of West Potomac Park. The distance 

between the memorial and the other elements of 

the city give the memorial a feeling of openness 

and informality to the north and west, far removed from the rigidity of the axial location on 

which it is actually sited. On the south side the 

proximity of I-395 detracts from the parklike 

setting. The highway corridor and bridges not 

only block the visual link with the river, but 

create a physical barrier to the open access of 

East Potomac Park. 

 289
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Within the memorial grounds themselves, the 

composition of the immediate ground plan 

becomes less rigid farther from the memorial. 

The surrounding architectural plantings of 

shrubs and trees within the circular roadway, 

together with the rectangle of grass, give way to 

the informal parkland composition of trees set in 

grass. 

The Jefferson Memorial is situated within a 

completely engineered landscape. No natural 

plant species exist in the vicinity today, due to 

the hard edge of the Tidal Basin wall and depth 

of water. 

Topography 

The original topography of the site was the 

Potomac River and its edge wetlands. Since the 

land was created through dredging, the memorial site is essentially flat with two rings of retaining walls supporting two terrace levels that 

make the memorial feel like it is located on a 

knoll. Some minor grading has been done for the 

roads and to facilitate drainage. The graphics of 

the topography before construction in 1938 

show the modeling that took place to create the 

memorial site. They also illustrate the alterations 

made to the edge of the Tidal Basin to place the 

memorial directly on axis with the White House. 

Sometime after the dedication in 1943 a 3- to 4-

foot berm was added along the west side of the 

Tidal Basin, approximately 25 feet from the 

sidewalk. It is used to channel water to a drop 

inlet and has been planted with cherry trees. 

Settling has been a problem since the construction of the memorial and has been addressed at 

various times over the years 

Views and Vistas 

L’Enfant first conceived the initial inspiration 

for the dominant axial arrangement of buildings 

of primary importance around the Mall (and 

therefore the formal vistas between them) in his 

1792 plan of the Capital City. The gradual departure from his plan in subsequent years 

brought about the necessity to develop a new 

plan for the city center in order that it might 

regain some cohesive structure. 

The departure from the L’Enfant plan, together 

with the newly created lands reclaimed from the 

dredging of the river, influenced the McMillan 

Commission to redesign the central area, 

reinforcing the axes and the vistas. Its plan 

displayed the familiar five-point composition 

regulating the formal linkage and views of these 

cardinal points. The perspective view illustrated 

the intended vistas between them, despite the 

southernmost still being a vacant plot of land. 

Once the site for the Jefferson Memorial was 

chosen, there was never any question about its 

visual relationship with the White House. In 

fact, President Roosevelt ordered trees to be cut 

so the view of the memorial from the White 

House would be enhanced. 

The visual relationship between the Lincoln and 

Jefferson memorials was discussed by the 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial Commission and 

the Commission of Fine Arts in January 1943. 

The vista was opened up to the Lincoln Memorial following detailed discussion as to the line of 

the vista and whether it should run from portico 

to portico or from the center masses of the two 

buildings. The vista between the memorials was 

opened up by the pruning of trees at the end of 

January 1943, allowing a narrow view of one 

memorial from the other. 

Today the Lincoln Memorial is barely visible 

from the Jefferson Memorial. In summer, the 

top of the Lincoln Memorial can be seen above 

the trees. The view is slightly more apparent in 

the winter. The location of the wall at the 

Korean War Veterans Memorial emphasizes the 

line between the Lincoln and Jefferson memorials; however, this connection is only visible 

from the air. 

The vista to the White House is clearly visible 

from the steps of the Jefferson Memorial. Similarly, Jefferson’s statue is clearly visible from the 

Truman Balcony of the White House. 

The construction of the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial in West Potomac Park and the 

removal of selected trees in 1997 created another framed view of the Jefferson Memorial 

from the bank of the Tidal Basin. This vista was 

also part of the McMillan plan. There are some 

flowering crab and cherry trees in this vicinity 

today, but the narrow vista toward the west side 

of the memorial is still maintained. The vista 

looking toward the east side of the memorial is 

also apparent. 

290
Cultural Resources: Historic Properties and Cultural Landscapes — West Potomac Park (South of Independence Avenue) 

Dominating the view to the south from the memorial is the elevated I-395, which leads up to 

the 14th Street Bridge and parallels the railroad 

bridge. The highway structure considerably 

foreshortens the original view southward, and 

the noise and sight of the traffic has a seriously 

deleterious effect on visitor enjoyment of the 

memorial. The intrusion of the road is intensified when standing higher up inside the memorial, or on the stylobate mall. The road as viewed 

from the memorial is not well screened with 

trees. The rectangular grassed area immediately 

south of the memorial is similarly dominated by 

the presence of automobiles. Parking to the rear 

of the memorial was part of the original plan. 

The open view across the Tidal Basin to the 

north has not changed dramatically since the 

1940s in terms of structural changes to the 

landscape. However, the view due north is 

interrupted by the parking lot opposite the plaza 

along the north edge of the Tidal Basin. While 

this parking area has been in existence since the 

memorial’s construction, the increase in the 

number of vehicles has made it a conspicuous 

intrusion in an otherwise pleasant and 

uncluttered view across the water. 

Today the historical integrity of the views and 

vistas dating to the period of significance remains high. To the north, vistas to the White 

House and Washington Monument, and the 

view across the Tidal Basin all remain, along 

with vistas to the east and west of the memorial. 

Only the vista to the Lincoln Memorial has been 

compromised. 

Circulation 

The circular drive and plaza, originally designed 

for vehicular use, are now meant to be used 

exclusively by pedestrians. Some pedestrians 

arrive at the memorial from the east around the 

Tidal Basin, others from the Franklin Delano 

Roosevelt memorial to the west. The path 

adjacent to the Tidal Basin on the west side is 

made up of sections of asphalt and concrete; the 

one to the east is largely asphalt. On both sides 

the paths abut the concrete cap on the seawall. A 

temporary asphalt path was added south of the 

Tidal Basin path on the west side in 2008. This 

temporary path stabilizes active erosion behind 

the seawall and provides a safe pedestrian 

walkway between Inlet Bridge and the memorial. 

To access the memorial from the south, visitors 

may walk on sidewalks parallel to the approach 

roads or take the asphalt circular roadway and 

then climb the north steps to enter the chamber. 

Others, including visitors with disabilities, take 

the ramp on the south side to the terrace mall 

level and around the memorial to the west. From 

there they either climb the north stairs or enter 

the building and take the elevator to the 

chamber level. 

Due to the continual settlement since the memorial’s construction, sections of the circular roadway were at a considerably lower grade than the 

main plaza. When the current plaza was installed 

in the 1970s a transition section had to be constructed so the plaza would meet the circular road 

section. The north plaza, replaces the original 

macadam road, curbing, gutters, and sidewalk, 

and the small concrete plaza, forms the base of the 

front steps. At the same time vehicles were prohibited from driving around the memorial. 

In 1999–2000 a number of repairs to the circulation system were made. The north plaza was 

redone in the same colored aggregate concrete 

as the circular drive. The original curb-line of 

the circular driveway was marked with granite 

pavers. The north main steps were reset and 

repaired. The granite steps along the edge of the 

Tidal Basin leading to the northwest corner of 

the plaza were repaired, and the asphalt ramps 

bypassing both sets of steps adjacent to the Tidal 

Basin were widened and resurfaced. 

A sidewalk parallels East Basin Drive for most of 

its length within the memorial grounds. To the 

west an asphalt path added in 1986 runs from 

the Tidal Basin, starting approximately halfway 

to the Inlet Bridge, across the lawn to the northwest corner of the parking area. On the east four 

asphalt paths merge before crossing Outlet 

Bridge. 

The various surfacing materials throughout the 

memorial area create a patchwork effect of different colors and textures, detracting from the 

landscape setting and the grandeur of the 

memorial itself. 

 291
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Vegetation 

After reclamation and before the memorial was 

built, the area of newly created parkland was 

planted with trees and lawn. Japanese cherry 

trees were planted on the site in 1912 when the 

mayor of Tokyo presented 3,000 cherry trees to 

the city. They have been supplemented by 

subsequent plantings. The Olmsted planting 

plan that was installed at the time of construction featured a simple design within the circular 

driveway that was predominantly evergreen with 

limited flowering trees and shrubs. It featured 

clustered groups of trees and shrubs to the north 

and south of the memorial on both sides of the 

north steps and on both sides of the south view 

line. The plan included yews, American hollies, 

Japanese hollies, abelias, osmanthus, firethorns, 

and cotoneasters, with dogwoods and winter 

jasmine added for color. Because the planting 

was perceived as “too thin,” white pines were 

added to the stylobate mall, and some other 

replantings and additions took place before the 

dedication. 

Outside of the circular drive, the planting featured small flowering trees, with taller shade 

trees underplanted with grass and limited shrub 

and ground cover. The taller trees edged the 

circular drive and approach driveways, except 

on the north and east vistas. Other plantings are 

clustered at the four cardinal points outside of 

the circular drive, and where the approach roads 

intersect with East Basin Drive. The plantings 

focused on dogwood, crabapple, cherry, and 

elm, plus maple, hawthorn, plane, oak, holly, 

pine, yew, and periwinkle. 

The planting around the memorial today no 

longer reflects what was specified in the original 

plans, although vegetation on the stylobate mall 

has been restored based on the 1942 additions to 

Olmsted’s original planting plan, which included 

the addition of pine trees to fill in the original 

“thin planting” for which Olmsted was criticized. 

The major designed change occurred in the 

1970s, when additional yews were planted on 

the stylobate mall. The ring of zelkovas was 

planted inside the circular road, where none 

existed originally. These have grown to maturity 

and have become an accepted part of the current 

landscape. Also, an evergreen layer of American 

hollies has been added along East Basin Drive 

since the 1970s. 

Additional yews were the focus of the landscape 

restoration work that took place in 1993. This 

work removed the historically incorrect planting, which restricted the established vistas, especially those east and west. Original yews, which 

had been affected by the repeated addition of fill 

over the years to combat settlement, were 

removed and replaced. Today, some of the 

original planting remains historically correct in 

terms of species and location. However, the 

flowering shrubs and tree species (abelia, dogwood, winter jasmine, and osmanthus) that were 

planted on the lower terrace have been lost. In 

their place are several yews and a few hollies. 

Many of the yews have grown to such an extent 

that they have to be pruned severely to keep 

them back from the paths. This makes the yews 

look more formal than intended on the path 

side, while on the other side the yews grow in 

their more natural form. 

To the south of the memorial, the cotoneasters 

have been lost, leaving yews and firethorns. The 

original periwinkle, which was planted beneath 

the groups of three pines at the north of the 

memorial, was replaced with grass fairly early in 

the memorial’s history. In 1986 the dwarf inkberry hedge along the terrace walk was replaced 

with a hedge of the cultivar ‘Shamrock,’ which 

exists today. While these plants are generally in 

good condition, their form is becoming less 

compact. Elm trees to the southwest of the 

memorial that were there at the time of 

construction were the victims of regrading that 

took place to raise the ground levels due to 

settling. In 2000 the Bicentennial planting of 

hollies was removed. More flowering dogwoods 

and yews were planted, going back to the 

original Olmsted plan for the site. 

Constructed Water Features 

While the Thomas Jefferson Memorial is located 

on the Tidal Basin, which is integral to its setting 

and the visitor’s experience of the memorial, the 

water is not considered part of the Jefferson Memorial grounds, but part of West Potomac Park. 

292
Cultural Resources: Other Features Contributing to National Register Listings — Roadways 

Small-Scale Features 

Many styles of site furniture exist on the site 

today. Different components within the general 

landscape setting appear to have been added in a 

piecemeal fashion to suit the immediate needs of 

the time rather than fit into a structured 

management plan for the area. 

A metal trash receptacle with a fluted top is used 

throughout the memorial. Two round 

receptacles made of marble are located on the 

north plaza steps. There are wooden storage 

bins along the edge of the kiosk pad for use by 

the concessioner. 

There are 12 Washington globe lights along East 

Basin Drive between the Inlet and Outlet 

bridges. There are also eight tall metal poles with 

floodlights around the memorial; the poles to 

the southeast and southwest are masked by 

mature trees. Around the stylobate mall are eight 

shorter poles, each with a single floodlight. 

There are 3-foot-high lighted bollards along the 

edge of the Tidal Basin walk, but none to the 

east. There are also no lights on the walks 

through the greater site. At-grade flush-mounted 

lighting was installed in late summer of 2000, at 

the seawall at the end of the plaza. 

Signs at the memorial focus on regulations. 

Parking restriction signs are placed at close 

intervals around the grass rectangle. The only 

interpretive information is at an information 

kiosk on the south plaza. 

OTHER FEATURES CONTRIBUTING TO 

NATIONAL REGISTER LISTINGS

Roadways 

The following avenues, drives, and streets are 

contributing features of the L’Enfant Plan of the 

City of Washington, D.C.: 

Constitution Avenue NW 

Independence Avenue SW 

Jefferson Drive SW 

Madison Drive NW 

17th Street NW 

Louisiana Avenue NW 

Maryland Avenue SW 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW 

Virginia Avenue NW 

1st Street NW 

3rd Street SW and NW 

4th Street SW 

6th Street SW and NW 

7th Street SW and NW 

9th Street SW and NW 

10th Street SW and NW 

12th Street SW and NW 

14th Street SW and NW 

15th Street SW and NW 

17th Street NW 

18th Street NW 

19th Street NW 

20th Street NW 

21st Street NW 

22nd Street NW 

23rd Street NW 

 293
NATURAL RESOURCES

As an urban oasis, the National Mall contributes 

substantially to the open, expansive landscaped 

character of Washington, D.C. The primary land 

use in the study area is institutional and includes 

museums, galleries, memorials, and other 

cultural uses. Nearby destinations include the 

Smithsonian Institution facilities, the National 

Gallery of Art facilities, the U.S. Holocaust 

Memorial Museum, and the U.S. Botanic 

Garden. 

The District of Columbia “Generalized Land 

Use” map categorizes the entire area as “parks, 

recreation and open space.” In addition to their 

cultural importance, these areas provide both 

passive and active recreational open space, 

including softball fields, a polo field, and fields 

for other sports. The adjacent East Potomac 

Park contains a public swimming pool, a golf 

course / driving range, a miniature golf course, 

tennis facilities and courts, picnic areas, a food 

service facility, restrooms, office and maintenance buildings, a visitor transit operations 

facility, and a U.S. Park Police substation. 

WATER RESOURCES

Surface Water 

Washington, D.C., lies within the Potomac River 

basin and in the Middle Potomac-AnacostiaOccoquan watershed, a part of the greater 

Chesapeake Bay watershed. The District of 

Columbia contains two rivers — the Potomac 

and Anacostia — and several streams, such as 

Rock Creek. 

All surface waters in the District of Columbia 

flow to the Potomac River either directly or 

through tributaries such as Rock Creek and 

Anacostia River. These rivers comprise the 

second largest tributary watershed flowing into 

Chesapeake Bay. The Potomac River provides 

about 75% of the municipal water supply for 

domestic use in the Washington metropolitan 

area. The river also receives effluent discharged 

from a number of wastewater systems. Other 

than the Potomac River, no perennial streams or 

other natural surface waters remain in the planning area. 

At one time natural streams ran through the 

area, including Tiber Creek, which flowed into 

the Potomac River north of the Washington 

Monument. The creek was converted into the 

Washington City Canal in 1815, running along 

the north side of the Mall before turning south 

and emptying into the Anacostia River. The 

canal operation failed financially, and the canal 

was filled in or covered over in 1871 and became 

Constitution Avenue. Tiber Creek still flows 

through artificial conduits beneath Constitution 

Avenue and out to the Potomac River. 

The planning area is in an urban location and a 

large percentage is impervious. Impervious 

surfaces are areas that prevent the saturation of 

water into the surface of the soil (e.g., roads, 

parking lots, sidewalks, and rooftops), resulting 

in water running off the surface in greater 

quantity. Soil compaction is so great in some 

areas of the National Mall that the soil surfaces 

are considered impervious. 

The Potomac River is a jurisdictional water of 

the United States, subject to the regulatory 

control of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

(USACE). The District of Columbia, the federal 

government, and the states of Pennsylvania, 

Maryland, and Virginia are parties to the 1983 

Chesapeake Bay Agreement. The goals of this 

program include fostering stewardship and 

protecting water quality through managing 

pollutants and land use, and also managing 

fisheries and habitat. Actions that could be taken 

to fully comply with the goals of the Chesapeake 

Bay Program could include upgrading the 

stormwater systems to retain more stormwater 

and reduce runoff into waterways. Upgrading 

the system would address some water quality 

and quantity issues. The park maintains the 

vegetation in accordance with the integrated 

pest management system to protect the 

Chesapeake Bay as well as minimizing toxicants. 

The District of Columbia has ordinances for 

erosion, sediment control, and stormwater 

management that support the mission of the 

Chesapeake Bay Program by protecting surface 

runoff to the Potomac River. Although the 

National Park Service is not responsible for the 

 

294
Natural Resources: Water Resources — Surface Water 

FIGURE 42: IMPERVIOUS SURFACES, NATIONAL MALL AND MEMORIAL PARKS

water column of the Potomac River, it is responsible for managing the bed of the Potomac River 

within the District of Columbia (opinion 

rendered July 20, 1976, USDI Office of the 

Solicitor). 

The Tidal Basin is a 107-acre, 6-foot-deep manmade basin built originally at the mouth of Tiber 

Creek in 1885. It was designed by U.S. Army 

Major Peter C. Hains to mitigate flooding from 

the Potomac River. It was first dredged in 1885 

and re-dredged in 1907. The basin was designed 

to serve a practical function of preventing stagnation by flushing waters into the Washington 

Channel. This self-flushing feature had stopped 

functioning for several years but was restored in 

2006. The water in the 107-acre Tidal Basin is 

slightly brackish due to tidal inflows from Chesapeake Bay, but it supports a variety of native 

and nonnative fish. Storm water runs off from 

the surrounding land and enters the Tidal Basin 

by way of a system of storm drain inlets and 

pipes. 

The Tidal Basin is connected to the Potomac 

River at its south end and the Washington 

Channel on the east side. The basin is lined with 

retaining walls, or seawalls, that prevent the 

earth fill from eroding into the water. The Tidal 

Basin seawall was completed in 1896. The seawalls are capped by a concrete walk, intended to 

provide safe access to the riverfront for recreation, including sightseeing, strolling, and fishing. 

Constructed pools such as the Constitution 

Gardens Lake, the Lincoln Reflecting Pool, the 

Capitol Reflecting Pool, and other pools and 

fountains are artificial, concrete-lined waters. 

They are filled with treated, potable water 

supplied by the District of Columbia. The 

current capacity of the Capitol Reflecting Pool is 

2.5 million gallons, Constitution Gardens Lake 

 295
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

5.5 million gallons, and the Lincoln Reflecting 

Pool 5 million to 6.75 million gallons. The latter 

pool has a leaking problem. These pools often 

become stagnant and must be drained annually 

to clean out accumulated debris from the 

bottom. Draining and refilling these pools one 

time uses up to 14.75 million gallons of treated 

water. 

The growth of algae in pools throughout the 

National Mall is a management concern. This 

growth adversely affects aesthetics and the quality of water for other aquatic life. Treatments to 

control the algae include the use of fountains to 

aerate the water, mechanical removal, and the 

application of chemical algicides. The National 

Park Service has rules about which chemicals 

can be added to the water. Currently, only 

organic products certified by the Organic 

Materials Review Institute are used in all pools 

that are periodically drained in the Tidal Basin 

or another natural water body. 

Shorebirds and other waterfowl are frequently 

seen using the larger pools. The lake contains 

self-maintaining game fish populations and 

aquatic vegetation in planters. 

Floodplains and Stormwaters 

The 100-year floodplain elevation is about 13.5 

feet above mean sea level according to USACE 

studies, which are the base for the current Federal Emergency Management Agency flood 

maps (FEMA 2007). The area between the 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial and the Lincoln 

Reflecting Pool, as well as all of West and East 

Potomac parks, are within the 100-year 

floodplain of the Potomac River. The Lincoln 

Memorial and Washington Monument are built 

on elevations and are above the floodplain. The 

100-year floodplain also includes the eastern 

end of the National Mall and the area between 

Madison Drive and Pennsylvania Avenue. The 

500-year floodplain is only slightly larger but 

includes Constitution Gardens. 

The water surface elevation of the Tidal Basin is 

also influenced by daily tides moving up the 

Potomac River. The high tide in this area may be 

3 feet above mean sea level, and water overflows 

the subsiding southern rim of the Tidal Basin 

during most high tides, inundating walkways 

and some cherry trees. 

As a result of severe flooding in the 1930s, flood 

controls were built in Washington, including the 

Potomac Park levee, a raised berm extending 

from 23rd Street NW to the Lincoln Memorial 

Circle and along the north side of the Lincoln 

Reflecting Pool across 17th Street to the Washington Memorial grounds. During flood warnings in the past, NPS staff erect a temporary dike 

composed of earth fill and sandbags across 17th 

Street to complete the levee and protect downtown Washington. This was intended to provide 

protection from floods of the Potomac River up 

to 19 feet above sea level, but the Army Corps of 

Engineers has recently determined that the 

current design is no longer adequate, so a new 

flood control solution for 17th Street is being 

developed. The National Park Service will 

cooperate with the District of Columbia and 

Army Corps of Engineers to implement flood 

control measures under all of the alternatives in 

this plan. 

In June 2006 several buildings in Washington’s 

Federal Triangle flooded following torrential 

rains, resulting in significant damage and the 

temporary closure of several federal agencies. In 

response, the National Capital Planning Commission undertook a study to examine the various causes of flooding in the District, particularly in the low-lying National Mall, Federal 

Triangle, and downtown areas and to recommend protective measures. This study found 

that Washington is susceptible to both overbank 

flooding and urban drainage flooding (NCPC 

2007, 2008). While the Potomac Park levee protects against overbank flooding from the Potomac River, urban drainage flooding occurs as a 

result of heavy precipitation, such as prolonged 

rain or sudden snowmelt. Many of the buildings 

located along the original creek beds experience 

frequent basement flooding as water flows tend 

to follow the original drainage patterns. 

None of the alternative actions proposed in this 

plan would affect natural floodplains or cause a 

meaningful change in development or use of 

existing floodplains, so this topic has been 

dismissed from further analysis. 

296
Natural Resources: Soils — Fill 

Groundwater 

Fluctuations in the level of the water table result 

from seasonal variations in precipitation, surface 

runoff, and evaporation. Based on the area’s 

topography, the natural direction of groundwater flow is to the west/southwest (toward the 

Potomac River). Localized groundwater flow 

can be affected by subsurface structures. The 

groundwater level at the National Mall ranges 

from being very near the surface along the 

southern edges (near the Tidal Basin and 

Potomac River) to 35 feet below existing grades 

along the northern side (NPS 2007a). 

SOILS

On the north side of the National Mall two soil 

mapping units have been identified — the Beltsville-Urban land complex and Udorthents (SCS 

1976). The western and southern areas are composed of Lindside type loam immediately adjacent to the Tidal Basin, and Udorthents (largely 

heterogeneous fill material) on the remainder 

(USGS 1965). 

The Beltsville-Urban land complex is composed 

of soils formed in the parent material of a silty 

layer most likely deposited by wind. They are on 

0%–8% slopes and are moderately well-drained. 

About 20% of the complex is comprised of 

relatively undisturbed Beltsville soils. Another 

20% has been disturbed by urbanization and 

covered with up to several feet of fill material. 

Urban land comprises about 40% of the complex and underlies areas covered by asphalt, 

concrete structures, or other impervious surfaces. The remaining 20% of the complex includes fine sandy loam, silt loams, and sandy 

loam (SCS 1976). 

Udorthents formed in parent material that has 

been deposited or disturbed by humans as a 

result of cuts and excavations. Udorthents can 

be found on poorly drained to somewhat excessively drained soils on floodplains, terraces, and 

uplands. In many areas, this mapping unit is 

covered by structures, asphalt, concrete, and 

other impervious surfaces, along with material 

that was imported to facilitate development. 

Some of the mapping unit contains organic and 

inorganic waste from human activity, such as 

bricks, trash, wire metal, lumber, cinders, industrial waste, incinerator ash, and pieces of concrete and stone. The diverse composition of this 

unit has resulted in highly variable permeability, 

water capacity, run-off, and internal drainage. 

Uncovered and nearly level areas of Udorthents 

are usually high in fertility and available water 

capacity, thereby offering high potential for 

trees, lawns, and ornamental shrubs (SCS 1976). 

Lindside loam, which occurs on nearly level 

floodplains, consists of very deep, moderately 

well-drained soils formed in alluvium washed 

mainly from lime-influenced soils on uplands. 

They offer moderate permeability with slow 

runoff and little to no hazard for erosion. Due to 

the wetness and flooding hazards, the soil has 

poor potential for building sites (SCS 1976). 

Both the Lindside and the Udorthent soils have 

general tendencies to be used for humandeposited dredged material and cuts, fills, or 

otherwise disturbed land (USGS 1965). 

General characteristics of urban soils include 

extreme heterogeneity from area to area, variability in organic matter percentages, variability 

in fertility and pH, a wide variability in texture, 

and a tendency for the compacted soils to repel 

moisture (NPS 1975). 

Fill 

About half of the 684 acres of the planning area 

is fill dredged from the Potomac River to create 

the Tidal Basin and Washington Channel and to 

raise the original land elevation. The fill is over 

100 feet deep in some places. Most of West and 

East Potomac parks were created from fill material dredged from the Washington Channel and 

originally called the Potomac Flats. The area 

south and west of the Washington Monument 

was mostly created when the Tiber Creek valley 

was drained and filled. 

The Jefferson Memorial was built atop pilings 

and caissons sunk into an artificial mud flat that 

is about 100 feet deep. A problem of subsidence 

seems to be occurring where a section of the seawall is breaking from the memorial’s plaza and 

settling into the Tidal Basin. The western section 

of the seawall, which separates the memorial 

complex from the Tidal Basin, is currently about 

6 inches below the adjoining plaza. The “ring 

road,” which wraps around the memorial, has 

 297
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

also dropped several inches in spots and has 

been patched. 

The nearby Lincoln Memorial, Franklin Delano 

Roosevelt Memorial, and Korean War Veterans 

Memorial are also built on pilings atop fill. The 

Lincoln Memorial’s pilings go down about 40 

feet; the Roosevelt Memorial’s, 80 feet; and the 

Korean War Veterans Memorial’s, 30–60 feet 

(Ruane 2007). No settlement problems have 

been observed at these memorials. 

Soil Conditions 

Soils throughout the National Mall have been 

subjected to major impacts from heavy daily foot 

traffic, recreational activities, and special events, 

which may include impacts from vehicles. These 

uses have severely compacted soils, resulting in 

compressed pore space between soil particles 

and increased bulk density. 

National Mall soil compaction studies were 

done by various researchers in 1975, 1976, 1978, 

1986, 1990, 1991, 1994, 2006, and 2008. The 

studies utilized a variety of bulk density assessment methods (clod, core, nuclear probe, and 

cone penetrometer). Six of the studies confirmed severe compaction on the Mall. A study 

done in 1978 at sites on the Mall found the mean 

bulk density to be 1.61 grams per cubic centimeter (g/cm3

)on the surface and 1.74 g/cm3 at 30 

cm, a depth spanning much of the root zone of 

the elm trees (Short et al. 1986). The maximum 

acceptable bulk density for silt loams is 1.3 g/cm3 

and for loams, 1.4 g/cm3 (American Society of 

Landscape Architects et al. 2008). 

One report prepared by the Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station at Auburn University 

for the Smithsonian Institution in 1991 had very 

limited parameters (the top 1–3 inches of soil) 

and used the clod method, which is more likely 

to identify less compaction than actually exists. 

In 1992 the NPS Center for Urban Ecology 

(CUE) undertook additional studies of soil compaction, sampling both at the surface and at a 12-

inch depth outside the drip line and using the 

clod method. This study verified previous findings that soils with high bulk densities at the 12-

inch depth occur throughout the Mall. This is 

critical when considering that the minimum soil 

depth for providing adequate growth support 

for elm trees is 18 inches (NPS 1992a, 1992b). 

Generally, soil pore space should be about 50% 

to allow diffusion of oxygen, water, and minerals. Reduction of the pore space restricts the 

movement of water and oxygen, resulting in 

premature death of trees and other vegetation by 

suffocation. Compacted soils also physically 

restrict root growth. 

One study of soil in test pits on the National 

Mall has been found to be “as dense as concrete” 

when density and pore space were calculated 

(NPS 1975). The mean surface pore space on the 

Mall ranged from 37% at the surface to 33% at 

30 cm (Short et al. 1986). Soil compaction may 

be the largest factor affecting vegetation in the 

park (Sherald, pers. comm., 2007). 

VEGETATION

Vegetation within the National Mall has been 

highly manipulated for over 200 years, and there 

is no resemblance to the native vegetation patterns of the Atlantic Coastal Plain and Piedmont 

provinces. The entire area is considered a 

designed historic landscape, and landscapes in 

the project area have been individually designed 

and manipulated to establish desired settings, 

such as commemorative spaces, events space, 

recreational fields, and gardens. Perennial 

gardens and flowerbeds are enjoyed by visitors 

in several park areas. A fundamental resource of 

the park is open lawns that provide settings for 

buildings and memorials, as well as space for 

recreational activities, demonstrations, and 

special events. Most lawns are bordered by trees 

intended to define specific viewsheds. Trees in 

Union Square may have been planted when the 

area was the original site of the Botanic Garden, 

and a number of these trees are considered 

“witness” trees. 

Washington, D.C., is a good example of an 

“urban forest” composed of a combination of 

native and introduced tree species. The U.S. 

Forest Service (USFS) has developed the Urban 

Forest Effects model to better understand the 

urban forest resource and its numerous values, 

including air pollution removal, air temperature 

reduction, improved water quality, reduced 

noise, increased property values, aesthetics, and 

298
Natural Resources: Vegetation — Cherry Trees 

community cohesion (USFS 2006). Park vegetation is composed of turfgrass and ornamental 

trees, shrubs, hedges, and ground covers. In addition to elms and cherry trees, there are hedge 

maple, star magnolia, bald cypress, oaks, mulberry, hackberry, and Japanese pagoda trees, 

along with American lindens and various 

evergreens. 

Many tree groves and rows are historic, include 

specimen-quality trees, or are intrinsic to the 

visitor experience or landscape of specific areas 

of the park. The National Park Service maintains 

a database of the location and species for all 

trees in the park. 

Over the last two decades, there has been a substantial loss of tree cover within the District of 

Columbia, including the National Mall, affecting 

not only air quality and temperature, but quality 

of life (NPS 2008f). Stressors on trees and shrubs 

include soil compaction, insects, disease, salt 

and other chemicals used for deicing, and 

vandalism. Tree cover in the District is currently 

estimated to be 28.6% (Nowak et al. 2006.) The 

National Park Service supports a Metropolitan 

Washington Council of Governments initiative 

to increase the overall tree canopy in the city. 

Elm Trees 

There are approximately 2,700 elm trees 

throughout the monumental core. Nearly 600 

elms (predominantly American elms, Ulmus 

americana) border the area of the Mall in four 

rows on either side of center grass panels between 3rd and 14th streets. Double rows of 

European elms (Ulmus × hollandica spp.) line the 

walkways along the north and south sides of the 

Lincoln Reflecting Pool. Both of these groups of 

trees are defining features within the McMillan 

plan landscape. 

Most of the elms are under stresses caused by 

soil compaction, root constraints, abrasion on 

exposed roots, cutting of roots during construction, and air pollution/acid precipitation. In 

addition, Dutch elm disease continues to claim 

some trees every year. Leaf scorch caused by 

Xylella fastidiosa was found to affect approximately 25% of the American elms in a study 

conducted by the National Park Service in 1990. 

The National Park Service has taken the lead in 

developing disease-resistant elms and is working 

with the District of Columbia, the General Services Administration, the Department of Defense, the Architect of the Capitol, and the 

Smithsonian Institution to implement a management program for elm trees. Disease-tolerant 

strains such as the “Washington,” “Princeton,” 

and “Jefferson,” as well as wild-type American 

and other elms, are used as replacement trees. 

Cherry Trees 

Over 3,000 cherry trees line the Tidal Basin and 

East Potomac Park, are in several groves on the 

Washington Monument grounds, as well as 

along the Washington Channel in East Potomac 

Park. They are considered a major characterdefining component of the National Mall and 

are a protected feature. The Japanese government presented 3,020 flowering cherry trees (or 

‘Sakura’) as a gift to the United States in 1912. Of 

the original 12 varieties shipped, the white Yoshino and pink Kwanzan varieties represented 

the largest portion and have persisted as they are 

best adapted to the climate of Washington, D.C. 

Most of the remaining 10 varieties did not prove 

to be cold-hardy enough for this area. 

Most of the trees from the original shipment in 

1910 were destroyed due to insect/disease 

infestation, but 15 trees in East Potomac Park 

are believed to be from the original shipment. 

Definitive identification of trees growing around 

the Tidal Basin cannot be made because planting 

records were not kept. It is well-documented 

that many trees died the first few years after 

transplanting and were replaced with trees 

purchased from commercial nurseries in the 

United States. Trees that were replaced in the 

first 20 years cannot be distinguished from an 

original tree based on visual observation of age 

alone and could easily be mistaken for an 

original tree. 

Correspondence in the National Archives documents that trees from the original shipment were 

transplanted in 1922 to the Library of Congress 

grounds and the Washington Aqueduct. Nine of 

these trees still remain. The National Park Service, in cooperation with the National Arboretum, vegetatively propagated from these trees to 

 299
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

ensure that the genetic lineage of the original 

witness trees would be preserved. 

The National Arboretum conducted a study to 

compare the DNA from these documented trees 

with the suspected original trees around the 

Tidal Basin. The study found that while there is 

genetic variability within Prunus × yedoensis, 

eight of the older (presumed original) trees from 

which cuttings were taken were very similar to 

each other and to the 1912 plantings. 

Many trees are adversely affected by root trampling during the National Cherry Blossom Festival when thousands of visitors come to view 

the trees. High tides often cause an overflow at 

the south end of the Tidal Basin rim, which inundates nearby cherry trees and other vegetation in that area. As a result, on the south side 

of the Tidal Basin cherry trees have been planted 

in raised soil berms. 

Turfgrass 

Although usually not a native plant, turfgrass is a 

natural resource that is a substantial component 

of the desired landscape and settings throughout 

the National Mall. Grassy areas are very 

important to the visitor experience in this area. 

The “transition zone” climate of Washington, 

D.C., with its hot, humid summers and cold 

winters, is stressful to most turfgrass species. 

Only the most cold-tolerant warm-season 

turfgrasses (selected zoysia and Bermuda grass 

cultivars) and the most heat- and droughttolerant cool-season turfgrasses (principally tall 

fescue) can survive from year to year. New 

research on native (North American) grass seed 

mixtures may result in more sustainable mixes 

than the park currently uses. 

The National Park Service maintains approximately 112 acres of turf on the Mall for general 

public use and 50 acres on various athletic fields. 

The following are the selections/blends commonly used in the park. The selection is based 

on the best time of the year that seeding takes 

place, as well as shading and other 

environmental factors. 

• Turf Type Tall Fescue Mixture: A 90% 

certified mixture of turf-type tall fescue 

(Festuca arundinacea) consisting of three 

varieties, of which no variety exceeds 40% 

or is less than 20%, and 10% Kentucky 

Bluegrass (Poa pratensis). Recommended 

seeding dates: April 1 to May 15, September 

1 to November 1. 

• Bermuda Grass Blend: A certified blend of 

three hybrid Bermuda grasses (Cynodon 

dactylon), of which no variety exceeds 40% 

or is less than 20%. Recommended seeding 

dates: March 15 to August 15. 

• Perennial Ryegrass Blend: A certified blend 

of perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne), consisting of three varieties, of which no one 

variety exceeds 40% or is less than 20%. 

Recommended seeding dates: April 1 to 

December 15. 

• Perennial Ryegrass / Kentucky Bluegrass 

Mixture: A certified mixture containing 

60% Kentucky bluegrass, which consists of 

three varieties with no one variety exceeding 25% of the total mixture, and 40% 

perennial ryegrass, which consists of two 

varieties with no one variety exceeding 25% 

of the total mixture. Recommended seeding 

dates: April 1–30, August 16 to October 15. 

Healthy turf provides many physical and social 

benefits and reduces nutrient runoff into waterways. However, turfgrass on the Mall has been 

and continues to be adversely impacted by demonstrations, special events, recreational activities, and the development of social trails (usercreated trails off paved paths) and jogging paths. 

These uses have resulted in areas of destroyed 

turf (see the aerial photo of the Mall), broken 

sprinkler systems, and soil compaction. Soil 

compaction may be the largest factor affecting 

vegetation in the park (Sherald, pers. comm., 

2007). The condition of the lawn on the Mall 

(from 3rd to 14th streets) is chronically in fair to 

poor condition (NPS 2006d). Reseeding 

attempts after large events have been prone to 

failure due to soil compaction, nonfunctioning 

irrigation systems, and continued heavy use. The 

National Park Service uses two approaches to 

turf maintenance — turf recovery and turf 

renovation. If the grass is 50% or more 

destroyed, then a complete renovation is 

conducted that involves killing all remaining 

vegetation and replanting. Turf renovation 

consists of aeration, overseeding, fertilization, 

and thatching. 

300
Natural Resources: Fish and Wildlife — Turfgrass 

Proper irrigation and fertilization practices, including regular applications of nutrients (based 

on soil tests), are essential for turfgrass survival 

and recovery. The timely provision of nitrogenbased compounds increases turfgrass growth 

and density. Annual applications of lime may 

also be needed to maintain the soil pH in an 

acceptable range (6.0–6.5) for adequate nutrient 

availability to the turfgrasses (Turgeon 2006). 

Soil-amendments with light-weight materials 

(e.g., expanded slate and sintered fly-ash) 

increased soil pore space in long-term tests at 

Hains Point in East Potomac Park (NPS 1975). 

One way to reduce impacts on turfgrass is to 

control the level of traffic over a certain area. 

Proper traffic circulation management involves 

controlling both pedestrian and vehicular traffic 

on or around the turf so that traffic thresholds 

(i.e., maximum tolerable traffic intensities) are 

not exceeded. This can be done by reducing 

traffic intensity to a level below the damage 

threshold by various cultural interventions 

(Turgeon 2006). Another method might include 

seeding with more resilient Bermuda grass. 

However, this grass turns brown in the winter. 

Annual or perennial ryegrass could be planted in 

the fall to provide green lawns in winter, which 

would be replaced with the Bermuda grass when 

it comes back in spring. 

The park maintains all vegetation, including 

turfgrass, trees, and other plantings, by using the 

NPS integrated pest management system. Goals 

of this system include protecting the Chesapeake 

Bay watershed by minimizing toxicants. 

The National Park Service closes half of the Mall 

area every winter for a half year of rest and rehabilitation. In fall 2007 rehabilitation efforts on 

the east end of the Mall included trial approaches in different areas that included more 

intense restoration. The most intensively treated 

area had a visibly healthy stand of predominantly weed-free turf until the first events took place. 

FISH AND WILDLIFE

Most of the National Mall has been disturbed 

and landscaped, resulting in relatively poor 

quality habitat for terrestrial or aquatic animals 

when compared to undisturbed habitat. The 

D.C. Department of the Environment has classified some of the National Mall as “Pond and 

Pool” and to a lesser extent “River and Stream” 

habitats (DC 2007). There are no undisturbed 

native habitat types in the planning area. 

The Potomac and Anacostia rivers and several 

streams provide habitat for 62 species of greatest 

conservation need, making these areas a high 

priority habitat (DC 2006). All wildlife species 

use the rivers and streams in some way, and the 

health of the rivers and streams affects most fish 

and wildlife species. 

Fish species in nearby Rock Creek include two 

anadromous species that migrate from salt water 

to spawn in Rock Creek — the blueback herring 

and the alewife. The American eel is the only 

species found locally that lives in either fresh or 

brackish water. Eels migrate to the Sargasso Sea 

to spawn (catadromous). Other native fish that 

inhabit the area include shiners, catfish, sunfish, 

and bass. Nonnative species include carp and 

snakehead. 

FIGURE 43: LANDSCAPE CONDITIONS, APRIL 2002

Grass on the Mall in front of the Smithsonian Castle has been 

affected by intense use. 

Photo courtesy of U.S. Geological Survey. 

Constitution Gardens Lake has self-maintaining 

populations of largemouth bass, black crappie, 

bluegill, and yellow perch. Catch-and-release 

fishing is allowed. Some filamentous algae species in the lake provide food, shelter, and shade 

for the fish, but the uncontrolled growth of these 

species and blue-green algae can be detrimental 

to fish and water quality. 

Recreational fishing is allowed in the Tidal Basin 

and Potomac River. However, urban pollution 

has adversely affected regional fish diversity and 

population numbers (NPS 2005f). PCBs and 

 301
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

other chemical contaminants continue to be 

found in some fish caught in the Potomac and 

Anacostia rivers and their tributaries, including 

Rock Creek (DC Department of Health 2002). 

Common urban species of small birds include 

native songbirds as well as nonnative house 

sparrows, pigeons, and starlings. Larger native 

species include crows, common grackles, 

cormorants, loons, grebes, and gulls. Many birds 

of prey, such as bald eagles, osprey, peregrine 

falcons, and several species of hawks, are seen 

regularly. Great blue herons are also common, 

and a great egret is seen occasionally. Roaches 

Run Waterfowl Sanctuary, across the Potomac 

River from East Potomac Park, attracts many 

migratory waterfowl species. 

Two species of birds are a management concern 

— Canada geese and ducks. The birds have 

adapted to human presence and have become 

year-round, non-migratory residents. Large 

groups of Canada geese are present year-round 

near the Potomac River, Constitution Gardens 

Lake, and the reflecting pools. Ducks were 

introduced to the area for recreational hunting 

purposes. Bird droppings foul waters and make 

lawns unattractive to human uses. 

Resident wildlife includes mammals such as gray 

squirrels, bats, Eastern chipmunks, and Norway 

rats. They have become adapted to life in an urban environment and utilize nonnative vegetation for habitat needs. To some extent they have 

come to rely on human leftover food. When rats 

and squirrels are too numerous or aggressive, 

they become a management problem. 

The open lawns and trees provide foraging 

habitat for several species of bats. During a 

recent bat inventory conducted by the National 

Park Service, an eastern red bat was caught in a 

net and three other species were heard using bat 

detectors — big brown bats, hoary bats, and 

eastern pipistrelles.

Other species that may be seen in the area include 

raccoons, beavers, red foxes, and white-tailed 

deer. Deer are infrequently seen swimming 

across the Potomac River from Virginia. River 

otters and muskrats may also be in the area. 

In 1985 gray squirrels were so numerous in 

President’s Park that they were damaging trees 

and flowering plants, so the National Park 

Service started a relocation program (Manski et 

al. 1981). Congregations of pigeons and gulls 

result in large accumulations of droppings that 

cover benches, statues, walkways, and plantings, 

causing aesthetic problems for visitors, corroded 

metal, and damaged painted surfaces. 

302
DEMONSTRATIONS, SPECIAL EVENTS, AND 

NATIONAL CELEBRATIONS

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

The Importance of the Venue 

The National Mall is a place where Americans 

have gathered for generations to celebrate, make 

their opinions known, and commemorate significant events. Popularly known as America’s 

front yard, it is a place where citizen come together to organize events that celebrate achievements, bring focus to important issues, and 

provide opportunities for education. Lying 

between the U.S. Capitol, the Washington Monument, the national museums of the Smithsonian 

Institution and the National Galley of Art, it is 

the nation’s foremost people’s space. There is no 

other place that conveys an equal sense of 

national purpose or belonging. 

First Amendment demonstrations, special 

events, and national celebrations, and such 

events are permitted by the National Park Service in accordance with the Code of Federal 

Regulations (see page 16). The NPS Management 

Policies 2006 define these uses, as well as fireworks displays, filming, and photography, as 

special park uses (NPS 2006e, sec. 8.6). 

Special events and demonstrations are generally 

open to the public. Participation is limited only 

by the numbers of people that can be safely 

accommodated. Locations that are closer to the 

subway system may facilitate access and participation. The Mall, Union Square, and the 

Washington Monument are the areas with the 

easiest access to public transportation and the 

most popular locations for special park uses. 

Regulations 

Reasonable time, place, and manner regulations 

have evolved, and some of them have been 

tested, upheld, or modified through judicial 

proceedings. As previously described, the Code 

of Federal Regulations addresses public use limits 

(36 CFR 1.5; see page 16). 

Specific requirements of the National Capital 

Region as they apply to the National Mall are 

stated in 36 CFR 7.96. The regional director may 

impose reasonable restrictions on the use of 

temporary structures in the interest of protecting park areas, traffic, and public safety. This has 

resulted in Requirements for Special Events Held 

on Parkland in the National Capital Region, supplemented by Standard Public Health Requirements for Temporary Food Establishments Operating in Conjunction with a Special Event Held on 

Parkland in the National Capital Region. These 

two documents set requirements for submittals, 

resource protection, site plans, first aid, portable 

restrooms, signs, food, onsite supervision and 

security, liabilities, prohibition of glass containers, media, and other necessities. Within the 

National Mall and Memorial Parks, the 2009 

Guidelines for Special Events and Demonstrations

for the Lincoln Memorial establish procedures 

to protect resources at the memorial, and the

2006 “Record of Decision for Partial and Temporary Closure of a Portion of the National Mall 

(the Mall) for Turf Renovation” schedules the 

annual fall/winter closure of half the Mall for 

turf renovation. 

NPS and NCR requirements and restrictions 

applying to all activities on the National Mall 

have not been consistently followed. For example, tent stakes are not to be installed any more 

than 18 inches into the ground, and no structures or parking, or equipment operated, within 

tree root zone areas. 

Number and Size of Events 

Thousands of special events take place annually 

on the National Mall. The event size and complexity determine the need for additional planning, submittals, and the need to provide facilities and services. The majority of demonstrations and special events are smaller, with expected attendance of 5,000, but more than 

500,000 people can come to a major national 

celebration, such as the Fourth of July. Each year 

about two dozen events exceed 25,000 people. 

Attendance estimates are inaccurate on some 

permit applications; for example, organizers for 

large annual events (such as the Fourth of July 

303
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

and the American Folklife Festival) may list 

expected attendance in the thousands, while 

hundreds of thousands of visitors usually attend; 

while for other events attendance falls short of 

estimates.

Time Frame 

Demonstrations and special events are limited to 

four months (36 CFR 7.96(g)(4)(ii)). Demonstrations may be extended unless another applicant’s use precludes double occupancy. Time 

limits listed for specific special events are 

• Lighting of the National Christmas Tree 

and Christmas Pathway of Peace — 4 

weeks, plus setup and takedown between 

October 1 through February 1 

• Cherry Blossom Festival — 2 weeks, plus 2 

weeks for setup and takedown 

• Fourth of July Celebration — 3 weeks, 

including setup and takedown 

• Smithsonian Folklife Festival — 2 weeks, 

plus 8 weeks for setup and takedown 

Other national celebrations that require lengthy 

setup and takedown times include inaugural 

ceremonies. The Lighting of the National 

Christmas Tree and Christmas Pathway of Peace 

(formerly the Pageant of Peace) takes place on 

the Ellipse in President’s Park. 

FIRST AMENDMENT ACTIVITIES

First Amendment demonstrations comprise an 

essential democratic right of citizens on the 

National Mall. As previously mentioned, the 

Mall’s “location in the heart of our nation’s 

capital makes it a prime location for demonstrations. . . . As the court has stated before, ‘It is 

here that the constitutional rights of speech and 

peaceful assembly find their fullest expression’” 

(Friends of Vietnam Memorial v. Kennedy, 116 

F.3d 495, 496 (D.C. Cir. 1997), quoting ISKCON 

of Potomac v. Kennedy, 61 F.3d 949, 952 (D.C. 

Cir. 1995)). 

Demonstrations are usually thought of as political protests; however, they can address or support virtually any side of any issue. The National 

Mall accommodates over 1,000 First Amendment demonstrations annually. Demonstrations 

in 2008 included prayer vigils, peace vigils, 

religious activities and services, anti-war 

demonstrations, rallies to support the military 

troops, support for Latin American citizens, the 

Longest Walk II, Children’s Defense Fund, 

saving the salmon fishery, Amnesty International, support for Falun Gong, Greek unity, 

march for the U.S. Constitution, Guantanamo 

prisoners, march for life, vegetarian benefits, 

concern about torture, and Million DJ march. 

While demonstrations generally last for a short 

time, are attended by a few hundred people, and 

require few temporary facilities, attendance can 

range up to 10,000, and some demonstrations 

can attract hundreds of thousands and even 

spawn counter demonstrations. Participants 

typically hand out literature in support of their 

cause. 

Demonstrations are permitted in most areas of 

the National Mall, and areas can be reserved on 

a first-come, first-served basis. Demonstrations 

of less than 25 people generally do not require a 

permit. To protect the sanctity of visitor experiences in memorials, demonstrations are not 

allowed inside the ring of flagpoles at the 

Washington Monument, inside the Lincoln 

Memorial and the Thomas Jefferson Memorial, 

near Freedom Wall at the WWII Memorial, and 

near the Vietnam Veterans Memorial (36 CFR 

7.96(g)(3)(ii)). 

The Mall and Union Square are popular venues 

because visual backdrops include symbols of 

power (the U.S. Capitol) and symbols of our 

nation (the Washington Monument). The Washington Monument grounds also include visible 

backdrops or symbols of the nation — the 

Washington Monument, the White House, the 

Lincoln Memorial, the Thomas Jefferson 

Memorial, and a layered view of the World War 

II Memorial, the Lincoln Reflecting Pool, and 

the Lincoln Memorial. These areas are conveniently accessible to the Metro system. 

The Lincoln Memorial is a prime location for 

demonstrations related to freedom, equality, or 

civil rights because of its commemoration of the 

Great Emancipator, and it has been the site of 

several historic events, including the 1939 concert by Marion Anderson, the 1963 “I Have a 

Dream” speech by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., 

and the 1968 Poor People’s Campaign. 

304
Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations: Special Events 

Small structures related to the Vietnam Veterans 

Memorial, previously located near the west end 

of the Lincoln Reflecting Pool, are First Amendment demonstrations related to the military, the 

memorial, and those missing in action. These 

structures were relocated to complete 

construction on the Lincoln plaza. 

NATIONAL CELEBRATIONS

National celebration events on the National 

Mall, which are generally very well attended, 

include the National Cherry Blossom Festival, 

the Fourth of July celebration, the Smithsonian 

Folklife Festival, and inaugural activities. In 2007 

the National Mall and Memorial Parks 

undertook independent operational assessments 

of two national celebrations, the National 

Cherry Blossom Festival and the Fourth of July 

celebration. As a result of these assessments, a 

number of operational changes were made in 

2008, including the location of portable restrooms and frequency of service, as well as public 

parking and circulation. 

The National Cherry Blossom Festival is synonymous with spring in the nation’s capital, and an 

estimate 2–4 million people annually attend the 

approximately two-week festival. The narrow 

walks around the Tidal Basin are overwhelmed 

and people trample the roots of the cherry trees 

they have come to admire. Performances take 

place daily on a stage on the Thomas Jefferson 

Memorial plaza; food, portable restrooms, and 

information are provided in several areas around 

the Tidal Basin. In 2008 the Tidal Basin parking 

lot (141 spaces) was closed and many temporary 

facilities relocated to the paved parking lot to 

reduce the impact of the celebration. Additional 

post-and-chain fencing reminded many visitors 

to stay away from tree roots. A free shuttle bus 

provided access to and from nearly 800 parking 

spaces in East Potomac Park, and parking for 

bicycles was increased. 

The Fourth of July celebration attracts around a 

half a million people during a single day and 

evening and requires a great deal of logistical 

preparation. Some roads are closed during the 

entire day (Madison and Jefferson drives) and 

others (14th, 15th, and 17th streets, and 

Independence and Constitution avenues) are 

closed during the evening. Visitor services are 

supplemented with portable restrooms, mobile 

food carts, and first-aid and information 

stations. 

For the Fourth of July there are two evening 

concerts (one on the west lawn of the Capitol 

and the other on the Washington Monument 

grounds) that are timed so the finale is highlighted by the fireworks display. Fireworks are 

staged from the reflecting pool, so nearby areas 

are closed for public safety, and the World War 

II Memorial is closed in the afternoon. In 2006 

and 2007 there were weather-related evacuations that tested emergency preparedness, 

shelter procedures, and effectiveness of mass 

notification. The typical Fourth of July celebration results in nearly 30 tons of trash that must 

be removed by the next morning. 

The midsummer Smithsonian Folklife Festival 

has been taking place since 1967 and coincides 

with the Fourth of July celebration. Sponsored 

primarily by the Smithsonian Institution, with 

assistance from the National Park Service, the 

festival has been expanded to include international as well as American folklife. Temporary 

event facilities, such as tents and stages, are 

located in the elm tree panels to take advantage 

of shade (approximately a 10 degree cooling 

effect), even though no such facilities are 

allowed within any tree canopy by NPS National 

Capital Region requirements. Some utilities have 

been developed for festival use. 

SPECIAL EVENTS

In accordance with NPS regulations at 36 CFR 

7.96(g), special events may be permitted “when 

(1) there is a meaningful association with the 

park area and the event, and (2) the event will 

contribute to understanding of the significance 

of the park area” (NPS 2006e, sec. 8.6.2.1). They 

will be denied when they would result in 

unacceptable impacts, such as impeding the 

ability to achieve desired natural and cultural 

resource conditions, diminishing opportunities 

for current or future generations to enjoy, learn 

about, or be inspired by park resources or 

values; or unreasonably interfering with park 

programs or activities, an appropriate use, the 

atmosphere of peace and tranquility, or NPS 

concessioner or contractor operations (NPS 

2006e, sec. 1.4.7.1). The park has discretionary 

 305
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

authority to allow and manage authorized uses 

that will not cause impairment or unacceptable 

impacts, and should consider presidential and 

congressional interest and enabling legislation or 

proclamation (NPS 2006e, sec. 1.4.3.1).

Numerous special events take place annually on 

the National Mall. Some special events have an 

association with the National Mall, such as annual commemorative ceremonies related to park 

areas or memorials, including Veterans Day 

commemorative ceremonies and birthday ceremonies for George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, and Franklin Delano 

Roosevelt. Ceremonies generally take place in or 

near memorials on pavement, and the impact of 

these events is limited. Military concerts and 

performances of patriotic music by visiting 

school groups also take place at the Lincoln 

Memorial, the Thomas Jefferson Memorial, the 

Sylvan Theater, and other areas. 

Some cultural or educational events are associated with nearby federal facilities, such as the 

Library of Congress Book Festival (estimated 

attendance 50,000), or simulcasts with the 

Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. The 

Library of Congress Book Festival, held in the 

autumn, is a more recent tradition and has 

grown annually for more than five years. 

Kennedy Center simulcasts are held at various 

locations on the National Mall. The National 

Park Service also supports three annual National 

Symphony Orchestra concerts on the west lawn 

of the U.S. Capitol, each of which attract many 

tens of thousands of people. 

The Solar Decathlon, which has been held every 

two years, brings together national and international institutions of higher learning to compete in the design and operation of small solar 

houses they have built offsite. Each spring the 

Public Employees Roundtable is a recognition 

and recruitment event with information and 

education, with displays by federal agencies on 

the National Mall. Large tents cover the entire 

center grass panel, and vehicles and military 

equipment are on display. There are no accurate 

estimates for these events, but tens of thousands 

of people usually attend. 

Some events celebrate or honor a group’s identity, such as Black Family Reunion (annual twoday weekend, with the permit listing 100,000). 

Other events honor rites of passage or significant 

individual celebrations, such as college graduations, weddings, enlistments/reenlistments, and 

citizenship ceremonies. Other events provide 

information about various conditions (cancer, 

diabetes, HIV) and offer opportunities for 

interested people to gather. 

306
Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations: Special Events 

Inauguration Day 2009 — Lessons Learned from a Unique National Celebration 

For the inauguration of Barack 

Obama on January 20, 2009, preparations were made for unprecedented crowds on the National Mall. 

The Lincoln Memorial was used for 

pre-inaugural concert on Sunday, 

when it is estimated that over 

500,000 people attended and were 

concentrated from the Washington 

Monument west to the Lincoln 

Memorial. The inauguration ceremony took place on the west side of 

the Capitol on Tuesday, and an 

estimated that 1.8 million attended, 

with people concentrated east from 

the Washington Monument 

grounds. 

Resource Protection 

United States Park Police, with 

assistance from local, state, and 

federal agencies, provided law 

enforcement services. The National 

Park Service increased the number 

of uniformed park rangers and 

guides in anticipation of large 

crowds. There were no arrests. 

Jumbotrons were strategically placed 

throughout the National Mall, but a 

small percentage of the 1.8 million 

people did climb trees to get better 

views. 

Steps taken to protect memorials included temporary fencing to 

guide pedestrian flow, additional 

staffing to monitor resource preservation issues, and temporary environmental monitoring equipment in 

the Lincoln Memorial for the effects 

of additional lighting for the 

opening ceremonies. Staging on the 

National Mall and near the Lincoln 

Memorial used hardscape as much 

as possible, and the primary eastwest viewshed was maintained. 

Staging at the Lincoln Memorial was 

installed with protections for the 

memorial steps and plaza. 

Public Access and Wayfinding 

Advance media notices were 

made about access, openings, and 

closures of roads and subway stations. Public access was by subway, 

bus (public or tour), walking, and 

bicycle. On January 20 Metro provided about 1,120,000 rail trips, 

423,000 bus trips, and 1,721 MetroAccess trips (for people with disabilities who cannot use public transportation), for a total of 1,544,721 

trips, the highest ridership day ever 

in WMATA’s history (WMATA 

2009). Subway announcements 

provided information about locations, but because of the crowds 

and talking, the announcements 

may not have been widely heard. 

On inauguration day crowds 

began arriving by 4 a.m., and the 

Mall area had to be closed by 9:15 

a.m. because crowds had reached 

unsafe levels. While many law enforcement and military staff were 

present to guide people to and from 

the National Mall, coordinated 

information to help pedestrians find 

available space was insufficient, as 

was accurate information about the 

status of Metro stations. Hundreds 

of pedestrians holding tickets to ticketed areas on the east end of Mall 

were unable to reach their areas. 

Areas west of 15th Street could 

have accommodated more people 

during the inaugural ceremony. 

Attended bike valet parking 

was provided, but use was not required. In some areas people locked 

bikes to any structure they found, 

which affected pedestrian 

circulation. 

While arrivals were staggered 

over many hours, crowds left on 

both Sunday and Tuesday in one 

concentrated mass, proving very 

difficult to manage. More electronic 

signs would have helped guide 

people to open subway stations. The 

Smithsonian Institution museums 

were very crowded after the 

ceremony, with people sitting and 

sleeping under exhibits. 

Visitor Experience 

Numerous media broadcast 

from mobile studios on the Mall. 

More than 20 jumbotrons were 

dispersed around the National Mall 

to accommodate expected attendance. However, more large screens 

would have facilitated viewing both 

the concert and the inauguration. 

The National Park Service 

printed cards with educational 

information about the inaugurations 

of the five presidents with memorials on the National Mall — George 

Washington, Thomas Jefferson, 

Abraham Lincoln, Ulysses S. Grant, 

and Franklin Delano Roosevelt. 

Commemorative buttons were also 

handed out. 

Visitor Amenities 

Restrooms — About 5,000 

portable restrooms were dispersed 

throughout the area expected to 

receive the greatest use. These 

facilities were sufficient, and they 

were kept well stocked (toilet paper, 

hand sanitizer dispensers) and clean. 

However, long lines at restrooms in 

adjacent museums and at the 

Washington Monument grounds 

indicated that people preferred not 

to use portable restrooms. 

Food Service — In addition to 

10 refreshment stands there were 

12 tents selling food and or souvenirs. A total of 140,000 hot dogs 

were sold, 170,000 sodas, along 

with hot cocoa, Italian sausages, 

coffee, water bottles, and candy 

bars. 

Retail — While the NPS concessioner was authorized to sell official 

Presidential Inaugural Committee 

souvenirs, there appeared to be 

many impromptu sellers of souvenirs 

without permits. 

Public Health, Safety, and 

Security 

Only 30 children were reported 

lost and reunited with their parents. 

First-aid tents provided service to 

hundreds who were not prepared 

for the cold weather. No arrests 

were reported. 

Vision and breathing for some 

visitors on the Mall was affected by 

dust whipped up by winds after the 

ceremony. 

Park Operations 

Between 95 and 100 tons of 

trash and debris were picked up by 

the next morning. In addition to 

permanent trash containers, 300 

special recycling containers were 

provided, and numerous cardboard 

boxes were available. Many of the 

boxes were used to provide some 

insulation from the frozen ground. 

The turf on the Mall and in 

other areas was destroyed, and the 

lack of turf cover throughout large 

areas contributed to windblown 

dust. 

 307
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

FIGURE 44: THE INAUGURATION AND ITS AFTERMATH

Between 95 and 100 tons of trash were removed.

About 5,000 

portable restrooms 

were brought in.

308
ACCESS AND CIRCULATION

The National Mall is located in the midst of 

Washington, D.C.’s, urban circulation network. 

This network affects all users — whether they 

are pedestrians, motorists, transit users, tour bus 

users, or bicyclists and regardless of whether the 

purpose of their access is to visit the National 

Mall, commute to work, or travel between urban 

destinations. 

PUBLIC ACCESS

Road Network 

The road system in Washington, D.C., is an 

irregular grid overlaid by diagonal avenues. 

Along with the great civic open space of the 

National Mall, the road system defines the form 

of the capital city. Primary commuter routes that 

link to principal arterial entrances into the city 

include both park and city roads. Roads under 

NPS jurisdiction within the National Mall 

include 15th Street / Raoul Wallenberg Place, 

Maine Avenue, portions of 17thand 23rd streets, 

and Independence and Constitution avenues 

west of 15th Street. Roads under city jurisdiction 

include portions of Independence and Constitution avenues east of 15th Street, and 3rd, 4th, 

7th, and 14th streets, which cross the Mall. 

Roads under the full jurisdiction of the National 

Park Service include Ohio Drive, East Basin 

Drive, West Basin Drive, and Jefferson and 

Madison drives. 

The eastern half of the National Mall is shaped 

by the formal road patterns associated with the 

historic L’Enfant plan. Principal diagonal arterials converge near Union Square, where Maryland and Pennsylvania avenues terminate near 

1st Street. Other roads, like 23rd Street, connect 

the National Mall to the city road system. A few 

road sections introduce a new form and include 

symmetrical curves or help emphasize important 

structures, such as the Washington Monument 

or the Smithsonian Castle. 

The western half of the National Mall is largely 

the result of mid-20th century efforts to accommodate automobile traffic, with vehicular access 

by way of various bridges and a series of principal arterials. As a result, the McMillan plan’s 

Constitution Avenue, which originally terminated at a belvedere near the Potomac River, was 

reconfigured to connect to the Theodore Roosevelt Memorial Bridge / I-66. 

Commuter Routes 

Roads around the National Mall provide access 

to critical commuter routes into Washington, 

D.C., including I-395, US 1 (14th Street through 

the Mall), I-66, and US 50, as well as Rock Creek 

Parkway, Canal Road / Whitehurst Freeway / 

I-66, George Washington Memorial Parkway, 

and Maine Avenue. Three heavily used bridge 

corridors across the Potomac River feed traffic 

into the vicinity of the National Mall. From 

north to south these include the Theodore 

Roosevelt Memorial Bridge, the Arlington 

Memorial Bridge, and the I-395/14th Street 

Bridge corridor. The latter corridor consists of 

five bridges; three of the bridges (the George 

Mason, Rochambeau, and Arland D. Williams Jr. 

memorial bridges) are four-lane automobile 

bridges that carry I-395 and US 1 traffic. These 

three roadways merge in East Potomac Park and 

split into two 2-way bridges — the 14th Street 

bridge carries northbound traffic onto 14th 

Street, and the Francis Case Memorial Bridge 

carries I-395 (and southbound US 1) traffic onto 

the Southwest Freeway. Two additional bridges 

across the Potomac River at this location carry 

rail traffic, one the Metro Yellow Line and the 

other a main line railroad. The Metro line enters 

a tunnel in East Potomac Park, and the main line 

railroad passes over I-395 and runs over the 

Washington Channel just downstream of the 

14th Street approach before turning northeast 

along Maryland Avenue. 

In 2007 the three bridge corridors that feed traffic into the vicinity of the National Mall carried 

over 374,000 vehicles on the average weekday — 

approximately 104,000 vehicles on the Theodore 

Roosevelt Memorial Bridge, 68,000 on the 

Arlington Memorial Bridge, and 202,000 on the 

I-395/14th Street bridges (see Table 9; DDOT 

2008c). Nearly 32,000 vehicles used the Potomac 

River Freeway on a daily basis, and 16,000 the 

Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway. The section 

of 14th Street within the National Mall carries 

 309
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

TABLE 9: AVERAGE ANNUAL WEEKDAY TRAFFIC VOLUMES IN AND AROUND THE NATIONAL MALL —

2002, 2006, AND 2007 

(expressed in thousands, rounded to the nearest 100)

Area 2002 2006 2007 

Bridges 

Theodore Roosevelt Memorial Bridge 100.0 105.1 103.6 

Arlington Memorial Bridge 73.0 69.3 68.3 

I-395/14th Street Bridge Corridor 250.0 213.4 202 

Total 423.0 387.8 373.9 

Parkway / Freeway 

Rock Creek & Potomac Parkway NA 16 15.8 

Potomac River Freeway NA 30.4 31.6 

Streets within the National Mall 

North-South Streets 

3rd Street 17.0 15.8 15.6 

4th Street 7.5 7.8 7.8 

7th Street 16.1 16.7 16.5 

14th Street 37.2 44.3 45.8 

15th Street 21.8 14.2 14 

17th Street 25.1 25.7 25.4 

23rd Street 22.6 22.9 22.6 

Henry Bacon Drive 17.4 13.1 12.9 

Subtotal 164.7 160.5 160.6 

East-West Streets 

Jefferson Drive 7.0 7.3 7.3 

Madison Drive 9.7 10.1 10.1 

Lincoln Circle — North NA 58.2 57.3 

Lincoln Circle — South NA 7.8 7.6 

Constitution Avenue — 17th–23rd Streets 47.0 48.9 48.2 

Independence Avenue in West Potomac Park 34.1 22.1 21.8 

Independence Avenue to Maine Avenue 44.1 43.7 40.5 

Subtotal 141.9* 198.1 192.8 

Total All Surface Streets (Highest Segments) 306.6* 358.6 353.4 

Mall Tunnels 

2nd Street/I-395 117.7** 98.9 107.1 

9th Street 17.4 17.6 17.4 

12th Street 20.9 18.2 17.9 

Total 156.0 134.7 142.4 

Adjacent Streets 

Constitution Avenue east of 15th Street (highest segment) 32.7 37.6 37.1 

Independence Avenue east of 15th Street (highest segment) 23.4 23.8 29.3 

SOURCE: DDOT 2003b, 2008c. 2008d. 

NOTE: Traffic volumes are given for segments of streets; the highest segment traffic volume was used for the 

purposes of calculating total traffic volume. 

NA — Not available. 

* Counts for Lincoln Circle not available. 

** I-395 headed into tunnel. 

approximately 46,000 vehicles on a daily basis 

(DDOT 2008c). The highest used segment of 

Independence Avenue west of 15th Street carried about 22,000 vehicles and the highest used 

segment east of 15th about 28,000 vehicles. The 

highest used segment of Constitution Avenue 

west of 15th Street carried more than 48,000 

vehicles, and the highest used segment east of 

15th Street carried nearly 30,000 vehicles 

(DDOT 2008c). Altogether average annual daily 

traffic on surface roads traversing the National 

Mall in 2007 was about 300,000 vehicles. In 

addition, three tunnels — at 2nd, 9th, and 12th 

streets — go under the National Mall and provide freeway or expressway connections to I395. In 2007 the average annual daily traffic for 

these tunnels was more than 142,000 vehicles. 

Commuter Mode of Access 

In 2007 the Washington Metropolitan Council 

of Governments published the 2007 State of the 

Commute Survey Report, which showed modes 

of access used by commuters (Commuter Connections 2008). As shown in Table 10, more than 

310
Access and Circulation: Public Access 

two-thirds of commuters drive private vehicles 

or motorcycles, followed by trains, including the 

Metro, car or van pools, bus, and biking or walking. Between 2001 and 2007, driving has decreased slightly, while use of mass transit (rail 

and bus) has increased. Studies by WMATA 

show the present system can accommodate 

more passengers. 

TABLE 10: REGULAR MODE USE — PERCENTAGES 

OF WEEKLY COMMUTER TRIPS

2001 2004 2007 

Drive Alone / Motorcycle 72.6% 74.1% 71.0% 

Car Pool / Van Pool 7.6% 6.1% 7.6% 

Bus 4.6% 4.7% 5.2% 

Train / Metro 12.7% 12.8% 13.5% 

Bike / Walk 2.4% 2.3% 2.7% 

SOURCE: Commuter Connections 2008. 

Visitor Access 

The 2008 visitor study asked how visitors 

traveled to the National Mall from overnight 

accommodations. Respondents used multiple 

forms of transportation to travel between their 

overnight accommodations and the National 

Mall (see Table 11). With multiple responses 

allowed in a selection of 10 forms of transportation, the most used were public transportation 

(52.0%), followed by walking (39.3%) and 

private vehicles (36.7%). Those selecting other 

(4.1%) were most likely to indicate a hotel 

shuttle. 

TABLE 11: FORMS OF TRANSPORTATION VISITORS USED 

BETWEEN THEIR ACCOMMODATIONS AND THE NATIONAL 

MALL

Form of 

Transportation 

Response 

Frequency Percentage 

Public transportation 328 52.0 

On foot 246 39.3 

Private vehicle 230 36.7 

Taxi / limousine 70 11.2 

Sightseeing bus 67 10.8 

Tour motorcoach / bus 57 9.1 

Rental vehicle 41 6.6 

Other 25 4.1 

Bicycle 13 2.1 

School bus 0 0.0 

SOURCE: NPS 2009. 

Driving Conditions 

First-time National Mall visitors who are driving 

may be traveling at slower speeds because they 

are unfamiliar with the area and are looking for 

landmarks, and they may expect a more relaxed 

park driving experience instead of a highly congested urban traffic experience. 

Speed limits on park roads are most frequently 

posted at 25 mph, with some sections of Independence Avenue posted at 30 mph; Jefferson, 

Madison, East Basin, and West Basin drives are 

posted at 15 mph. Speed limits on park roads are 

typically exceeded by 8–14 mph (DDOT 2007). 

City arterials such as 3rd, 4th, and 7th streets, 

and adjacent city arterials such as 14th, Constitution, and Independence, are posted at 25 mph 

(Brudis & Associates 2006). 

Visitor Parking 

In the spring and summer of 2003 the National 

Park Service conducted a survey to assess the 

preferences and needs of visitors regarding 

transportation in the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area (NPS 2003e). The survey revealed 

that 25% of visitors preferred to drive to the 

National Mall and wanted to park their vehicles. 

There are 1,183 public parking spaces on and 

near the National Mall, plus 132 spaces for visitors with disabilities (see Table 12). There are 

also 56 tour bus loading/unloading spaces and 9 

2-hour tour bus parking spaces. 

The numbers of visitor parking spaces for people with disabilities is approximately 10% of 

total public parking, which exceeds the 4% percent standard in the Americans with Disabilities 

Act. Except in very high use times visitors can 

usually find parking, but not necessarily close to 

where they want to be. The city has metered 

parking along the Mall cross streets (3rd, 4th, 

and 7th streets); however, free parking provided 

by the National Park Service is more desirable, 

and motorists may drive around until they find a 

free parking space. There are time limits on 

some parking spaces, and no parking is allowed 

on major commuter routes during rush hours. 

When cars are not moved in time, they are 

moved onto the boulevards and sidewalks and 

out of the traffic right-of-way. Some free public 

parking appears to be used by office workers, 

making it less available to visitors. 

On Independence Day most parking is eliminated, and some roads are closed. The subway 

system provides the primary mode of travel to 

get more than half a million people to the 

 311
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

TABLE 12: NATIONAL MALL PARKING LOCATIONS

Location Public Parking 

Parking for Visitors 

with Disabilities 

Tour Bus Loading/ 

Unloading 

Tour Bus 

Parking 

Parkway Drive 70 

Henry Bacon Drive 9 

Daniel French Drive 8 6 

Constitution Avenue 156 10 6 

Homefront Drive 5 3 

Madison Drive 192 22 10 

Jefferson Drive 127 27 

Independence Avenue 8 9 

Tidal Basin (paddleboat area) 132 9 

Homefront Drive 5 3 

12th Street (Constitution to Madison Drive) 48 

Ohio Drive SW (Arlington Memorial Bridge 

to I-395) 

150 5 

West Basin Drive 48 5 12 

East Basin Drive 8 5 

Raoul Wallenberg Place 6 7 

South of the Thomas Jefferson Memorial 

• Lot A 98 6 

• Lot B 72 4 

• Lot C 63 4 

Survey Lodge 2 

Ohio Drive SW (East Basin to Ohio Drive) 19 

Total 1,183 132 56 9 

National Mall. In the past the National Park 

Service explored underground parking in the 

park and concluded it would never be able to 

provide sufficient parking to meet demand. 

More than 20 years ago public underground 

parking was closed at several Smithsonian 

Institution museums. About 350 public parking 

spaces were closed at the National Air and Space 

Museum in 1983 as a result of security concerns. 

About 150 spaces were closed at the National 

Museum of Natural History in 1985. Only staff 

parking was provided at the National Museum 

of American History. While up to 550 spaces are 

no longer available for public parking, they and 

some additional parking spaces have been 

available to staff. 

Transit Access 

Since the late 1960s the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area has emphasized mass transit as 

the preferred means of public access and transportation to and within the city, which would 

reduce vehicle pollution and congestion. According to the 2003 visitor survey, 60% of 

visitors use the Metro rail and bus system and 

75% are comfortable using public transit (NPS 

2003e). 

The Washington Metropolitan Area Transit 

Authority operates the second largest rail transit 

system and the fifth largest bus network in the 

United States (WMATA 2008b). Metrorail 

serves 86 stations and has 106 miles of track. 

Metrobus serves the nation’s capital 24 hours a 

day, seven days a week with more than 1,500 

buses, all of which are accessible to people with 

disabilities (WMATA 2008b). Five distinct rail 

lines radiate out from the downtown core, and 

Metrobuses feed into the Metrorail stations, 

creating a comprehensive mass transit network. 

The Smithsonian Metro station (serving the 

Orange and Blue lines) is directly on the National Mall, but the station name does not tell 

people they have arrived at the National Mall. 

The accessible elevator entrance is farther away, 

just north of Independence Avenue. Within a 5-

minute walk are four other Metro stations serving four lines (Yellow, Green, Orange, and Blue), 

and within a 7- to 10-minute walk three additional subway stops serving five lines (Red, 

Yellow, Green, Orange, and Blue). 

Use at the Smithsonian Metro station, which is 

on the Mall, was analyzed for 2008, when 

439,375 people exited through this station. (The 

station has two exits, one north of Jefferson 

312
Access and Circulation: Public Access 

TABLE 13: EXITS AT THE SMITHSONIAN METRO STATION BY TIME OF DAY — 2008 

Morning 

(opening to 9:30 a.m.) 

Midday 

(9:30 a.m. to 3 p.m.)

Afternoon 

(3 to 7 p.m.) 

Evening 

(7 p.m. to closing) Total 

Exits Percentage Exits Percentage Exits Percentage Exits Percentage Exits Percentage 

Weekdays 61,697 41% 68,138 45% 17,271 11% 3,888 3% 151,020 34.4% 

Saturdays 11,282 7% 123,429 72% 32,027 19% 5,728 3% 172,495 39.3% 

Sundays 9,974 9% 85,873 74% 17,398 15% 2,583 2% 115,860 26.3% 

Total Exits 82,953 19% 277,440 63% 66,696 15% 12,199 3% 439,375 100% 

Drive and directly on the National Mall, and the 

other south of Independence Avenue.) This 

station receives more use on Saturdays (172,495 

exits, or more than 30% of the total) than on 

weekdays (151,020 exits, 34%), and the least 

amount of use on Sundays (115,860 exits, 26%). 

The majority of use is between the hours of 9:30 

a.m. and 3 p.m., when use varies from 45% on 

weekdays to 72%–74% on Saturdays and 

Sundays (see Table 13). It is assumed that these 

are the hours when most visitors to the National 

Mall, the Smithsonian Institution, and the 

National Gallery of Art would arrive. 

Figure 45 shows the combined monthly exits for 

weekdays, Saturdays, and Sundays between 9:30 

a.m. and 3 p.m. Peak usage months were March 

and April, which coincides with the Cherry Blossom Festival, with an average of 17,380 exits 

each month. The next highest months are July 

and June. 

Several public bus routes cross the National 

Mall. The Circulator bus service goes around the 

Mall and the Washington Monument on 

weekends, and also provides north-south service 

along 7th Street. Seven taxi or pedicab pickup 

locations have been designated on the National 

Mall. Water taxis have been proposed and tried 

at various times since the 1960s. 

Tour and Sightseeing Bus Access 

Tour Buses and School Buses 

According to the local tour bus industry, up to 

one-third of the visitors to the National Mall 

FIGURE 45: MONTHLY MIDDAY EXITS AT THE SMITHSONIAN METRO STATION — 2008 

9:30 a.m. – 3 p.m. 

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

18,000

20,000

Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec.

Midday Exits

Weekdays Saturdays Sundays

 313
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

arrive on planned bus tours. Tour buses are defined as vehicles holding more than 15 passengers; however, the vast majority of tour buses are 

over-the-road coaches. The D.C. Office of 

Planning estimates there are 1,200 tour buses on 

a peak-season day. School buses are typically 

used by local and regional school groups. 

Several companies operate sightseeing services 

around the National Mall, and it has been estimated that up to 1,200 tour buses travel in the 

District on a daily basis (D.C. Office of Planning). Through a concession contract the 

National Park Service offers Tourmobile, an 

interpretive transportation service with stops 

throughout the National Mall and service to 

Arlington National Cemetery. Tour bus pickup 

and drop-off locations convenient to the 

memorials and museums can accommodate up 

to 56 buses at one time. Other sightseeing buses, 

which include trolleys and double-decker buses, 

can pick up and drop off customers on the 

National Mall, but because of contract issues 

money cannot be exchanged on the National 

Mall. At each memorial and along Madison and 

Jefferson drives curb space is allocated for tour 

buses, parking for visitors with disabilities, taxi 

cab stands, and public parking. Little to no curb 

space is unallocated on the National Mall. 

Tour bus parking is provided in East Potomac 

Park, and tour buses frequently park along Ohio 

Drive. Some buses use Independence Avenue for 

drop-offs and pickups. Outside the National 

Mall there are 8 off-street parking locations 

throughout the city and 11 curbside areas. 

During high-use times these locations can see a 

great number of people. If there are 1,200 tour 

buses in the District daily, major attractions do 

not have adequate space to accommodate 

loading/unloading without causing traffic 

backups. 

Tour bus operators frequently provide meals for 

their patrons, and the resulting large quantities 

of trash from meal boxes, bottles, etc. may exceed the capacity of trash containers near tour 

bus stops, detracting from the appearance of the 

National Mall. Trash attracts birds and squirrels, 

which toss garbage around, as well as vermin. 

Tour Bus Parking 

Based on estimates by the D.C. Office of Planning, there are 1,200 tour buses in the city daily 

during the peak season. Most, if not all, tours to 

Washington visit the National Mall, in addition 

to sites throughout the city, such as the National 

Cathedral, Georgetown, and the U.S. Capitol. 

There are 9 tour bus parking spaces on the National Mall along Independence Avenue (see 

Table 12), and an additional 10 spaces at Hains 

Point in East Potomac Park. Other current bus 

parking locations include the southwest waterfront, downtown areas, and in Virginia. The 

National Park Service receives numerous comments about the visual impact of tour buses 

affecting views on the National Mall. 

To provide parking for an additional 1,180 tour 

buses on and the near the National Mall, the 

only option would be to reallocate all private 

vehicle parking to tours buses, including 770 

spaces on Madison and Jefferson drives and on 

Constitution and Independence avenues. 

TABLE 14: MAXIMUM STREET PARKING CAPACITY — NATIONAL MALL AND EAST POTOMAC PARK

Parking Locations 

Two-Hour 

Turnover 

Three-Hour 

Turnover 

Four-Hour 

Turnover 

Six-Hour 

Turnover 

National Mall 

• Private Vehicles — 770 4,620 3,080 2,310 1,540 

• Tour Buses — 255 1,530 1,020 765 510 

East Potomac Park 

• Private Vehicles — 400 2,400 1,600 1,200 800 

• Tour Buses — 130 780 520 390 260 

Total 

Private Vehicles 7,020 4,680 3,510 2,340 

Tour Buses 2,310 1,540 1,155 770 

NOTE: Only street parking is included, not parking areas at the Tidal Basin or in East Potomac Park. 

ASSUMPTIONS: The operating day during the peak season would be 12 hours. All private vehicle parking on National Mall roads (770 spaces) 

and East Potomac Park (398 spaces) would be reallocated to tour bus parking, displacing these drivers. A tour bus would require

approximately 60 feet of parking space, or three vehicle spaces, so the maximum number of buses that could be accommodated at one 

time would be approximately 385. 

314
Access and Circulation: The Pedestrian Environment 

Assuming that each tour bus would need 60 feet 

to park and that each vehicle parking space is 

approximately 20 feet, one tour bus would 

occupy three vehicle parking spaces. Therefore, 

approximately 255 tour buses could park on the 

National Mall at one time, and an additional 130 

in East Potomac Park. Table 14 shows the parking capacity for turnover rates ranging from two 

hours to six hours, assuming a 12-hour operating 

day. A four-hour turnover rate would allow an 

estimated 1,155 tour buses to be accommodated 

on and near the National Mall during a peakseason day, while approximately 3,510 private 

vehicles would be displaced. The National Park 

Service will continue to work with the District of 

Columbia, Destination DC, and other visitor 

industry stakeholders to identify tour bus management solutions that would meet the needs of 

all regional destinations, both public and private. 

Many initiatives, such as tour bus parking at 

Union Station and at RFK Stadium, have been 

explored, and additional collaborative efforts 

are needed to resolve this issue beyond the 

boundaries of the National Mall 

NPS Interpretive Visitor Transportation 

Tourmobile, the NPS concession-run interpretive visitor transportation service, has provided a 

range of bus services on and around the National Mall since the late 1960s. There is all-day 

hop-on / -off service on the National Mall route 

(12 stops) plus a one-way route between 

Arlington National Cemetery and Union Station. 

There is also a supplementary special visitor 

route at Arlington National Cemetery. In 2006 

the National Park Service completed the Visitor 

Transportation Study, as described in “Interrelationships with Other Plans and Projects.” 

THE PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT

According to a Brookings Institution Survey, 

Washington, D.C., ranked as the most walkable 

urban metropolitan area in the nation. The 

National Mall provides several of the components of a walkable urban environment since it is 

generally accessible by multiple modes of transportation. Nearly every destination can be 

reached on foot, and the National Mall provides 

a fairly level and easily walkable environment 

with one prominent elevation rising to the 

Washington Monument. While the terrain is 

quite level between destinations, memorials and 

museums frequently have staircases, and 

accessible entrances may be farther away and 

less convenient. Snow, ice, or rain can make 

stairs or some surfaces slippery. 

The overall distance between the Lincoln Memorial and the U.S. Capitol is about 2 miles. A 

person walking at a very brisk pace without 

stopping could cover its length in 45 to 60 minutes. While walking is the most common and 

preferred way of getting around, up to 25% of 

the public indicated in the 2003 visitor survey 

that they have difficulty walking long distances 

(NPS 2003e). 

Studies have shown that visitors typically go to 

up to five destinations a day, generally by walking. The result is that visitors traversing the 

National Mall may walk more than 5 miles to get 

back to their starting place. Exhaustion is a 

frequent complaint. Vehicle traffic affects the 

pedestrian experience in most areas of the 

National Mall because of the convergence of a 

number of high-volume commuter routes. 

Roads and pedestrian routes intersect frequently, and most crosswalks are striped and 

have traffic lights and lighted crossing symbols, 

while in a few areas there are crosswalk buttons 

or audio warning announcements. Crosswalks 

signals are timed more to accommodate traffic 

flows than pedestrian movements, so people 

typically have long waits at crosswalks and 

crossing times are short. At some locations 

pedestrians must push a button for a crossing 

light. D.C. law requires vehicles to stop for pedestrians in crosswalks; however, both motorists 

and pedestrians engage in risky and potentially 

dangerous behaviors. Jaywalking or crossing 

against red lights may be intentional or due to 

inattention, visual distractions, the size of a 

group, or an assessment that there is adequate 

time to cross before a vehicle comes. 

In many areas pedestrian walks are too narrow 

for groups or current levels of use, resulting in 

choke points or areas of pedestrian congestion 

or gridlock. Pedestrian volumes exceed walkway 

capacities in locations such as the Tidal Basin, 

near some intersections, and near the entrance 

to the Korean War Veterans Memorial. Extremely narrow walks on the Kutz Bridge cannot 

 315
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

comfortably accommodate two people, much 

less a stroller or bicycle. 

During peak times of national celebrations, such 

as the National Cherry Blossom Festival, pedestrian conditions around the Tidal Basin could be 

described as two slowly moving masses of people going in opposite directions. Because there 

are few alternatives, one person stopping to take 

a photograph can halt hundreds of people. 

Additional pedestrian challenges include varied 

and irregular surface materials, walking surfaces 

in need of repair, and lack of lighting in some 

locations. Some areas are without pedestrian 

amenities, such as sufficient seating or shaded 

seating, and facilities such as restrooms may be 

difficult to find. Outdated orientation maps are 

being replaced in phases and will be supplemented by pedestrian guide signs. 

Pedestrians and bicycle riders share the same 

walks through much of the National Mall. 

Because bicyclists travel at different speeds and 

pedestrians may be distracted by sightseeing, 

there is a potential for accidents. 

Nine wheelchairs are available at no cost for use 

at five memorials — Thomas Jefferson (1 wheelchair), Franklin Delano Roosevelt (2), World 

War II (4), Korean War Veterans (1), and Vietnam Veterans (1). Wheelchairs can only be used 

in the memorial where they are picked up; however, the wheelchairs at the Vietnam and Korean 

War veterans memorials can also be used at the 

Lincoln Memorial. 

BICYCLING

The relatively flat terrain of the National Mall 

makes it conducive to bicycling, which offers a 

pleasant, healthy, and nonpolluting means of 

transportation. Bicyclists and pedestrians share 

walkways, creating conflicts between uses. Between 2000 and 2002, 37.3% of bicycle crashes 

(296) occurred in the D.C. ward that includes 

the National Mall. Both commercial and NPS 

bicycling tours of the National Mall are offered. 

Bicycles must be left outside memorials or 

walked through them. 

Bicycles can be rented in the nearby downtown 

area, at the Old Post Office Tower near Pennsylvania Avenue, and near Thompson’s Boat Center in Rock Creek Park. 

The Washington Area Bicyclist Association 

(WABA) is an organization dedicated to promoting bicycling and has an extensive website 

providing information, maps, and bicycle safety 

programs. WABA volunteers frequently host 

popular bicycle parking during special events. 

In addition to recreational biking, there is a large 

population of bicycle commuters. The National 

Capital Planning Commission estimated in 2005 

that there were 20,000 bicycle commuters, many 

of whom traverse the National Mall. In 2007 and 

2008 the National Park Service installed 110 

additional two-bike racks on the National Mall 

to supplement the 22 existing bike racks. This 

project was partially funded by D.C. Department 

of Transportation. The District of Columbia has 

recently embarked on a bike-sharing program, 

with 120 bikes available to members at 10 selfservice racks in the downtown area. At this 

point, the program is not available to short-term 

users such as tourists. 

Bicycling routes within other national park units, 

such as George Washington Memorial Parkway, 

Rock Creek Park, and the Chesapeake and Ohio 

Canal, have connections to the National Mall. 

The East Coast Greenway, a long-distance 

bicycle trail, goes through the National Mall. 

Midday is a popular time for competitive 

training rides, and East Potomac Park sees a 

great many of these riders. 

Pedicabs, which are treated as taxicabs, are an 

increasingly common form of transportation on 

the National Mall.

316
VISITOR EXPERIENCE

The National Mall provides an essential American experience for citizens and guests from 

around the world. Located in the heart of the 

nation’s capital, this space was originally 

planned to epitomize our democratic form of 

government, and its great memorials commemorate our history as a nation. However, the 

symbolic landscape has also become the nation’s 

front yard and its premier civic forum, where 

citizens come to exercise their First Amendment 

rights, to take part in national celebrations like 

the inauguration of a president or the Fourth of 

July, and to attend various special events. In 

addition, recreational activities have taken place 

here since the late 1800s, when Congress created 

Potomac Park for the “recreation and pleasure 

of the people.” All of these purposes — symbolic, commemorative, civic, and recreational — 

are integral to present-day visitor experiences on 

the National Mall. 

In accordance with the NPS Organic Act and 

Management Policies 2006, one of the mandates 

of the National Park Service is to provide visitor 

enjoyment opportunities that are uniquely 

suited to the superlative natural and cultural 

resources found within the national park system, 

which includes the National Mall. 

The types of experiences that visitors have on 

the National Mall depend on their backgrounds, 

expectations, available opportunities and facilities, needs, and desires. Specific topics discussed 

in this chapter include elements of the visitor 

experience (destinations, visual experiences, and 

sounds), information and education, recreational opportunities, visitor facilities and amenities, 

and health and safety. Visitor use trends are 

discussed to give an idea of future use levels at 

memorials on the National Mall. (Experiences of 

participants in demonstrations, national 

celebrations, or special events are described 

beginning on page 303, and experiences related 

to visitor access or circulation are discussed 

beginning on page 309.) 

VISITOR USE CHARACTERISTICS

Visitor information was obtained in multiple 

ways. NPS staff annually distribute a visitor 

survey. Several recent detailed surveys have 

provided a great deal of visitor information. 

Also, public comments have been solicited on 

the National Mall planning effort. 

The annual “Visitor Satisfaction Survey,” which 

complies with the Government Performance 

and Results Act, measures each park unit’s 

performance. Visitors are asked to indicate their 

level of satisfaction in topic areas such as park 

facilities, visitor services, and recreational 

opportunities. The analysis of survey results over 

a period of several years indicates that 96% of 

the respondents were satisfied with their visits. 

However, from a facilities standpoint, restrooms 

need improvement, and from a visitor services 

standpoint, commercial services (such as food 

and retail) could be improved. 

The 2003 Washington, D.C., Visitor Transportation Survey profiled the findings of visitor 

surveys conducted in the spring and summer of 

2003 (NPS 2003e). While the focus of the report 

was on transportation planning in and around 

the central visitor core of downtown Washington, most of the information describes general 

visitor characteristics that are applicable to this 

planning effort. 

In September 2008 another visitor survey was 

undertaken related to the socioeconomic impact 

of the National Mall and visitor destinations in 

the monumental core, which encompasses the 

National Mall. The survey was conducted by the 

School of Recreation, Health, and Tourism at 

George Mason University. Several questions 

were similar to those in the 2003 transportation 

survey and allowed the National Park Service to 

examine the impact of new destinations, such as 

World War II Memorial, the Newseum, and the 

National Museum of the American Indian. 

As part of National Mall plan, a planning website 

(www.nps.gov/nationalmallplan) was established, and public comments were requested on 

three of the four newsletters that have been 

issued for this planning project. Newsletter 1, 

which was released in fall 2006, included 15 

scoping topics for visitors to comment on, and 

the results were published in the April 2007 

317
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Public Scoping Comments Report. Comments on 

the preliminary range of alternatives that were 

presented in newsletter 3 (fall 2007) were also 

solicited and were summarized in Newsletter 3 

Comment Report. Comments were analyzed by 

the George Mason University School of Recreation, Health, and Tourism. Comments on the 

preliminary preferred alternative, which was 

presented in newsletter 4 (winter 2009), were 

also solicited. 

Visitor Profiles 

Visitor surveys were conducted in 2003 and 

2008 to identify characteristics of visitors and to 

identify needs to be addressed. Visitors come to 

experience and learn more about our national 

capital and its well-known memorials and the 

iconic symbols of our country. For many visitors, a trip to Washington, D.C., is an opportunity to learn about our government, the history of 

our nation, and our way of life — a shared historical journey often made with family and 

friends. 

Most visitors come with family and friends. In 

the 2008 survey the six states with the highest 

number of respondents were Virginia, California, Maryland, New York, Florida, and 

Pennsylvania. International visitors were primarily from Europe, with the most visitors from 

the United Kingdom, followed by Australia. 

Visitor Activities 

The visitor study conducted in the fall of 2008 

for the National Park Service presents an overview of what visitors do when they come to the 

National Mall (NPS 2009e). Table 15 highlights 

some of the trip and visitor characteristics from 

this study. 

The 2008 visitor study also asked respondents to 

indicate their primary reason for visiting the 

National Mall. For this question they were asked 

to select only one of eight responses. The most 

common response was the desire to visit the 

monuments and memorials on the National Mall 

(31.7%; see Table 16). Those who indicated 

“other” (16.4%) were asked to write out their 

primary reason for visiting; the most common 

responses were meeting/convention, reunion, a 

family member was visiting them, an event or 

concert, they were on a stopover en route to a 

different destination, or they had multiple 

reasons and could not select one response. 

Nevertheless, visiting the monuments and memorials far outpaced any other reason for 

visiting the National Mall. 

TABLE 16: PRIMARY REASON FOR VISITING THE 

NATIONAL MALL

Frequency Percentage 

Visit Monuments and Memorials 190 31.7 

Other 98 16.4 

Visit Friends/Relatives 71 11.9 

Resident 63 10.5 

Business 61 10.2 

Visit Museums 55 9.2 

Visit Federal Sites 54 9.0 

Total 599 100 

SOURCE: NPS 2009. 

Most Important Activity 

Visitors were asked to list all of the activities in 

which they participated and then to write out 

the one activity that was the most important to 

their visit. They were requested to list only one, 

and they also were given the option to indicate 

that no activity was most important (see Table 

17). The most frequent response (67.2%) was 

visiting the National Mall monuments and memorials, followed by visiting museum sites 

(16.6%). The most common response for those 

indicating “other” (7.6%) was visiting the White 

House, either for work or family-related 

reasons. 

TABLE 15: TRIP AND VISITOR CHARACTERISTICS — 2008

NATIONAL MALL VISITOR STUDY

Questionnaire Item Finding 

Average length of stay (day-trippers) 7.2 hours (18.9% of 

sample) 

Average length of stay (overnight 

guests) 

4.4 days (81.1% of 

sample) 

Average group size 2.7 people 

Average respondent age 49.7 years 

Average number of visits 3.7 visits 

SOURCE: NPS 2009. 

Number of survey respondents = 644. 

Visitor study respondents were also asked to 

indicate from a list of 54 options which sites they 

visited during their entire stay. Table 18 shows 

the top 15 sites, the top 5 of which are monuments and memorials. 

318
Visitor Experience: Visitation 

SOURCE: NPS 2009. 

TABLE 18: TOP 15 DESTINATIONS FOR NATIONAL 

MALL VISITORS

Destination 

Percentage Who 

Visited 

Lincoln Memorial 83.2 

Washington Monument 81.9 

World War II Memorial 81.4 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial 72.1 

Korean War Veterans Memorial 61.2 

U.S. Capitol 54.8 

The White House 52.0 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial 48.5 

National Air & Space Museum 48.2 

Arlington National Cemetery 43.9 

Downtown Restaurants 40.5 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial 34.6 

Union Station 33.7 

National Museum of Natural History 32.6 

Smithsonian Castle 31.6 

Source: NPS 2009. 

NOTE: The National Museum of Natural History was closed for renovation during this period, and the U.S. Capitol Visitor Center was not yet 

open. 

The visitor survey showed that overnight guests 

visited on average 13.4 sites, while day-trippers 

visited 7.7 sites. 

VISITATION 

This section only looks at visitor use at certain 

monuments and memorials on the National Mall. 

It does not take into account attendance at demonstrations, national celebrations, or special 

events, when hundreds of thousands of people 

may come. For example, the Fourth of July celebration may attract 500,000–700,000 people to 

the National Mall, and Barack Obama’s inauguration attracted 1.8 million people. See “Demonstrations, Special Events, and National 

Celebrations” (page 303) for more information. 

Past Visitor Use Trends 

The National Park Service has policies and 

procedures for estimating visitation at seven 

sites on the National Mall — Washington Monument, World War II Memorial, Vietnam 

Veterans Memorial, Lincoln Memorial, Korean 

War Veterans Memorial, Franklin Delano 

Roosevelt Memorial, and Thomas Jefferson 

Memorial. However, there are no policies or 

procedures for estimating the total amount of 

use at First Amendment demonstrations, national celebrations, permitted special events, or 

daily recreational use; no NPS statistics are kept 

for these events. Event organizers state expected 

attendance levels, but these estimates have 

sometimes been highly inaccurate. 

TABLE 17: MOST IMPORTANT ACTIVITY

Activity 

Response 

Frequency Percentage 

Visit National Mall monuments 

and memorials 365 67.2 

Visit museum sites 90 16.6 

Exercise or athletics 8 1.5 

Charter bus or sightseeing tour 7 1.3 

Learn/research history 9 1.7 

Ranger talks/walks 1 0.2 

Entertainment/special events 10 1.8 

Relaxing 8 1.5 

Eating and drinking at 

restaurants/bars 4 0.7 

Other 41 7.6 

Total 543 100.0 

Figure 46 shows total visitation for four memorials on the National Mall dating back to 1995 — 

the Washington Monument, Vietnam Veterans 

Memorial, Lincoln Memorial, and Thomas 

Jefferson Memorial; visitation in 1995 at these 

four sites totaled just a little over 4 million visits. 

After the Korean War Veterans Memorial 

opened in 1995, total visitation increased by 

about 700,000 visits (a 17% increase). After the 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial opened in 

1997, total visitation increased by about 3.6 

million visits (a 75% increase). In 1998 visitation 

more than doubled, from 8.3 million to 19.1 million visits, then gradually dropped to 12.9 million visits by 2003. When the World War II Memorial opened in 2004, total visitation increased 

to 21.4 million (a 65% increase). Visitation since 

2004 has remained fairly stable, averaging about 

21.1 million visits per year (see Table 19). 

At the World War II Memorial visitation declined from about 5.4 million visits in 2004 to 3.6 

million in 2006, then rose to over 4 million in 

2007 and 2008. Visits at the Washington Monument were low in 2004 and 2005 because the 

monument was closed from October 2004 

through March 2005 so the grounds could be 

rehabilitated and security provided. In July and 

August 2008 hours were extended until 10 p.m., 

resulting in 671,081 visits in 2008, an increase of 

about 13.5% from 2005. 

 319
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

FIGURE 46: TOTAL VISITATION AT NATIONAL MALL SITES — 1995–2008 

SOURCE: NPS Public Use Statistics Office (http://www.nature.nps.gov/stats/). 

NOTE: Recreational visits include Washington Monument, Vietnam Veterans Memorial, Lincoln Memorial, and Thomas Jefferson Memorial since 1995; 

plus Korean War Veterans Memorial since 1996; plus Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial since 1997; plus World War II Memorial since 2004. It is 

assumed that one person will visit multiple sites, and there is no way to estimate the total number of people.

0

5,000,000

10,000,000

15,000,000

20,000,000

25,000,000

19951996199719981999200020012002200320042005200620072008

Total Recreation Visits

World War II Memorial o

Franklin Delano Roosevelt 

Memorial opens 

pens

Korean War Veterans Memorial 

opens 

It is important to remember that these numbers 

are only the number of visits recorded by the 

National Park Service, not the number of people, and according to visitor surveys most 

visitors go to multiple sites per day. As previously mentioned, these numbers do not include 

visits by people who do not go to one of these 

seven sites, including participants in demonstrations, national celebrations, or special events. 

There are currently no user capacity limits for 

any areas of the National Mall. 

TABLE 19: RECREATIONAL VISITS TO NATIONAL MALL SITES — 2004–2008 

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 

Average 

Annual Visits

Washington Monumenta 378,416b 467,550 b 586,603 591,081 671,031c 538,936 

World War II Memorial 5,382,498d4,410,379 3,865,430 4,079,606 4,153,749 4,378,332 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial 3,789,889 3,799,968 3,629,739 3,633,793 4,243,573 3,819,392 

Lincoln Memorial 2,988,650 3,638,806 3,810,347 4,214,167 4,678,861 3,866,166 

Korean War Veterans Memorial 3,610,796 3,214,467 3,248,757 3,433,663 3,654,976 3,432,532 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial 3,038,046 2,852,565 2,662,016 2,751,725 2,622,806 2,785,432 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial 2,200,371 2,312,726 2,219,255 2,327,254 2,363,263 2,284,574 

Total 21,388,666 20,696,461 20,022,147 21,031,289 22,388,259 21,105,364 

SOURCE: NPS Public Use Statistics Office (http://www.nature.nps.gov/stats/). 

NOTE: The National Park Service collects visitation data only for these seven sites on the National Mall. No estimates are made for demonstrations, national 

celebrations, or special events. The totals only represent the number of visits, not the total number of people. It is assumed that one person will visit 

multiple sites, and there is no way to estimate the total number of people. Impacts of use are based on the number of site visits. 

a. The number of visitors inside the Washington Monument is limited to 80 people. 

b. Washington Monument closed from October 2004 to March 2005 for landscaping of the surrounding grounds. 

c. Visitor hours extended to 10 p.m. during July and August. 

d. First year World War II Memorial opened. 

320
Visitor Experience: Visitation 

Projected Visitor Use Trends 

Future visitation projections to memorials on 

the National Mall are based on an analysis of 

recreational visits since 1995. As previously described, three new memorials opened during 

this period, and each time visitation surged and 

then leveled off (visitation increased by 75% 

after the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial 

opened in 1997, and by 65% after the World 

War II Memorial opened in 2004). 

Two of the three projects that Congress has 

authorized — the Vietnam Veterans Memorial 

Center and the Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial — will be on the National Mall and will be 

managed by the National Park Service. The third 

project, the National Museum of African American History and Culture, will be managed by the 

Smithsonian Institution. These projects will 

bring more people to the National Mall, just as 

previous projects have. Visitation to the Smithsonian Institution museums has not been considered in projecting future visitation for the 

National Mall. 

Three future visitation scenarios were developed, as described below and shown in Figure 

47: 

1. Over the past five years (since the World 

War II Memorial was opened) total average 

annual visitation has grown at about 1.25% 

per year. This scenario assumes that this 

rate of growth would continue. Using 

average annual visitation during this period 

as the baseline (21.1 million annual visits), a 

1.25% growth rate would result in total 

annual use of 25.8 million visits in 20 years. 

2. The second scenario takes into account 

likely visitation increases once the Martin 

Luther King, Jr. Memorial and the Vietnam 

Veterans Memorial Center open in the 

future. Once these memorials have opened, 

it is expected that visitor use would increase 

initially (conservatively figured at a 4% 

average annual increase for 10 years), but 

would then level off (decreasing to a 2% 

average annual increase for the next 10 

years). Using average annual visitation over 

FIGURE 47: 20-YEAR VISITATION PROJECTIONS AT NATIONAL MALL MEMORIALS

0

5,000,000

10,000,000

15,000,000

20,000,000

25,000,000

30,000,000

35,000,000

40,000,000

45,000,000

1995199719992001200320052007

Year 1Year 3Year 5Year 7Year 9

Year 11Year 13Year 15Year 17Year 19

Years / Future Years

Total Recreation Visits

Historic Data 1.25% Increase 4% Increase/2% Increase Trendline Projection

 321
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

the past five years as the baseline (21.1 

million visits), total annual use in 20 years 

would be about 38 million visits. 

3. The third scenario is a trend line based on a 

regression analysis of historical data since 

1995. Under this scenario total annual use 

in 20 years would be about 42.5 million 

visits. 

These projections are only for visits to memorials on the National Mall where visitor use is 

tracked. It is important to remember that the 

number of visits does not equal the number of 

people. Based on survey information, visitors go 

to multiple sites while they are on the National 

Mall, so if visitors went to all seven memorials 

where numbers are monitored, then the number 

of people would be one-seventh of total recreation visits (that is, 42.5 million would correspond 

with approximately 6.1 million people). 

ELEMENTS OF THE VISITOR 

EXPERIENCE

Monuments and Memorials 

Some memorials, like the Washington Monument, the Lincoln Memorial, and the Thomas 

Jefferson Memorial, are internationally known 

symbols of our nation, while others are less well 

known. The major memorials are the primary 

attractions that make the National Mall the 

place where Americans and others contemplate 

our past and our ideals and values. There are five 

presidential memorials (George Washington, 

Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, Ulysses S. 

Grant, and Franklin Delano Roosevelt), and four 

war-related memorials (the Vietnam Veterans, 

Korean War Veterans, the World War II, and the 

D.C. War memorials). 

Lesser known memorials honor national heroes 

such as the 56 Signers of the Declaration of Independence, George Mason, John Paul Jones, 

and John Ericcson. Other memorials, plaques, or 

areas commemorate events or cultural resources 

(such as the First Air Mail Flight, the Jefferson 

Pier Marker, the former location of a canal), or 

international friendship (the German-American 

Friendship Garden, the Japanese pagoda and 

lantern, and the cherry trees around the Tidal 

Basin). 

The memorials are lit at night and contribute to 

the special nighttime character of the National 

Mall. Several memorials have related extensive 

water features or reflecting pools nearby. Many 

of the monuments and memorials are outdoor 

facilities. The public is free to enter and walk 

around memorials at any time of the day or 

night, which is authorized by 16 USC 6802(d) 

(3)(C). Staffed facilities, such as bookstores and 

information stations associated with particular 

monuments and memorials, are generally open 

from 9:30 a.m. to 8:30 p.m. 

In all visitor surveys respondents have said that 

they valued the National Mall as a respectful 

place and a place for quiet reflection, peace, and 

meditation. They mentioned their enjoyment of 

and desire to keep the open and unobstructed 

green space in the center of the Mall, with expansive views to the river. They also mentioned 

the cultural and historical ideas associated with a 

public cultural space to remember those who 

have contributed much to the country, the 

preservation of American history, and a place of 

pride, inspiration, and patriotism. Additional 

comments provided in response to newsletter 3 

focused on the value of the National Mall as our 

national civic gathering space and the importance of First Amendment rights within this 

space. 

The Washington Monument, the Lincoln 

Memorial, and the Thomas Jefferson Memorial 

are recognized as symbols of the nation, and 

they contribute to the unique and recognizable 

day- and nighttime character of Washington, 

D.C. Together with the White House and the 

U.S. Capitol, they comprise five significant icons 

for our nation. These visually prominent symbols are within important vistas or are the visual 

terminus of planned vistas. Special lighting 

ensures that these icons dominate the nighttime 

character of Washington, D.C. Activities with 

these symbols as backdrops help make the 

National Mall one of the most photographed 

places in our country. 

Washington Monument 

The Monument. The Washington Monument, 

the most prominent visual feature in Washington, D.C., provides a visual orientation point for 

people on the ground, as well as air travelers. 

322
Visitor Experience: Elements of the Visitor Experience 

The monument is on the top of a hill, and its 

large granite plaza is encircled by 50 American 

flags and limestone benches. Here visitors wait 

for a tour or enjoy vistas in all directions. 

After visitors enter through a security checkpoint (the current checkpoint on the east side is 

temporary), they see several exhibits and a statue 

of George Washington before taking the elevator to the top of the monument. From that 

vantage point they can look out windows in all 

directions. To the north the view focuses on the 

White House and the city beyond; to the east, 

the Capitol, with the symmetrically planted rows 

of elm trees and a wide panel of turf on the Mall 

in the foreground; to the south, the Thomas 

Jefferson Memorial and the Tidal Basin; and to 

the west, the World War II Memorial, the Lincoln Memorial and the reflecting pool, and 

Arlington National Cemetery across the Potomac River. 

Guides and exhibits at the ground and upper 

levels provide a variety of educational content. 

In addition, the elevator pauses in several 

locations on the way down so that visitors can 

see some of the nearly 200 carved commemorative stones that line the interior walls. 

Beginning in the summer of 2008 tour hours 

were extended to 10 p.m., which almost doubled 

the number of people going to the top of the 

memorial. Visitation is limited to approximately 

80 people within the monument at any one time 

because of safety codes, so visitors must get free, 

timed tickets on the day they visit. Tickets are 

obtained at Monument Lodge and for a small fee 

are available on the internet. Frequently there is 

a visitor queue waiting for tickets, and most 

tickets are issued by 9 a.m. when the office 

opens. When hours were extended until 10 p.m., 

tickets were available until about noon. 

The Grounds. Within the last six years new 

walkways and walls have been constructed, 

changing use patterns at the Sylvan Theater. 

Small men’s and women’s restrooms are also 

available near the Sylvan Theater on the southwest corner of 15th Street and Independence 

Avenue. Recreation fields used by teams are 

north of the monument, but visitors may enjoy 

all of the grounds for various activities, from 

concerts to kite flying, and from demonstrations 

to the Fourth of July celebration. A recreation 

field is also located south of Independence 

Avenue. 

Monument Lodge is a short distance to the east 

of the monument and offers restrooms, a ticket 

window, and a bookstore. Survey Lodge is 

southwest of the monument and is used as the 

park ranger office, with an information desk and 

two public restrooms; this building is not easily 

found or identified by the public. 

Lincoln Memorial 

The Memorial. The Lincoln Memorial on the 

west end of the National Mall is approached by a 

series of wide stone stairs from the east. Near the 

top of the steps is an inscription marking the 

location where Martin Luther King Jr. gave his 

“I Have a Dream” speech during the 1963 March 

on Washington. From the top of the steps, 

visitors enter the chamber, lit by alabaster 

skylights and dominated by the larger than life 

seated statue of Abraham Lincoln. The atmosphere is generally respectful and hushed as 

people photograph the statue, read the 

Gettysburg Address or the Second Inaugural 

Address, or enjoy murals in the side chambers. 

There is no seating for visitors inside the 

chambers. The memorial is staffed from 8 a.m. to 

midnight, and no entrance tickets are required. 

Visitors looking east from the memorial see a 

classic view of the U.S. Capitol, with the World 

War II Memorial and the Washington Monument in the foreground. The memorial steps also 

form an informal amphitheater for enjoying the 

Fourth of July celebration or views of the capital 

city. Looking west from the memorial visitors 

can enjoy views of Arlington Memorial Bridge 

and Arlington National Cemetery, with Arlington House located above the Women in Military 

Service to America Memorial and the Kennedy 

gravesites. 

The Grounds. The long, narrow reflecting pool 

extends to the World War II Memorial and is the 

most visually prominent part of the grounds 

around the Lincoln Memorial. From the ground 

the Washington Monument dominates the view 

looking east. A narrow stone edge flanks the 

reflecting pool and is insufficient for the numbers of people who desire to walk along the edge 

of the pool and enjoy the views. Resulting social 

trails have made it impossible to maintain the 

 323
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

turf. Visitors have voiced concerns about the 

lack of grass and the pool’s water quality and appearance. Walks to both the north and south of 

the reflecting pool are pleasantly shaded by elms 

in the summer, but the walks do not have a 

strong visual relationship to the memorials at 

either end of the pool. 

To the west and north of the memorial are a 

number of historic elements — Arlington Memorial Bridge, the ceremonial Watergate steps, 

and the Constitution Avenue terminus belvedere. There are sand volleyball courts and 

ballfields in the area. Ohio Drive passes under 

Memorial Bridge and Parkway Drive adjacent to 

the Potomac River. 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial 

The Memorial. The main entrance to the 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial is from the north 

staircase. From the rotunda visitors have views 

in four directions, and they can use benches to 

rest and contemplate Jefferson and his contributions to our nation. Looking across the steps 

to the north, visitors can see the White House 

and the Washington Monument, with the Tidal 

Basin in the foreground. Visiting the memorial 

does not require an entrance ticket. 

The front stairs of the memorial are frequently 

used for informal seating during the National 

Cherry Blossom Festival and at other times. The 

wide plaza at the base of the stairs and the wide 

curved walks around the memorial accommodate many people and can be flexibly used for 

national celebrations. The wall at the north edge 

of the plaza, which has been sinking, will be 

stabilized and repaired. 

The Grounds. The Thomas Jefferson Memorial 

is surrounded by temporary concrete security 

barriers that are visually out of character with 

the memorial’s setting. A security perimeter is to 

be built that would be in keeping with the memorial’s historic character. South of the memorial, a rectangular turf area is surrounded by a 

road that was at one time a parking lot, but now 

provides limited maintenance access. Elsewhere 

the grounds are generally informal in layout, and 

vegetation is characterized by large shade trees 

and groupings of flowering cherry trees. Walks 

in the area are asphalt and exposed aggregate 

concrete. 

Ulysses S. Grant Memorial / Union Square 

The Ulysses S. Grant Memorial is in Union 

Square at the east end of the National Mall, just 

west of the Capitol grounds. The National Park 

Service has provided several wayside exhibit 

signs with information about President Grant 

and the memorial. 

Looking east, the memorial is a prominent 

foreground for the U.S. Capitol building, and it 

is frequently the location for group photographs. 

Looking west across a 4.3-acre reflecting pool, 

the Washington Monument dominates the vista, 

with the towers of Smithsonian Castle to the 

south. The reflecting pool’s size is an obstacle to 

pedestrian circulation, and its water quality 

frequently generates comments about smell or 

appearance. 

World War II Memorial 

The World War II Memorial is within the major 

east-west axis between the Lincoln Memorial 

and the U.S. Capitol. Many visitors to this memorial are war veterans. The layout of the 

memorial is formal and symmetrical. An electronic World War II database contains the 

names of those who submitted information 

about their service. 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial 

At the Vietnam Veterans Memorial visitors walk 

along the memorial wall quietly and with reverence, frequently pausing to look at the remembrances left at the wall. Some visitors look 

through catalogs at both ends of the wall that list 

where names can be found. Nonperishable items 

left at the wall are collected and curated by the 

National Park Service; the collection has now 

exceeded 100,000 items. Some of these items are 

on a rotating display at the Smithsonian’s 

National Museum of American History. 

Korean War Veterans Memorial 

The design of the Korean War Veterans Memorial offers a contemplative setting to commemorate this international conflict. The polished 

granite wall along the south edge of the 

memorial helps create a quiet setting. 

324
Visitor Experience: Elements of the Visitor Experience 

D.C. War Memorial 

The classical D.C. War Memorial was designed 

as a bandstand, 40 feet in diameter and large 

enough to hold the 80-member U.S. Marine 

Corps Band. The memorial is in a grove of trees 

(Ash Woods) and is north of Independence Avenue between the World War II and Korean War 

Veterans memorials. 

George Mason Memorial 

Located south of Outlet Bridge and east of Ohio 

Drive, the George Mason Memorial was built 

around a historic fountain (Fountain 4) and is 

surrounded by a landscaped perennial garden 

and flowering trees. 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial 

The Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial, along 

the west side of the Tidal Basin, takes a landscape approach, with shade trees, waterfalls, 

statuary, and quiet alcoves to create the feeling 

of a secluded garden. The memorial’s outdoor 

rooms entice visitors to stroll and learn more 

about Roosevelt’s four terms as president. There 

are several viewpoints of the Tidal Basin under 

flowering cherry trees. Presidential images and 

sculpture are much closer to life scale than at the 

four other presidential memorials on the National Mall. Seating is provided in several areas, 

and the last room was designed to be used for 

programs and lectures. Water is used effectively 

to muffle the noise of aircraft at the nearby 

Ronald Reagan Airport. 

Other Visitor Destinations 

In addition to the iconic memorials on the 

National Mall, there are hundreds of visitor 

destinations in the metropolitan area. Nearby 

are the museums of the National Gallery of Art 

and the Smithsonian Institution, the National 

Archives, the U.S. Capitol, the Library of Congress, the U.S. Botanic Garden, the Supreme 

Court, the Bureau of Engraving and Printing, 

and the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum. 

Several privately owned museums or exhibitions 

(Newseum, Spy Museum, Crime and Punishment, Madame Tussauds) also contribute to the 

rich tourist environment adjacent to the National Mall. Visitor comments frequently note 

that they were surprised at how much there is to 

do, or that they needed to plan much more time 

for their next visit. 

Future Projects on the National Mall 

As previously described, three future projects 

that have been authorized by Congress for the 

National Mall would expand visitor 

opportunities: 

• Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial — The 

Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial is 

planned for the northwest area of the Tidal 

Basin. The memorial would increase opportunities for visitors to understand American 

history and the civil rights movement, and it 

would be likely to increase the number of 

African-Americans visiting the National 

Mall. The memorial will have restrooms, a 

bookstore, and an information area. After 

completion, the memorial will be managed 

by the National Park Service. 

• Vietnam Veterans Memorial Center — A 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial Center will be 

constructed northwest and across the street 

from the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. The 

underground facility will include exhibits, 

restrooms, information, and a bookstore. It 

can be expected to increase opportunities 

for those wishing to learn more about the 

Vietnam War era. After completion, the 

center will be managed by the National 

Park Service. 

• National Museum of African American 

History and Culture — The National Museum of African American History and 

Culture is to be built south of Constitution 

Avenue between 14th and 15th streets NW. 

The land has been transferred from the 

National Park Service to the Smithsonian 

Institution. Like the Martin Luther King, Jr. 

Memorial, the museum is likely to increase 

the numbers of African-Americans visiting 

the National Mall. 

Demonstrations, Special Events, 

and National Celebrations 

As previously discussed, demonstrations and 

special events take place nearly continually on 

the National Mall, and general visitors are 

affected to varying degrees. When tents and 

 325
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

stages are erected for national celebrations and 

special events, views to the memorials and 

buildings that are symbols of our nation may be 

periodically blocked, and recreational pursuits 

and league play may have to be temporarily 

suspended. Visitors’ ability to cross streets or to 

use the visitor transportation system may also be 

occasionally disrupted. 

Music, speeches, and rallies also affect visitor 

experiences. The sounds of an event are more 

evident the closer one is to an event. Sounds may 

interrupt visitors’ desired experiences for contemplation, or they may provide education and 

enjoyment through stirring speeches, music, or 

engaging entertainment. 

Visitors to the National Mall may not be aware 

in advance that such permitted activities are 

taking place and they may need to adjust their 

plans. Depending on why people are visiting the 

National Mall, they may find special park uses 

serendipitous, fun, and interesting, or an annoyance that affects their ability to move between 

planned destinations and activities. 

Visual Experiences 

The National Mall is one of the most photographed, visually recognizable, and symbolic 

locations in the United States. Visual experiences range from the monumental and formal to 

intimately scaled, informal areas. Visitors’ experiences are dominated by this interplay of formal 

and informal elements of the historic landscape. 

The formal landscapes typically align with the 

east-west vista of the great cross axis of the 

National Mall; the informal landscapes are 

generally at the west end of the National Mall 

and lying north and south of the east-west vista. 

The most prominent visual features are symbols 

of our country, with the Washington Monument 

at the center, and formally placed memorials or 

buildings including the White House, the U.S. 

Capitol, the Lincoln Memorial, and the Thomas 

Jefferson Memorial. 

Visitors have said that they expect to be proud of 

the nation’s front yard, where citizens and guests 

can feel welcome. Visitors have commented that 

the visual appearance of landscaped areas 

throughout the National Mall is unacceptable. 

Deteriorated conditions are the result of very 

high levels of use, with the most noticeable 

impacts being to the turf. Before planning began, 

social trails were found in most places where the 

public walks — through trees, along paved walkways, and across lawn corners. New measures 

such as post-and-chain fencing around lawn 

areas impede social trails and help protect turf 

conditions, improving the appearance. Visitors 

are also concerned about algae in water features, 

the appearance and odor of water, and the 

volume of resident duck and Canada geese 

droppings on walks and turf. 

The Great Cross Axis 

Dominating the visual experience is the planned 

east-west vista between the U.S. Capitol and the 

Lincoln Memorial and the shorter north-south 

vista between the Thomas Jefferson Memorial 

and the White House. The vistas intersect near 

the Washington Monument. Today visitors 

greatly appreciate these vistas and their 

symbolism. 

The East-West Vista 

The east-west vista has a formal feeling because 

of its linear layout, stretching nearly 2 miles from 

Union Square to the Lincoln Memorial. For 

much of its length multiple rows of regularly 

spaced trees define the view corridor. Pedestrian 

circulation generally aligns with the vista and 

draws visitors along its length. Visual and 

commemorative points or widened areas include 

Union Square, the Washington Monument 

grounds, the World War II Memorial, and the 

Lincoln Memorial. 

• Union Square — Union Square visually 

connects the National Mall to the U.S. 

Capitol. At the east end of Union Square is 

the Ulysses S. Grant Memorial, a prominent 

foreground to the Capitol building and 

grounds and symbolically connecting to the 

Lincoln Memorial at the west end. Looking 

west from the Grant Memorial the vista is 

immediately dominated by the large curved 

Capitol Reflecting Pool with the Washington Monument in the distance; the Lincoln 

Memorial is not easily visible from this 

location. As visitors walk around the pool, 

they can see the diagonal vistas along 

Maryland Avenue SW and Pennsylvania 

Avenue NW. From Union Square looking 

326
Visitor Experience: Elements of the Visitor Experience 

to the north is the open space planned for 

the U.S. Senate Youth Park and U.S. 

Botanic Garden Education and Outreach 

Center, and to the south the U.S. Botanic 

Garden. 

• The Mall — The Mall, with broad central 

turf panels bordered by formal rows of 

American elm trees, extends from 3rd to 

14th Street. Four wide parallel walkways 

run the length of the Mall and are crossed 

by north-south walks that provide visual 

and physical access to museums, the 

National Archives, and the downtown area. 

Thirteen buildings and two sculpture 

gardens flank the north and south sides of 

the Mall; most of the buildings are open to 

the public and are managed by either the 

Smithsonian Institution or the National 

Gallery of Art. Looking north on 4th Street 

visitors can see the red brick Pension 

Building/National Building Museum. At the 

location where 8th Street would cross the 

Mall, visitors can look through the National 

Gallery of Art Sculpture Garden to see the 

National Archives, and to the south the 

sunken Hirshhorn Sculpture Garden. 

 Visitors taking the Metro to the National 

Mall emerge at 12th Street, where they have 

their first view of the Mall, with the 

Washington Monument to the west, the 

National Museum of Natural History to the 

north, the U.S. Capitol to the east, and 

Smithsonian Castle to the south. The simple 

formal landscape continues to 14th street 

and the Washington Monument grounds. 

• Washington Monument and Grounds —

From the grounds of the Washington 

Monument, the city’s most prominent 

visual symbol and orientation point, visitors 

have 360 degree views of the National Mall. 

The east-west vista widens into a large, 

open turf area edged by street trees, with 

the Washington Monument rising on a 

knoll. To the east visitors see the tree-lined 

Mall and the U.S. Capitol, with Union 

Square and the Grant Memorial subordinate features from this vantage point. To 

the south is the Thomas Jefferson Memorial, and to the north the Ellipse and the 

White House. To the west, the World War 

II Memorial around Rainbow Pool, the 

Lincoln Reflecting Pool, and the Lincoln 

Memorial dominate the vista. 

• World War II Memorial — The World 

War II Memorial continues the formal, 

symmetrical design around the Rainbow 

Pool to maintain the vista to the Lincoln 

Memorial. The 17th Street entry is flanked 

by flagpoles and walls with bas-relief 

sculptures that step down to the elliptically 

shaped Rainbow Pool. On the west side of 

the memorial the wall of honor with gold 

stars becomes foreground for views to the 

Lincoln Memorial. For visitors making 

their way to the Lincoln Memorial, they 

leave to the north or south through the 

Pacific and Atlantic entries. 

• Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool — The 

Lincoln Reflecting Pool, flanked to the 

north and south by double rows of 

American elms with shaded walkways, 

dominates the central foreground to the 

Lincoln Memorial. To keep the memorial in 

view as they approach, visitors usually walk 

along the sides of the reflecting pool, which 

has resulted in a packed-earth social trail on 

each side. Visitors who use the elm 

walkways do not have clear views of the 

memorial. 

• Lincoln Memorial — The west end of the 

reflecting pool is the lower approachway to 

the Lincoln Memorial. Stone and cobble 

paving and wide side staircases are the 

foreground to the elevated view of the 

memorial and the statue of Abraham 

Lincoln. The broad central staircase is a 

prominent visual feature and also provides 

space for visitors to sit and enjoy the vista 

back to the east. This east vista at this location is enjoyed by many on the Fourth of 

July for the stunning display of fireworks 

with the background of the Washington 

Monument and the Capitol. 

From adjacent areas the Washington Monument, the Lincoln Memorial, and the Thomas 

Jefferson Memorial can be readily seen from 

Arlington National Cemetery, the Marine Corps 

Memorial, and the Air Force Memorial, as well 

as from points along George Washington Memorial Parkway. As previously discussed, the 

Washington Monument is visible for miles, espe-

 327
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

cially on roads leading into the city, visually 

drawing people toward the National Mall. 

The North-South Vista 

The planned vista between the Washington 

Monument and the White House was extended 

to the Thomas Jefferson Memorial when the 

Potomac River flats were reclaimed. Less formal 

in character than the east-west vista, the 

prominent visual features of the north-south 

vista are the Washington Monument, the White 

House, the Tidal Basin, and the Thomas 

Jefferson Memorial. Unlike the east-west axis, 

vistas along the north-south axis do not align 

with pedestrian circulation. Vistas can be 

glimpsed through planned openings in trees. 

• Washington Monument and Grounds —

The central point in the north-south axes is 

the Washington Monument, which sits just 

to the east and helps define the vista. To the 

north are the monument grounds, the 

symmetrical but informal German-American Friendship Garden, and the White 

House. The view to the south is defined by 

the monument knoll and trees, with the 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial visible through 

openings in the trees. Sometimes this vista 

is blocked by buses and traffic. 

• The White House and President’s Park —

The view from the White House to the 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial is well known 

from photographs, even though it is not 

generally available to visitors. Openings in 

the trees on the south grounds of the White 

House and on the north and south sides of 

the Ellipse maintain the north-south vista. 

Visitors near the south fence of the White 

House may not be aware of that the 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial is visible to the 

south. 

• Thomas Jefferson Memorial — The south 

terminus of the planned vista is the classical 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial. The memorial’s center broad staircase is where many 

visitors sit and enjoy views of Tidal Basin, 

the Washington Monument, and the White 

House, with the top of the Lincoln Memorial visible above the trees. The memorial 

and the Washington Monument are 

reflected in the waters of the Tidal Basin. 

Informal Landscapes 

Visual experiences in the more informal landscapes of the National Mall are as rewarding as 

views along the great cross axis, but they are 

more intimate in character. These visual experiences are provided in more human-scale 

memorials such as the Vietnam Veterans 

Memorial, the Franklin Delano Roosevelt 

Memorial, the Korean War Veterans Memorial, 

and the George Mason Memorial, as well as 

around the Tidal Basin, in Constitution Gardens 

and all along the Potomac River. The visual 

informality is reinforced by meandering 

pedestrian pathways. Smaller memorials, such as 

those to John Ericcson and John Paul Jones, are 

located within road intersections. 

• Constitution Gardens — Constitution 

Gardens is characterized by rolling, 

wooded terrain around the 6.75-acre 

artificial lake, providing a visual sense of 

separation from the city and an intimacy 

defined by terrain. From Constitution 

Gardens visitors have pastoral views of the 

lake and gardens, with the Washington 

Monument dominating views near the lake. 

• The Tidal Basin — The asymmetrical 107-

acre Tidal Basin is the setting for the 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial, the Franklin 

Delano Roosevelt Memorial, several small 

commemorative markers, and the future 

Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial. The 

informal character of the basin is prized by 

photographers during the spring and fall, 

when blossoms and color are reinforced by 

the spreading and overhanging tendencies 

of the Japanese cherry trees. Views and 

reflections around the basin are dominated 

by the Washington Monument and the 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial. Seasonal 

visual interest is provided by the tulip and 

annual flower displays east of Kutz bridge. 

Bridge railings provide immediate visual 

interest, with long views of the basin and 

memorials. 

• George Mason Memorial — The visual 

character of the George Mason Memorial is 

informal, intimate, and gardenesque, with 

flowering trees and plants surrounding a 

round pool. The statue of George Mason, 

328
Visitor Experience: Information and Education 

in an informal pose located under an arbor, 

reinforces the relaxed visual character. 

• Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial —

At the memorial to Franklin Delano Roosevelt visitors experience a series of four 

landscaped, outdoor rooms featuring 

quotations, stone, walls, plants, sculpture, 

and water features. Many of the sculptural 

elements were designed to encourage 

interaction and photography. 

• Vietnam Veterans Memorial — The visual 

experience of walking along the highly polished black granite wall is highly emotional 

for many visitors, as they view the names 

and items left at the wall. Additional visual 

interest is provided away from the wall by 

two sculptures and a flagpole. The open 

area around the wall is surrounded by more 

wooded terrain. 

• Korean War Veterans Memorial — The 

visual experience at the Korean War Veterans Memorial is defined by the 19 soldiers moving up a hill. Visitors walk on each 

side of the patrol, and can look at photographs etched in black granite or read 

inscriptions in the walkway. 

• Arlington Memorial Bridge, Watergate 

Steps, Constitution Avenue Belvedere —

West of the Lincoln Memorial visitors see 

Arlington Memorial Bridge, flanked by 

large gilded sculptures representing the Arts 

of War, and the entrance to George 

Washington Memorial Parkway, flanked by 

statues representing the Arts of Peace. The 

Watergate steps lead down to Ohio Drive 

and the Potomac River. Arlington National 

Cemetery and the Robert E. Lee House are 

visible from these areas. The Constitution 

Avenue belvedere is to the north. The 

organization and visual setting is informal 

within a simple landscape of shade trees 

and turf highlighting views to and across 

the Potomac River. 

• Potomac Riverfront — South of Arlington 

Memorial Bridge the visual experience is 

informal, with the Potomac riverfront 

characterized by informal groupings of 

flowering trees closer to the river and taller 

shade trees nearer Ohio Drive. River views 

are dominated by a serene, vegetated 

parklike setting, with views of recreational 

boating. Visitors also enjoy views across the 

river toward George Washington Memorial 

Parkway, Arlington National Cemetery, and 

the U.S. Air Force Memorial. 

Sounds on the National Mall 

The urban environmental surrounding the National Mall brings with it the sounds of people 

and traffic. The location of the National Mall on 

the flight path of Ronald Reagan Washington 

National Airport contributes to noise levels. 

Because this is the national capital, the sounds of 

helicopters and police escorts are also frequent. 

While sounds of crowds can be energizing for 

people, unwanted sounds can interfere with 

visitor opportunities for contemplation. 

To balance the noise aspects, several memorial 

designs have made use of waterfalls and jets, 

terrain changes, orientation, walls, and vegetation to muffle the undesirable urban sounds. 

The Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial and 

the World War II Memorial effectively use the 

sound of active water to muffle urban noises. 

The primary entrances to the Thomas Jefferson, 

Lincoln, Korean War Veterans, and Franklin 

Delano Roosevelt memorials are oriented away 

from major thoroughfares. Sounds of traffic on 

3rd Street next to Union Square contribute to a 

somewhat unfriendly pedestrian environment in 

this area. 

INFORMATION AND EDUCATION

Orientation and Information 

Advance Information 

NPS websites are available for the National Mall 

as a whole and for specific units within it (such 

as the Lincoln Memorial). The websites receive 

about 11 million users a year. Web pages for 

each site contain basic information on operating 

hours, parking, public transportation, bicycle 

use, contact phone numbers, and climate; 

additional links are provided for trip planning, 

fees, and reservations. The web pages also refer 

visitors to public transportation and Tourmobile 

websites. The most popular web pages are for 

the Washington Monument and the National 

Mall and Memorial Parks. 

 329
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

The visitor survey conducted in 2008 found that 

while 20% of visitors got no advance planning 

information, the visitors who did get pretrip 

information used several sources. The most 

popular information sources were friends (58%) 

and guidebooks or tour providers (45%), while 

17% looked at park websites, and 30.5% 

checked other websites. Visitors were also asked 

what sources they would check for future visits; 

60% said they would check park websites, and 

30% would continue to check other websites. 

Onsite Information 

Orientation, Maps, and Brochures 

Washington: The Nation’s Capital is the NPS map 

that shows all kinds of visitor destinations in 

central Washington and Arlington National 

Cemetery, including museums, government 

buildings, and memorials. It also lists general 

hours of operation, programs, and contact information. The National Park Service has individual brochures for the following locations 

through the internet, at the sites, or at NPS 

offices: the Mall, Washington Monument, 

Lincoln Memorial, Thomas Jefferson Memorial, 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial, World 

War II Memorial, Vietnam Veterans Memorial, 

Korean War Veterans Memorial, and the 

Ulysses S. Grant Memorial. 

Staff 

Uniformed park rangers and staff, volunteers, 

nonprofit partners and concession employees 

provide visitors with basic information, 

directions, and orientation. 

Directional Signs and Display Boards 

Free-standing pedestrian maps and interpretive 

signs are located throughout the National Mall. 

These outdated, uncoordinated signs are being 

replaced throughout the park area. 

Educational Information and 

Programs 

Staffed Sites and Exhibits 

NPS park rangers provide interpretive programs 

to thousands of U.S. and international visitors at 

the Washington Monument and six memorials 

(Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, Vietnam Veterans, 

Korean War Veterans, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and World War II). However, the volume of 

visitors at an area like the Lincoln Memorial may 

mean that there is only one ranger for every 

9,000 visitors. Seven interpretive wayside exhibits are provided at various locations to deepen 

visitor understanding of our national heritage. 

Roving rangers on bicycles also answer 

questions 

Cell phone tours have been provided since 2008, 

and more than 12,000 users have participated. 

NPS Programs 

NPS interpretive and educational programs are 

based on current scholarship, and various means 

are used to convey educational information to 

diverse visitors and to encourage support for 

resource stewardship and protection. Regular 

programs are scheduled at staffed memorials. 

The Junior Ranger Program offers specialized 

activities and programs for children. One very 

popular educational offering is the “I Have a 

Dream” program during the winter months 

when students can recite Dr. King’s famous 1963 

speech from the same location on the steps of 

the Lincoln Memorial. Educational programs 

for special events are also presented during 

annual presidential birthday commemorations, 

the birthday of Martin Luther King Jr., and the 

National Cherry Blossom Festival, as well as 

presidential inaugurations. 

Park programs, events, and activities are publicized through the media and the park radio 

station, posted on signs at memorials, and listed 

on park websites. Living history programs 

portray portions of American military heritage. 

Guided bicycling tours provide visitors with 

different ways to learn about the National Mall’s 

cultural and natural history. 

Ranger staff provide educational information 

about history and resources to area teachers 

through annual teacher workshops, share 

current information about park sites with the 

local tour guides, and assist and/or train 

concessioners with accurate park information. 

Curriculum-based programs are scheduled 

onsite and as outreach visits to schools in the 

District of Columbia, Virginia, and Maryland. 

330
Visitor Experience: Enjoyment and Recreation 

ENJOYMENT AND RECREATION

Gardens 

Seasonal and perennial gardens include those at 

the George Mason Memorial, Constitution 

Gardens, the World War II Memorial, and the 

Ulysses S. Grant Memorial. The floral library 

and perennial beds are on the south side of 

Maine Avenue north of the Tidal Basin. Other 

flowerbeds include those at the Constitution 

Avenue belvedere and the German-American 

Friendship Garden. 

Recreational Activities 

A variety of informal and active recreational 

opportunities are available. The National Mall 

has historically been the site for numerous local 

recreational activities, and these activities have 

changed over time to reflect current recreational 

interests. Swimming and tennis have been replaced by turf spaces that can be used for picnicking, strolling, and sunbathing, as well as 

informal or organized active recreation (e.g., 

pickup ballgames and amateur league sports). 

Few facilities are provided for recreation; some 

backstops are provided near the Potomac River, 

and there are sand volleyball courts northwest of 

the Lincoln Memorial. Athletic fields are well 

used and worn, and many fields lack an irrigation system. Most active recreation takes place 

on open turf areas, and groups supply needed 

equipment, such as goals or bases. Activities 

include softball, soccer, football, kickball, 

Frisbee, kite flying, rugby, and catch. Bicycle 

riding and in-line skating generally take place on 

roads. Paddleboats can be rented and used at the 

Tidal Basin. The National Park Service will continue to work with the National Capital Planning 

Commission on the best method of mitigating 

the loss of one ballfield at the Vietnam Veterans 

Memorial Center site. 

Permitted Recreation 

 331
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Under a memorandum of agreement with the 

D.C. government, the city issues permits for field 

use (DC Recreation Board 1972). NPS special 

regulations restrict use in case of wet grounds 

(36 CFR 7.96). Activities are permitted at the 

discretion of the superintendent. Bathing, wading, and swimming are prohibited in all commemorative water features. 

The National Mall is conveniently located to fill 

the recreation demand of the federal and local 

workforce. Many workers take advantage of 

park areas to lunch, read, visit, or jog. Agencies 

and branches of government have recreational 

sports teams; for example, many of the approximately 200 teams of the congressional softball 

league, which has existed since the 1970s, 

practice on the National Mall. 

Walking 

Washington, D.C., is one of the most walkable 

cities in the nation. While there are some grade 

changes on the National Mall, primarily near the 

Washington Monument and east of Union 

Square, all areas are accessible to people with 

disabilities. The distance between the Capitol 

and the Lincoln Memorial is about 2 miles, but 

most visitors find that as they explore memorials 

or museums they walk far more than they 

planned. Pedestrian amenities such as lighting 

and seating contribute to the enjoyment of visits. 

Based on the 2003 Visitor Transportation Survey, 

most visitors walk to their destinations. However, nearly 25% said they had an individual in 

their party who could only walk a limited distance because of age, youth, discomfort, breathing difficulties, or disabilities that required use of 

a wheelchair, walker, or cane. 

Many walkways need to be replaced. The two 

center walkways on the Mall are gravel, and the 

two outer walkways are paved with exposed 

aggregate that resembles the gravel center walks. 

The gravel surfaces make it difficult for people 

with disabilities or those pushing strollers to 

maneuver; the surface can also be slippery, and 

the public has complained about the dusty 

conditions created by the gravel. 

Jogging 

Individuals, military units, and local running 

clubs use the National Mall for jogging. Joggers 

prefer softer surfaces and frequently run next to 

sidewalks, resulting in dirt jogging trails. Over 

time these paths have hardened, making it difficult to reestablish turf. The 2-mile length of the 

National Mall makes it easy to measure jogging 

routes. 

Bicycling 

Bicycle rentals or tours are available at several 

locations off the National Mall and are used by 

visitors. The flat terrain and moderate distances 

between sites make visiting the National Mall by 

bicycle convenient and attractive. Park staff 

schedule and lead bicycle tours, generally 

meeting near the Thomas Jefferson Memorial. 

Bicycles are permitted on sidewalks. Bicycle 

racks are provided, and bicycle parking is 

provided during some special events. 

Because bicyclists and pedestrians share 

walkways, during busy periods, particularly rush 

hours and lunch time, use conflicts are more 

likely as pedestrians, people with baby strollers 

and in wheelchairs, and bicyclists all try to use 

the same rights-of-way. 

Entertainment 

Three areas on the National Mall are designed 

for performances — the Sylvan Theater on the 

Washington Monument grounds, which hosts a 

variety of performances; the D.C. War Memorial, which was designed as a bandstand; and 

Room 4 at the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial, which was designed for programs and 

lectures. In addition the lower approachway to 

the Lincoln Memorial and the plaza at the 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial are used for special 

events, but no utility connections or other infrastructure is provided. The steps at both of these 

memorials are used for seating. 

Lawn areas on the Mall and the Washington 

Monument grounds are also used during entertainment events. Organizers bring in stages or 

video screens for events such as the Fourth of 

July, Screen on the Green movies, Kennedy 

Center simulcasts, the Tchaikovsky’s 1812 

Overture, the World War II series on PBS, and 

the Smithsonian Folklife Festival. 

332
Visitor Experience: Visitor Facilities and Amenities 

V Seating ISITOR FACILITIES AND AMENITIES

Seating is distributed throughout the National 

Mall and depending on the time of day and the 

season can easily be found in both sunny and 

shaded locations. Most seating is inadequate for 

large groups. Stone seating is provided at the 

Ulysses S. Grant Memorial, the Washington 

Monument, the Thomas Jefferson Memorial, the 

World War II Memorial, the George Mason Memorial, the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial, and the Korean War Veterans Memorial. 

No seating is provided in the Lincoln Memorial 

chamber or near the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. The steps of the Lincoln and Thomas 

Jefferson memorials are frequently used for 

informal seating, as well as for groups. 

Visitor facilities and amenities include food 

service, retail locations, information stations, 

bookstores, and restrooms. Frequently, food 

and retail facilities are combined. Park furniture 

includes seating and tables, light fixtures, and 

trash and recycling containers. NPS facilities on 

the National Mall are described briefly below by 

type and also by area, and they are summarized 

in Table 20. Facilities in adjacent buildings (such 

as the Smithsonian Institution and the National 

Gallery of Art) are summarized in Table 21. 

Types of Facilities 

Restrooms 

The 1930s park bench, consisting of a metal 

frame with wood slats, is most frequently used 

for seating, and each bench seats two to three 

people. Of the more than 800 benches on the 

National Mall, over 70% are the NPS standard 

Washington benches. Benches are placed along 

walks, but they are not located for people to 

enjoy views and vistas. The simple form of the 

bench, without arms, does not meet standards 

for accessibility. Other styles of wood benches 

include some with no backs and others that have 

been designed specifically for certain areas. 

The National Park Service maintains just over 

100 stalls or urinals at 10 locations on the National Mall (Monument Lodge, Survey Lodge, 

and the Sylvan Theater at the Washington Monument; at the World War II Memorial and Constitution Gardens; inside the Lincoln Memorial; 

at Ash Woods; at each end of the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial; and inside the Thomas 

Jefferson Memorial). There are no NPS restrooms east of 15th Street. Restrooms are available at Smithsonian Institution museums, the 

National Gallery of Art facilities, and the U.S. 

Holocaust Memorial Museum (see Table 21). 

Comments noted by the public include inadequate and outdated facilities that are poorly 

maintained, and the lack of facilities near food 

service locations. 

Tables and Chairs 

Tables and chairs are most frequently found 

around food and picnicking locations. Metal 

tables and chairs are generally provided near 

refreshment stands. Wood or concrete picnic 

tables are provided in a few locations. For national celebrations (e.g., the National 

Cherry Blossom Festival and Fourth of July), up 

to 500 portable restrooms are provided. For the 

2009 inauguration 5,000 portable restrooms 

were provided. 

TABLE 20: NPS PUBLIC FACILITIES ON THE NATIONAL MALL

Public Restrooms 

Area 

Men’s 

Toilets/ 

Urinals 

Women’s 

Toilets 

Family/ 

Assisted 

Companion Seating Visitor Services 

/ Information Food Service 

Bookstore / 

Retail Sales Notes 

Union Square 0 0 0 Built into 

Grant Memorial 

None None None No visitor 

facilities or 

services 

Mall 0 0 0 Benches Information 4 year-round refreshment stands; 

tables and chairs 

Limited souvenirs, convenience items 

at 4 refreshment stands 

 333
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Public Restrooms 

Area 

Men’s 

Toilets/ 

Urinals 

Women’s 

Toilets 

Family/ 

Assisted 

Companion Seating Visitor Services 

/ Information Food Service 

Bookstore / 

Retail Sales Notes 

Washington 

Monument 

0 0 0 Stone 

benches 

Programs, 

interpretive 

rangers 

Food items available seasonally at 

temporary tent; 

seating at picnic 

tables 

Souvenirs, convenience items 

at temporary 

facility 

Temporary 

facilities tent 

must be 

relocated; 

recreation 

fields 

• Monument 

Lodge 

4 6 0 Stone 

benches 

and wall 

Ticketing, 

interpretive 

rangers 

Exhibits

None Bookstore Passport to 

Your National Parks©

stamping 

location 

• Survey Lodge 0 0 2 Information 

desk, 

interpretive 

rangers 

None None Difficult to 

find; Passport to Your 

National 

Parks©

stamping 

location 

• Sylvan Theater 4 4 0 No None None None Performance 

space 

World War II 

Memorial 

4 6 1 Stone 

seating 

Information, programs, computers, wheelchairs

None None Passport to 

Your National Parks©

stamping 

location 

Constitution 

Gardens 

4 4 0 Stonewalled 

terraces 

None 1 seasonal refreshment stand; 

limited bench 

seating 

Limited souvenirs, convenience items at 

refreshment 

stand 

Restroom 

outdated 

Vietnam 

Veterans 

Memorial 

0 0 0 None near 

wall; 

benches 

Information station northeast 

of Lincoln Memorial; programs, wheelchair 

None None 

Lincoln 

Memorial 

7 8 0 None in 

memorial 

Memorial 

steps used 

for seating 

Benches 

along elm 

walks

Exhibit area in 

memorial, interpretive rangers, 

programs 

2 year-round 

refreshment 

stands, with large 

outdoor seating 

areas 

Bookstore; souvenirs, convenience items 

at north and 

south refreshment stands 

Passport to 

Your National Parks©

stamping 

location 

Korean War 

Veterans 

Memorial 

0 0 0 Stone 

seating 

Information, interpretive rangers, programs, 

wheelchair 

None None 

D.C. War 

Memorial 

0 0 0 No Bandstand; no 

utilities 

None None 

Ash Woods 4 4 0 None None None None Recreation 

fields 

Tidal Basin 0 0 0 None Seasonal 1 seasonal refreshment stand; limited bench seating

Paddleboat 

rental facility

Franklin Delano 

Roosevelt 

Memorial 

12 11 0 Stone 

seating 

Information, interpretive rangers, programs, 

wheelchair 

None Bookstore, 

souvenirs 

West Potomac 

Park Riverfront 

0 0 0 Limited None None None Recreation 

fields 

George Mason 

Memorial 

0 0 0 Stone 

seating 

None None None 

334
Visitor Experience: Visitor Facilities and Amenities 

Public Restrooms 

Area 

Men’s 

Toilets/ 

Urinals 

Women’s 

Toilets 

Family/ 

Assisted 

Companion Seating Visitor Services 

/ Information Food Service 

Bookstore / 

Retail Sales Notes 

Thomas 

Jefferson 

Memorial 

6 9 1 Memorial 

steps used 

for seating

Exhibit area in 

memorial, information, interpretive rangers, 

programs, 

wheelchair 

1 year-round refreshment stand; 

limited bench 

seating 

Bookstore; souvenirs, convenience items 

Refreshment 

stand 

difficult to 

find 

Total 45 52 4 10 refreshment 

stands, 6 with 

outdoor tables, 

4 with nearby 

benches; no 

indoor seating 

NOTE: All NPS locations have wheelchair accessible restrooms. 

TABLE 21: PUBLIC FACILITIES ADJACENT TO THE NATIONAL MALL

Restrooms 

Facility and 

Location 

Men’s 

Toilets/ 

Urinals 

Women’s 

Toilets 

Wheelchair Accessible 

Family/ 

Assisted 

Companion Visitor ServicesPublic Food Service — 

Seating Capacity Retail Sales Notes 

Bureau of 

Engraving & 

Printing, 14th 

and C St., SW 

4 4 8 0 Educational 

items, souvenirs, convenience items, 

Only open 

during public tours. 

Capitol Visitor 

Center, East 

Plaza 

8 8 10 Information desk, 

exhibit halls, 

programs, 

tours, films 

Dining facility – 550 seats Two gift shops, 

site-specific 

items 

Opened Dec. 

2, 2008 

National Archives Building, 

700 Pennsylvania Ave. NW 

(Rotunda on 

Constitution 

Ave.) 

37 29 0 Wheelchairs, 

public lockers, 

coatrooms 

Café/food court — 56 

seats 

Site-specific 

items, educational items, 

convenience 

items, 

souvenirs 

National Gallery 

of Art, 6th St. 

and Constitution Ave., NW 

51 40 22 4 Wheelchairs, 

strollers, 

coatrooms 

Café/food court — 619 

seats 

Restaurant — 135 seats 

Outdoor café/ seating 

areas — 136 seats 

Seasonal outdoor carts 

(drinks, ice cream) 

Site-specific 

Items, educational Items 

Rental audio 

tours/ 

downloads 

available 

Smithsonian Institution 

• Castle, 1000 

Jefferson Dr. 

SW 

4 4 2 0 Café/food court — 48 

seats 

Outdoor café/ Seating 

Areas — 60 seats 

Seasonal outdoor carts 

(drinks, ice cream) 

Site-specific 

Items, educational items, 

souvenirs 

• Freer Gallery of 

Art, Jefferson 

Dr. and 12th 

Street, SW 

•Arthur M. Sackler Gallery, 

1050 Independence Ave., SW 

16 5 1 1 Wheelchairs, 

public lockers, 

coatrooms 

NA Site-specific 

Items, educational Items, 

souvenirs 

• Hirshhorn Museum and 

Sculpture 

3 5 4 2 Wheelchairs, 

public lockers, 

coatrooms 

Seasonal outdoor carts 

(drinks, ice cream, 

popcorn, other) 

Site-specific 

items, educational items, 

 335
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Restrooms 

Facility and 

Location 

Men’s 

Toilets/ 

Urinals 

Women’s 

Toilets 

Wheelchair Accessible 

Family/ 

Assisted 

Companion Visitor ServicesPublic Food Service — 

Seating Capacity Retail Sales Notes 

Garden, 7th St. 

and Independence Ave., SW 

convenience 

items, 

souvenirs 

• National Air 

and Space 

Museum, 6th 

St. and Independence Ave., 

SW 

32 44 12 2 Wheelchairs Café/food court — 900 

seats 

Restaurant — 100 seats 

Outdoor café/ seating 

area — 35 seats 

Seasonal outdoor carts 

(drinks, ice cream, 

popcorn, other) 

Site-specific 

items, educational items, 

convenience 

items, 

souvenirs 

• National Museum of American History, 

14th St. and 

Constitution 

Ave., NW 

28 26 54 0 Wheelchairs, 

strollers, public 

lockers 

Café/food court — 450 

seats 

Restaurant — 100 seats 

Seasonal outdoor carts 

(drinks, ice cream, 

popcorn, other) 

Site-specific 

items, educational items, 

convenience 

items, 

souvenirs 

• National Museum of Natural 

History, 10th 

St. and Constitution Ave., 

NW 

56 55 1 1 Wheelchairs, 

public lockers, 

coatrooms 

Café/food court — 100 

seats 

Restaurant — 500 seats 

Year-round outdoor carts 

(drinks, ice cream, 

popcorn) 

Site-specific 

items, educational items, 

convenience 

items, 

souvenirs 

Rental audio 

tours/ 

downloads 

available 

• National Museum of the 

American Indian, 4th St. 

and Independence Ave., SW 

31 49 18 4 Wheelchairs, 

strollers 

Café/food court — 360 

seats 

Site-specific 

items, educational items, 

souvenirs 

• National Museum of African 

Art, 950 

Independence 

Ave., SW 

26 16 7 2 Wheelchairs, 

public lockers 

NA Site-specific 

items, educational items, 

souvenirs 

U.S. Holocaust 

Memorial Museum, 100 

Raoul Wallenberg Pl., SW 

22 22 10 2 Wheelchairs, 

coatrooms 

Café/food court — 80 

seats 

Site-specific 

items, educational items, 

souvenirs 

Total 318 307 129 745 Cafés/food courts — 

1,303 

Restaurants — 1,345 

Outdoor cafés — 136 

Outdoor carts — 5 

locations 

Total food service 

seating — 2,794 

NOTE: All Smithsonian Institution museums, the National Gallery of Art, and the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum are generally open to the public everyday and 

have security checkpoints. 

Food Service 

There are 10 permanent refreshment stands on 

the National Mall that offer snacks, sandwiches, 

and salads. They are supplemented by seasonal 

pushcarts that are used primarily to sell drinks 

and ice cream. During events, particularly those 

on the Mall, these stands may provide additional 

food service to meet demand. However, for a 

very large event, such as the 2009 inauguration, 

food service was increased at temporary facilities throughout the National Mall. Public comments indicate desires for more food choices 

and support for restaurant-type facilities. 

Retail

Most refreshment stands offer souvenirs and 

retail items related to National Mall destina336
Visitor Experience: Visitor Facilities and Amenities 

tions. Retail locations stock convenience items 

such as batteries, aspirin, film, and rain ponchos. 

Bookstores are provided at several memorials 

and offer thematic educational materials. 

Trash/Recycling Containers 

Trash containers have been replaced in recent 

years with metal containers, similar to those 

used throughout the city. In a few locations the 

former container types (wood, wire basket, 

plastic, metal, and concrete) may remain. 

Custom-designed trash containers are used at 

the Thomas Jefferson Memorial (marble) and 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial (granite). 

Some recycling containers were part of an early 

recycling program in the 1990s. 

Most trash containers do not have lids, so 

squirrels and birds scavenging for food may 

spread trash around the immediate area. Trash 

containers near tour bus drop-offs and pickups 

frequently overflow when bus passengers and 

operators deposit large amounts of trash. Public 

comments indicate that visitors expect the 

National Mall to be clean, and for the National 

Park Service to be a leader in recycling practices. 

Lighting 

The night lighting of memorials and water features creates a special nighttime ambience at the 

National Mall that is more intimate or evocative. 

Light fixtures in some areas contribute to the 

historical character of the National Mall, but the 

lack of lighting in areas such as the Tidal Basin 

makes some visitors uncomfortable.

Facilities in Specific Areas 

Union Square 

No facilities are provided at Union Square.

The Mall 

The National Park Service has authorized four 

small refreshment stands and a visitor contact 

station; however, no public restrooms are 

provided. Benches facing north and south line 

the east-west walkways, but they are not 

oriented to take advantage of views and vistas 

toward the important monuments, memorials, 

or major buildings. Light fixtures have been 

designed specifically for the Mall, but the 

distance between fixtures creates intervening 

dark areas. Visitors have said that this makes 

them feel uncomfortable because they cannot 

clearly see their surroundings or other people. 

Washington Monument 

Monument Lodge has restrooms, a ticket window, and a bookstore. Survey Lodge has an 

information desk and two public restrooms. 

There are 26 parking spaces nearby for government vehicles and staff parking; no public 

parking is available. 

Food and retail services have been provided for 

years in a large blue tent north of Madison Drive 

between 14th and 15th streets. This facility, 

while unattractive, is popular and serves visitor 

needs. It must be relocated to allow for the 

construction of the National Museum of African 

American History and Culture. 

World War II Memorial 

There is a nearby restroom, a staffed information station, and parking and access for people 

with disabilities. There are frequent complaints 

about insufficient parking. Tour bus access is 

provided on Constitution Avenue and along 

Homefront Drive. Wheelchairs are available for 

visitors to use. 

Constitution Gardens 

Outdated facilities (restrooms and a refreshment 

stand) are located on the west end of the lake. A 

series of stone-walled terraces on the east end of 

the lake were planned to provide outdoor 

seating for a restaurant that was not built. 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial 

There is an information station. Rangers are 

available to answer questions and give talks from 

8 a.m. to midnight. A wheelchair is available. 

Lincoln Memorial 

The Lincoln Memorial has a bookstore, exhibit 

area, and two small restrooms. Ramps and an 

elevator make it accessible to people with 

disabilities. 

Two refreshment stands (one to the north and 

one to the south of the memorial) offer both 

 337
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

food and retail services. They are currently the 

largest visitor facilities on the National Mall; 

however, neither has public restrooms. Both 

have large outdoor seating areas. 

Staffed visitor contact stations are located 

diagonally from the steps, toward the Korean 

War Veterans and Vietnam Veterans memorials, 

and information is generally geared toward 

those memorials.

Korean War Veterans Memorial 

There is an information station at the Korean 

War Veterans Memorial, with educational materials and computer databases. Rangers are 

available to answer questions and give talks from 

8 a.m. to midnight. A wheelchair is available. 

Tidal Basin 

Visitors enjoy the picturesque, shaded path 

around the Tidal Basin. The asphalt walkway is 

8–10 feet wide. West of the Thomas Jefferson 

Memorial the walkway was frequently under 

water due to sinking seawalls; this walkway has 

been replace by a walk farther from the basin. 

These walkways are often inadequate to handle 

current pedestrian volumes, resulting in people 

walking on tree roots where there is no postand-chain fencing to control access. 

Three bridges around the Tidal Basin — Kutz, 

Inlet, and Outlet bridges — are too narrow to 

accommodate both pedestrians, visitors with 

strollers, and bicycles. 

A small seasonal refreshment stand and paddleboat rental facilities are located near the Tidal 

Basin parking area on the east side of the basin, 

but there are no restrooms. 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial 

Rangers are on duty to answer questions. An 

information area and bookstore at the north 

entrance are open daily. Restrooms are available 

near the north and south entrances. No food 

service is available, but wheelchairs are available. 

West Potomac Park Riverfront 

Dry-laid stone seawalls south of Arlington 

Memorial Bridge, constructed in the 1880s, have 

deteriorated, and the river edge is stabilized by 

rip-rap. This area contains highly used 

recreation fields. 

George Mason Memorial 

There are no visitor services. Public parking is 

available nearby, and the tour bus drop-off is at 

the Thomas Jefferson Memorial. 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial 

A bookstore, retail space, exhibits, and restrooms are located inside the memorial, and it is 

accessible by elevator. A wheelchair is available. 

An older, small, outdated refreshment stand is 

located on the access road, where many visitors 

may not find it. The stand is near the visitor 

transit stop and tour bus drop-off/pickup areas, 

and there is limited bench seating. There are no 

other nearby restrooms, but a wheelchair is 

available. 

Adequacy of Visitor Services 

and Amenities 

A 2007 analysis of public scoping comments for 

this planning project showed that visitors to the 

National Mall wanted improved services and 

higher quality of the landscape (NPS 2007d). 

Based on close to 3,000 comments from the 

general public, 6 categories and 18 associated 

themes of needs were identified (see Table 24). 

The public comment analysis showed a clear 

desire for increased services, such as bathroom 

access, information, transportation, walkway 

improvements, and food access, as well as a 

significant need for greenspace improvements. 

In the 2008 visitor study respondents were asked 

to indicate, from a list of options, the desired 

services and activities they would like to have 

available on a future visit to the National Mall. 

Table 25 shows the frequency of responses 

(from 644 respondents) in the order that services 

and activities were desired. 

The results were also analyzed to determine if 

there were any statistically significant differences in desired services / activities when 

comparing day-trippers and overnight guests 

(see Table 22), where day-trippers stayed in the 

area less than 24 hours and overnight guests 

stayed 24 hours or more. Analyses were also 

conducted to see if there were any differences 

338
Visitor Experience: Visitor Facilities and Amenities 

TABLE 22: DESIRED SERVICES / ACTIVITIES FOR FUTURE 

VISITS — DAY-TRIPPERS COMPARED TO OVERNIGHT 

GUESTS

Service /Activity 

Percentage of 

Day-Trippers 

Indicating 

Interest 

Percentage of 

Overnight 

Guests Indicating Interest 

Roving Rangers Available 

to Answer Questions 

60.7 61.4 

Self-guided Audio Tours 47.7 52.8 

Historian / Expert Lectures 

/ Talks 

38.3 41.3 

Ranger Talks / Programs 35.5 40.5 

Living History Programs 

and Dramatic Presentations 

40.2 29.6 

Outdoor Exhibits 32.7 29.5 

Indoor Exhibits 26.2 22.6 

Interactive Exhibits 20.6 21.6 

Special Events 20.6 17.7 

Movies / Films 19.6 17.4 

Children’s Programs 22.4 14.5 

Recreation Rentals 14.0 12.0 

SOURCE: NPS 2009. 

NOTE: Sample size: day-trippers = 112, overnight guests = 482.

TABLE 23: DESIRED SERVICES / ACTIVITIES FOR FUTURE 

VISITS — LOCALS COMPARED TO NONLOCAL VISITORS

Service /Activity 

Percentage of 

Locals Indicating Interest 

Percentage of 

Nonlocals Indicating Interest

Roving Rangers Available 

to Answer Questions 

55.7 61.9 

Self-guided Audio Tours 45.5 52.7 

Historian / Expert Lectures 

/ Talks 

51.1 39.9 

Ranger Talks / Programs 46.6 38.4 

Living History Programs 

and Dramatic Presentations 

34.1 31.4 

Outdoor Exhibits* 42.0 27.1 

Indoor Exhibits* 34.1 20.6 

Interactive Exhibits* 30.7 19.2 

Movies / Films 22.7 16.9 

Special Events* 31.8 15.1 

Children’s Programs* 28.4 13.9 

Recreation Rentals* 23.9 10.7 

SOURCE: NPS 2009. 

Sample size: local visitors = 90, nonlocal visitors = 525. 

* Indicates a statistical difference when comparing the two groups.

when comparing local visitors and nonlocal visitors (see Table 23). Locals are defined as those 

living in Washington, D.C.; Charles, Montgomery, and Prince George’s counties, Maryland; 

and Arlington, Fairfax, Loudoun, and Prince 

William counties, Virginia, as well as the 

independent cities adjacent to these areas. 

When comparing day-trippers and overnight 

visitors, the only statistically significant difference was that day-trippers were more interested 

in living history programs and dramatic presentations for future visits than overnight guests. 

TABLE 24: VISITOR NEEDS FOR SERVICES AND AMENITIES 

IDENTIFIED DURING PUBLIC SCOPING

Grouping/Theme Count Percentage 

I. Facilities 909 31.33 

1. Bathrooms* 275 9.48 

2. Monuments / Memorials 212 7.31 

3. Walkways 153 5.27 

4. Furniture 133 4.58 

5. Water 75 2.58 

6. Lighting 33 1.14 

7. Museums 28 0.97 

II. Services 731 25.20 

8. Information* 294 10.13 

9. Transportation* 261 9.00 

10. Food* 163 5.62 

11. Retail 13 0.45 

III. Landscape 505 17.41 

12. Greenspace* 460 15.86 

13. Sustainable Practices 45 1.55 

IV. Activities 333 11.48 

14. Events 196 6.76 

15. Recreation 114 3.93 

16. Entertainment 23 0.79 

V. Vision 328 11.31 

17. Purpose of National Mall 328 11.31 

VI. Regulation 95 3.27 

18. Safety and Security 95 3.27 

Total 2,901 100.00 

SOURCE: NPS 2007d. 

* Area where needed improvements were noted. 

TABLE 25: DESIRED SERVICES AND ACTIVITIES 

FOR FUTURE VISITS

Service / Activity 

Frequency 

Indicating 

Interest 

`Percentage 

Indicating 

Interest 

Roving Rangers Available to 

Answer Questions 

371 61.3 

Self-guided Audio Tours 315 51.9 

Historian/Expert Lecture/Talks 248 40.8 

Ranger Talks/Programs 240 39.6 

Living History Programs and 

Dramatic Presentations (people 

in costumes) 

190 31.5 

Outdoor Exhibits 183 30.1 

Indoor Exhibits 141 23.2 

Interactive Exhibits (displays on 

computers/PDAs, etc.) 

130 21.4 

Special Events 110 18.2 

Movies/Films 108 17.8 

Children’s Programs 96 15.9 

Recreation Rentals (e.g., boats) 75 12.3 

Other 69 11.5 

SOURCE: NPS 2009. 

NOTE: Sample size = 644, 

 339
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

When comparing local and nonlocal visitors, the 

desire for six services / activities was statistically 

different, including interactive exhibits, recreation equipment rentals, indoor exhibits and 

outdoor exhibits, children’s programs, and 

special events. In all cases locals were more 

interested in these services and activities than 

nonlocal visitors. Because the average number of 

visits to the National Mall is radically different 

when comparing the two groups (18.3 visits for 

locals versus 1.1 visits for nonlocals), it is not 

surprising that locals would want more 

specialized services / activities, while nonlocals 

would be more likely to be content with the 

myriad of activities already available. 

HEALTH AND SAFETY

Security 

Security perimeter work remains to be completed at the Lincoln Memorial and the Thomas 

Jefferson Memorial. 

Lighting along streets, walks, and at crosswalks 

helps visitors safely find their way during the 

evening. Light fixtures are provided in many 

areas of the National Mall, generally along walks 

on the Mall, near memorials, and within 

Constitution Gardens. Temporary lighting has 

been provided along the elm walks north and 

south of the Lincoln Reflecting Pool. There is no 

pedestrian lighting around the Tidal Basin. 

Public comments indicate that some areas, such 

as the Mall and the Tidal Basin, are too dark. On 

the Mall light fixtures are spaced too far apart, 

leaving darker areas between pools of light. This 

situation causes many visitors to feel uncomfortable because they cannot see walkway surface 

conditions or other people in the area. 

Access for People with Disabilities 

and the Elderly 

Free wheelchairs are available for use by visitors 

in several areas; however, they cannot be taken 

to other sites. Some surfaces (gravel and exposed 

aggregate) may be difficult for people with 

disabilities to move on. 

Other modes such as bicycles and Segway®

Human Transporters (HTs) are used by some 

visitors unable to walk long distances or people 

with disabilities, even though these devices were 

not designed for this purpose. The policy of the 

National Mall and Memorial Parks is to permit 

the use of these devices for mobility access 

within all park sites where pedestrians are 

allowed. 

Weather 

Many people visit Washington, D.C., during the 

summer months when weather is frequently hot 

and humid. Temperatures during these months, 

particularly in July and August, can be 90°F and 

more and very humid. This can cause heat-related illnesses, such as headaches, dizziness, and 

confusion. Visitors most susceptible to heatrelated illness are those with disabilities, seniors, 

and children. Staying cool, drinking plenty of 

water, and having places to rest are critical to the 

health of visitors. Occasionally the National Park 

Service uses sprinklers to help cool people. 

Some visitors, particularly children, do take 

advantage of the interactive fountains at the 

German-American Friendship Garden. 

Both tents and fans are used in temporary event 

facilities during hot and humid weather to 

provide a cooling effect. Rain, snow, and ice can 

occasionally affect the experiences of people on 

the National Mall. Areas can be slippery, and 

park staff put out warning signs. 

Drinking Water 

More than 40 drinking fountains are dispersed 

throughout the National Mall. However, most 

function on a delay, so visitors may assume that 

they do not work. Bottled water is for sale at all 

refreshment stands and push carts, as well as at 

museums, and from street vendors. 

Shade 

The National Mall has many mature trees with 

branches that span sidewalks and provide large 

shaded areas. During the hot and humid 

summer, these trees provide welcome protection 

from the sun, and visitors enjoy sitting, picnicking, jogging, walking, resting under the trees. 

The health of the trees is directly tied to visitor 

health and safety. 

340
SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT

While the United States as a whole is facing a 

recessionary period, the business economy of 

the Washington, D.C., area has remained comparatively robust, with strong current and projected performance in the following sectors of 

the local economy: local and federal government, tourism (hotels, restaurants, arts and 

entertainment), retail trade, and transportation 

(Downtown Business Improvement District 

2007). The parks managed by the National Mall 

and Memorial Parks are almost exclusively 

contained within the District of Columbia; 

however, tourist resources are readily accessed 

in counties in adjacent states. Therefore, the 

commercial and economic influence of park 

areas, while centered in Washington, D.C., 

extends west to Arlington County and Fairfax 

County in Virginia, and east to Montgomery 

County and Prince George’s County in Maryland. The first part of this description of the 

socioeconomic environment focuses on Washington, D.C., and the latter part on the regional 

communities. 

TABLE 26: POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS 

OF WASHINGTON, D.C. 

1990 2000 2006 

Total Population 606,900 572,059 581,530 

Median Age * 34.6 35.0 

Sex Male 

Female 

46.6% 

53.4% 

47.1% 

52.9% 

46.9% 

53.1% 

Race Black/African-American 

White 

Hispanic/Latino 

Other 

Asian 

Two or more races 

Native American 

Pacific Islander 

65.8% 

29.6% 

* 

2.5% 

1.9% 

* 

0.2% 

** 

60.0% 

30.8% 

7.9% 

3.8% 

2.7% 

2.4% 

0.3% 

0.15 

55.4% 

34.5% 

8.2% 

4.8% 

3.4% 

1.5% 

0.3% 

0.0% 

SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau. 

*Information not determined in 1990. 

**Combined with Asian in 1990. 

WASHINGTON, D.C., DEMOGRAPHIC 

CHARACTERISTICS

Population 

Between 1990 and 2000 population declined by 

5.7% in Washington, D.C.; however, growth 

slowly increased by 1.7% between 2000 and 

2006 (see Table 26). In 2006 the District of 

Columbia had a higher percentage of female 

residents (53.1%) than the national percentage 

(50.7%). 

The racial composition of the city is distinct 

from that of the United States as a whole. In 

2006 the percentage of African-American residents was 55.4%, while the national percentage 

was 12.8%. The percentages for other races were 

lower than the national average: white residents 

— 34.5% in D.C., 66.4% nationally; Hispanic/ 

Latino — 8.2% in D.C., 14.8% nationally; and 

Asian — 3.4% in D.C., and 4.4% nationally. 

Income 

Total personal income increased by 44.2% between 1990 and 2000, and it further increased by 

44.4% between 2000 and 2006. The influence of 

the housing market on income is evidenced by 

the median home value increasing by 178% from 

2000 to 2006 (see Table 27). While housing 

values have more recently fallen dramatically in 

some of the outlying counties, values in the District have remained comparatively stable. 

TABLE 27: INCOME CHARACTERISTICS

1990 2000 2006 

Population in Labor 

Force (16 and over)

606,900 298,225 320,402 

Average Wage $33,529 $52,634 $69,114 

Total Personal 

Income 

$16,024,876 $23,102,223 $33,355,583 

Median Home Value $123,900 $157,200 $437,700 

SOURCE: Bureau of Economic Analysis and U.S. Census Bureau. 

Employment 

Major Industries by Earnings 

Earnings in Washington, D.C., are driven largely 

by government, which accounted for two-fifths 

(40%) of the overall industry earnings in 2007 

(see Table 28). The strong role of professional 

and technical services, which encompass about a 

fourth of District earnings, is indicative of the 

urban core status of the District. Tourist- and 

hospitality-related sectors, including contributions from industries such as retail trade; trans341
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

portation; arts, entertainment, and recreation; 

accommodation and food services; and other 

services have a combined influence that supports the functioning of this economic area. 

TABLE 28: EARNINGS BY INDUSTRY, 2007 

(in thousands of dollars) 

Industry Sector Earnings Percentage

Forestry, Fishing and Related $958,883 1.31 

Mining $10,352 0.01 

Utilities $282,993 0.39 

Construction $880,173 1.23 

Manufacturing $181,532 0.25 

Wholesale Trade $572,614 0.78 

Retail Trade $668,374 0.92 

Transportation and 

Warehousing $347,033 0.48 

Information $2,692,433 3.83 

Finance and Insurance $2,849,239 3.90 

Real Estate and Rental and 

Leasing $1,157,953 1.59 

Professional and Technical 

Services $17,398,117 23.83 

Management of Companies 

and Enterprises $463,576 0.64 

Administrative Support / 

Waste Management $2,145,826 2.94 

Educational Services $2,282,093 3.13 

Health and Social Services $3,681,552 5.04 

Arts, Entertainment and 

Recreation $441,151 0.60 

Accommodation and Food 

Services $1,799,193 2.46 

Other Services, except Public 

Administration $4,876,346 6.68 

Government and 

Government Enterprises $28,177,502 39.97 

Total $72,997,483 100.00 

SOURCE: Bureau of Economic Analysis, 2007 North American Industry 

Classification System (NAICS) data.

TABLE 29: EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY, 2007

Industry Sector 

Full- and 

Part-time Jobs Percentage

Forestry, Fishing and Related 9,829 1.21 

Mining 322 0.04 

Utilities 2,422 0.30 

Construction 15,567 1.88 

Manufacturing 2,111 0.26 

Wholesale Trade 5,760 0.71 

Retail Trade 21,737 2.67 

Transportation and 

Warehousing 6,901 0.85 

Information 24,568 3.02 

Finance and Insurance 21,478 2.64 

Real Estate and Rental and 

Leasing 22,631 2.78 

Professional and Technical 

Services 128,530 15.80 

Management of Companies 

and Enterprises 1,744 0.21 

Administrative Support / 

Waste Management 49,737 6.11 

Educational Services 52,289 6.43 

Health and Social Services 62,138 7.64 

Arts, Entertainment and 

Recreation 12,075 1.48 

Accommodation and Food 

Services 51,820 6.37 

Other Services, except Public 

Administration 73,385 9.02 

Government and Government 

Enterprises 248,990 36.60 

Total 813,734 100.00 

SOURCE: Bureau of Economic Analysis; 2007 NAICS data. 

Major Industries by Employment 

In 2007 the Washington, D.C., economy supported over 800,000 full- and part-time positions 

(see Table 29), with the government sector 

providing almost one-third (33.6%). Various 

service industries, including those related to 

administration, education, health, lodging, food 

and other services, also provided about onethird of the district’s positions. These employment figures support the notion that Washington, D.C., like most of the nation, has almost 

completely shifted away from manufacturing 

and agriculture to a service-based economy. 

Unemployment 

As shown in Table 30, unemployment rates since 

2004 in Washington, D.C., have ranged from a 

low of 5.5% in 2007 to a high of 10.7% in 2009, 

substantially exceeding national percentages. 

Therefore, while the business economy remains 

strong, unemployment is high. 

TABLE 30: UNEMPLOYMENT RATES

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 

District of 

Columbia 6.9 6.5 5.8 5.5 7.0 10.7*

Fairfax County, 

VA 2.7 2.5 2.2 2.1 2.8 NA 

Loudoun 

County, VA 2.6 2.4 2.1 2.1 2.8 NA 

Prince William 

County, VA 2.9 2.7 2.4 2.4 3.3 NA 

Montgomery 

County, MD 3.2 3.1 2.8 2.7 3.2 NA 

Prince George’s 

County, MD 4.5 4.5 4.1 3.7 4.5 NA 

SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics. 

* May 2009 data for District of Columbia; 2009 data not available at 

the county level. 

342
Socioeconomic Environment: Visitor Spending Characteristics 

REGIONAL COMMUNITIES TABLE 31: ACTIVITIES THAT VISITORS COMPLETED 

DURING THEIR VISITS TO NATIONAL MALL

Activity 

Percentage 

Completin

g Activity 

Visit National Mall monuments and memorials 96.9 

Visit museum sites 74.6 

Eating and drinking at restaurants/bars 64.5 

Relaxing 72.1 

Shopping 22.7 

Learn/research history 22.6 

Charter bus or sightseeing tour 21.6 

Ranger talks/walks 14.3 

Entertainment/special events 14.3 

Other (results were primarily work/business) 12.2 

Exercise or athletics 11.3 

SOURCE: NPS 2009. 

The Washington, D.C., metropolitan area, as 

previously described, encompasses the four 

adjacent counties —Fairfax and Arlington 

counties in Virginia and Montgomery and 

Prince George’s counties in Maryland. Commuting patterns radiate beyond these counties 

and branch into Pennsylvania and West Virginia. 

Similar to other urban cores, the citizens in the 

regional communities often reap the benefits of 

the district more so than its own residents. For 

example, unemployment rates in what is commonly referred to as Northern Virginia, including the city of Alexandria, Arlington County, 

Fairfax County, and more recently, Prince 

William County and Loudoun County, have 

held steady at around 3% for the past several 

years, which is roughly half of the unemployment rate in Washington, D.C. These gateway 

areas offer an abundance of supply resources 

pertaining to retail trade, accommodations, 

cultural resources, dining establishments, and 

other services. 

VISITOR SPENDING 

CHARACTERISTICS

According to the 2008 visitor study, 96.9% of 

visitors spent time at monuments and memorials 

on the National Mall, but only 64.5% ate and 

drank at the restaurants and bars (and fewer still 

in the downtown locales based on primary destinations, see Table 31), and just 22.7% indicated 

shopping activity (NPS 2009e). It is important to 

note that all monuments and memorials on the 

National Mall are free of charge, so once visitors 

arrive, they are not paying admission fees (16 

USC 6802(d)(3)(C)). 

Table 32 shows the percentage of visitors to the 

National Mall who made purchases during their 

stays within Washington, D.C., or the metropolitan area (within a one-hour drive). The percentage of people staying in Washington, D.C., and 

making purchases was higher in every category 

that those making purchases within the metropolitan area. Presumably these percentages 

would grow under any alternative where the 

number and variety of services and activities 

would be enhanced, which would be projected 

to increase the average length of stay. 

TABLE 32: PERCENTAGE OF VISITORS REPORTING EXPENDITURES BY CATEGORY AND AREA

Category 

Percentage of Visitors Who 

Made Purchases while at the 

National Mall and in 

Washington. D.C. 

Percentage of Visitors Who Made 

Purchases outside Washington, 

D.C., but within the Metropolitan 

Area (1-hour drive) 

Lodging (hotels, camping, B&B, etc.) 45.5% 36.3% 

Restaurants and Bars 88.5% 52.0% 

Food Stands / Refreshment Stands 71.8% 16.0% 

Gas and Oil (auto, RV, boat, etc.) 25.2% 39.1% 

Public Transportation (subway, bus, taxi) 65.4% 23.9% 

Other Transportation Fees (rental cars, auto repairs, 

but NOT airfare) 

14.6% 11.2% 

Admissions, Recreation, and Entertainment Fees 

(e.g., tour guide fees, sightseeing tours, movies) 

44.7% 19.8% 

Other Services (e.g., barber / beauty shops, laundry) 8.8% 4.2% 

Retail Purchases Related to Sites Visited (souvenirs, 

books, t-shirts, etc.) 

59.6% 22.5% 

All Other Retail Purchases Not Site-Specific (books, 

groceries, sporting goods, clothing, etc.) 

33.1% 22.2% 

Other Expenses 9.9% 4.2% 

SOURCE: NPS 2009. 

 343
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

TABLE 33: AVERAGE PER PARTY EXPENDITURES — ALL VISITORS

Category 

Average per Party 

Expenditures during Entire 

Stay in Washington, D.C. 

Average per Party Expenditures 

during Entire Stay outside 

Washington, D.C., but within the 

Metropolitan Area (1-hour drive) 

Lodging (hotels, camping, B&B, etc.) $340.52 $181.29 

Restaurants and Bars $178.82 $93.04 

Food Stands / Refreshment Stands $27.75 $7.72 

Gas and Oil (auto, RV, boat, etc.) $13.56 $31.34 

Public Transportation (subway, bus, taxi) $28.06 $10.76 

Other Transportation Fees (rental cars, auto repairs, 

but NOT airfare) 

$22.53 $16.10 

Admissions, Recreation, and Entertainment Fees 

(e.g., tour guide fees, sightseeing tours, movies) 

$37.74 $12.61 

Other Services (e.g., barber / beauty shops, laundry) $5.94 $1.21 

Retail Purchases Related to Sites Visited (souvenirs, 

books, t-shirts, etc.) 

$52.75 $21.97 

All Other Retail Purchases Not Site-Specific (books, 

groceries, sporting goods, clothing, etc.) 

$32.86 $23.69 

Other Expenses $19.39 $2.40 

Total $759.92 $402.13 

SOURCE: NPS 2009. 

Note: Sample size = 644. 

Table 33 summarizes average expenditures per 

party during their entire stay in Washington, 

D.C., and in the metropolitan area (within a onehour drive). In Washington, D.C., average expenditures totaled $759.92, while average 

expenditures within the metropolitan area 

totaled $402.13. As expected, the highest expenditure category was lodging, followed by 

restaurants and bars. Retail purchases related to 

sites visited totaled $52.75 per party during the 

entire stay within Washington, D.C. 

Per party expenditures by day-trippers, defined 

as people who spent less than 24 hours in the 

metropolitan area (with an average stay of 7.2 

hours), averaged $109.28 in Washington, D.C., 

and $150.56 in the metropolitan area (see Table 

34). The highest expenditure categories for these 

visitors were food service (restaurants and bars, 

food stands and refreshment stands) and retail 

purchases related to sites visited. 

Per party expenditures by overnight guests (who 

stayed an average of 4.4 days) spent an average 

TABLE 34: AVERAGE PER PARTY EXPENDITURES — DAY-TRIPPERS ONLY

Category 

Average per Party 

Expenditures during Entire 

Stay in Washington, D.C. 

Average per Party Expenditures 

during Entire Stay outside 

Washington, D.C., but within the 

Metropolitan Area (1-hour drive) 

Lodging (hotels, camping, B&B, etc.)* $4.66 $58.25 

Restaurants and Bars $32.88 $31.03 

Food Stands / Refreshment Stands $16.13 $1.62 

Gas and Oil (auto, RV, boat, etc.) $8.60 $16.08 

Public Transportation (subway, bus, taxi) $8.96 $3.84 

Other Transportation Fees (rental cars, auto repairs, 

but NOT airfare) 

$3.17 $11.82 

Admissions, Recreation, and Entertainment Fees 

(e.g., tour guide fees, sightseeing tours, movies) 

$10.17 $3.75 

Other Services (e.g., barber / beauty shops, laundry) $1.15 $0.68 

Retail Purchases Related to Sites Visited (souvenirs, 

books, t-shirts, etc.) 

$15.03 $10.91 

All Other Retail Purchases Not Site-Specific (books, 

groceries, sporting goods, clothing, etc.) 

$2.03 $12.57 

Other Expenses $6.50 $0.01 

Total $109.28 $150.56 

SOURCE: NPS 2009. 

Note: Sample size = 112. 

* Lodging expenditures are included for day-trippers because a few may stay overnight in the city.

344
Socioeconomic Environment: Visitor Spending Characteristics 

TABLE 35: AVERAGE PER PARTY EXPENDITURES — OVERNIGHT GUESTS ONLY

Category 

Average per Party 

Expenditures during Entire 

Stay in Washington, D.C. 

Average per Party Expenditures 

during Entire Stay outside 

Washington, D.C., but within the 

Metropolitan Area (1-hour drive) 

Lodging (hotels, camping, B&B, etc.) $422.65 $180.31 

Restaurants and Bars $214.90 $107.64 

Food Stands / Refreshment Stands $32.41 $9.67 

Gas and Oil (auto, RV, boat, etc.) $14.72 $35.28 

Public Transportation (subway, bus, taxi) $33.50 $12.25 

Other Transportation Fees (rental cars, auto repairs, 

but NOT airfare) 

$29.11 $17.98 

Admissions, Recreation, and Entertainment Fees 

(e.g., tour guide fees, sightseeing tours, movies) 

$45.92 $14.11 

Other Services (e.g., barber / beauty shops, laundry) $7.71 $1.12 

Retail Purchases Related to Sites Visited (souvenirs, 

books, t-shirts, etc.) 

$63.65 $25.78 

All Other Retail Purchases Not Site-Specific (books, 

groceries, sporting goods, clothing, etc.) 

$41.43 $24.66 

Other Expenses $24.35 $3.11 

Total $930.35 $431.91 

SOURCE: NPS 2009. 

NOTE: Sample size = 482. 

of $930.35 in Washington, D.C., and $431.91 in 

the metropolitan area (see Table 35). The highest expenditure categories within Washington, 

D.C., were lodging, restaurants and bars, and 

retail purchases related to sites visited. 

For day-trippers an average of $34.26 per person 

per day was spent in Washington, D.C., while for 

overnight guests an average of $94.37 was spent 

per person per day (with nights configured for 

lodging). Therefore, every 1,000 new daytrippers are estimated to bring $34,260 per day 

into the Washington, D.C., economy, while 

every 1,000 new overnight guests are estimated 

to bring $94,370 per day/night into the Washington, D.C., economy in direct spending. In 

terms of the metropolitan area (outside Washington, D.C., but within a one-hour drive), daytrippers spent an average of $47.20 per person 

per day, while overnight guests spent an average 

of $43.39 per person per day (with nights 

configured for lodging). Therefore, every 1,000 

new day-trippers are estimated to bring $47,200 

per day into the metropolitan area, while every 

1,000 new overnight guests are estimated to 

bring $43,390 per day/night into the metropolitan area in direct spending. 

Visitor expenditures by nonlocal and local 

residents were also analyzed. Local residents 

were defined as those living in Washington, 

D.C.; Charles, Montgomery, and Prince 

George’s counties in Maryland; and Arlington, 

Fairfax, Loudoun, and Prince William counties 

in Virginia, as well as the independent cities 

adjacent to these areas. 

Total expenditures on the National Mall and in 

Washington, D.C., by nonlocal visitors averaged 

about $849 per party, compared to $163 for local 

visitors. As would be expected, nonlocal visitors 

spent the most for lodging, then restaurants and 

bars; retail purchases related to sites visited was 

the third highest spending category (see Table 

36). The highest expenditure category for local 

visitors was restaurants and bars, followed by 

admission, recreation, and entertainment fees 

(e.g., tour guide fees, sightseeing tours) and retail 

purchases related to sites visited (see Table 37). 

Transportation-related expenditures show that 

nonlocal visitors within Washington, D.C., spent 

more on public transportation than on gas and 

oil or other transportation fees (such as rental 

cars), while parties staying outside Washington, 

D.C., but within a one-hour drive of the city, 

spent 25% more on gas and oil and other 

transportation fees. 

Comparing transportation-related expenditures 

for local visitors shows higher public transportation expenditures for local visitors within 

Washington, D.C., than for those coming from 

outside the District (within a one-hour drive). 

Visitors coming from outside the District also 

spent 60% more on gas and oil than visitors 

within the District.

 345
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

TABLE 36: AVERAGE PER PARTY EXPENDITURES — NONLOCAL VISITORS ONLY

Category 

Average per Party Expenditures 

during Entire Stay at the 

National Mall and in 

Washington, D.C. 

Average per Party Expenditures 

during Entire Stay outside 

Washington, D.C., but within the 

Metropolitan Area (1-hour drive) 

Lodging (hotels, camping, B&B, etc.) $387.51 $211.94 

Restaurants and Bars $195.83 $104.71 

Food Stands / Refreshment Stands $30.15 $9.28 

Gas and Oil (auto, RV, boat, etc.) $14.44 $34.34 

Public Transportation (subway, bus, taxi) $31.01 $12.51 

Other Transportation Fees (rental cars, auto repairs, 

but NOT airfare) 

$25.87 $19.29 

Admissions, Recreation and Entertainment Fees 

(e.g., tour guide fees, sightseeing tours, movies) 

$41.22 $14.20 

Other Services (e.g., barber / beauty shops, laundry, 

etc.) 

$7.01 $1.39 

Retail Purchases Related to Sites Visited (souvenirs, 

books, t-shirts, etc.) 

$58.89 $24.37 

All Other Retail Purchases That Were Not Site 

Specific (books, groceries, sporting goods, 

clothing, etc.) 

$34.02 $24.48 

Other Expenses $23.04 $2.12 

Total $848.99 $458.63 

SOURCE: NPS 2009.

NOTE: Sample size = 525.

TABLE 37: AVERAGE PER PARTY EXPENDITURES — LOCAL VISITORS ONLY

Category 

Average per Party Expenditures 

during Entire Stay at the 

National Mall and in 

Washington, D.C. 

Average per Party Expenditures 

during Entire Stay outside 

Washington, D.C., but within the 

Metropolitan Area (1-hour drive) 

Lodging (hotels, camping, B&B, etc.)* $14.47 $21.21 

Restaurants and Bars $69.48 $37.46 

Food Stands / Refreshment Stands $12.48 $0.34 

Gas and Oil (auto, RV, boat, etc.) $8.90 $15.08 

Public Transportation (subway, bus, taxi) $7.81 $2.32 

Other Transportation Fees (rental cars, auto repairs, 

but NOT airfare) 

$3.29 $1.02 

Admissions, Recreation and Entertainment Fees 

(e.g., tour guide fees, sightseeing tours, movies) 

$19.06 $5.47 

Other Services (e.g., barber / beauty shops, laundry, 

etc.) 

$0.68 $0.45 

Retail Purchases Related to Sites Visited (souvenirs, 

books, t-shirts, etc.) 

$15.10 $8.18 

All Other Retail Purchases That Were Not Site 

Specific (books, groceries, sporting goods, 

clothing, etc.) 

$9.80 $16.25 

Other Expenses $1.81 $3.92 

Total $162.88 $111.70 

SOURCE: NPS 2009.

NOTE: Sample size = 90. 

* Lodging expenditures are included for locals because while locals live in the area, they could have guests in town and all could choose to stay 

overnight in a D.C. hotel. 

346
PARK OPERATIONS

The National Mall and Memorial Parks (NAMA) 

has a staff of around 330 people, who are organized in five divisions — park programs, administration, resource management, maintenance, and 

interpretation and education — and the superintendent’s office. In addition to caring for the 

National Mall’s historic landscape and commemorative works, the National Mall and Memorial 

Parks operate 156 reservations, parks, circles, and 

triangles throughout a large area of north-central 

Washington, D.C. These areas include the Law 

Enforcement Officers Memorial, Dupont Circle, 

McPherson Square, and Columbus Circle, as well 

as Pennsylvania Avenue National Historic Site 

and East Potomac Park. Ford’s Theatre National 

Historic Site, a separate national park system 

unit, may continue to rely on NAMA staff for 

some tasks. President’s Park, also a separate 

national park system unit, also relies on NAMA 

staff, primarily for special events and maintenance. 

PARK ORGANIZATION

The Office of the Superintendent provides management and planning leadership. The office has 

six to nine employees, including the superintendent, two deputy superintendents, a special 

assistant, a management and program analyst, 

and support staff. A partnership office typically 

has three to four staff members and deals with 

wide-ranging partnerships, transportation, 

business services, and volunteer programs. The 

volunteer office coordinates more than 29,000 

donated hours of labor annually for activities 

such as painting, weeding, and river cleanup. 

The Park Programs Division handles special 

events and demonstrations for the National 

Capital Region of the National Park Service. 

This small division of about five people processes more than 6,000 permits annually, which 

result in about 3,000 events. Because of the 

limited staff, only limited onsite monitoring of 

events can be provided. Depending on the 

number of people expected to attend an event, 

different levels of advance planning, logistical 

preparation, requirements, and monitoring are 

necessary. 

The Administration Division includes a chief 

and staff who address financial/budget management, human resources, communications, contracting, and computer/information technology. 

The division averages around 20 staff members. 

The Resource Management Division includes a 

chief, cultural and natural resource specialists, 

and preservation staff who work on memorials 

and statues. The division ranges from 15 to 20 

employees. 

The Maintenance Division (including the East 

Potomac Park and the NPS Brentwood facilities) 

is responsible for facility maintenance, grounds 

and trees, roads and trails, and transportation. In 

2008 this division, the largest in the park, had 

177 permanent employees and 25 seasonal employees; there are an additional 20 maintenance 

employees for the Centennial Initiative. Over the 

last 12 years annual staffing in this division has 

averaged 248 employees, with a high of 301. The 

staff at park headquarters is small, consisting of a 

chief of maintenance, deputy, civil engineer, 

landscape architect, facility assessment IT 

specialist, facility management specialist, and an 

administrative assistant. 

The Maintenance Division’s Facility Maintenance Branch includes trades and specialties such 

as carpentry, electrical, masonry, metal craft, 

painting and signs, plumbing, and special events. 

Staff also provide technical craft and trade 

support for other national park system units. 

The Maintenance Division has a number of contracts to perform the following types of work: 

• elevator maintenance 

• heating, ventilating, and air conditioning 

(HVAC) maintenance 

• mowing of East Potomac Park and areas 

north of Constitution Avenue 

• catch-basin cleaning 

• tree services (tree removal, stump grinding, 

trimming, etc.) 

• security system maintenance 

347
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

• maintenance of the World War II Memorial water features, including the electrical 

systems and pool cleaning 

• pool cleaning for the U.S. Navy Memorial 

and Korean War Veterans Memorial 

• street light maintenance (PEPCO) 

The Division of Interpretation and Education 

provides interpretation, education, and informational programs and helps provide visitor 

safety as well as first-line response for medical 

emergencies. The division currently has 79 people, who are organized in three work shifts. Over 

the last 10 years the division has remained fairly 

constant, with an average of 80 employees and a 

high of 93. 

OPERATIONS BACKGROUND

Operating Budget 

The park’s operating budget in 2006 was $29.8 

million; in 2007, $30.4 million; and in 2008, $31.1 

million. 

Staffing Levels 

The National Park Service is conducting a process known as core operations planning to align 

staffing with the core or essential operations that 

are performed in a park unit. Core activities are 

linked to legislative mandates, the park purpose, 

and significant park resources. This core operations planning process is coordinated with the 

foundation statement that was developed for the 

National Mall plan (see page 9). 

Since 1996 the park staff has averaged 378 full 

time equivalent employees (FTEs) annually, with 

a high of 450 and a current near low of 330. (The 

park has operating increase requests for technical and trade, engineering, xxx). The greatest 

impact of staff reductions has been in the Maintenance Division, and contracts have been used 

to make-up the shortfall. 

Law enforcement is provided by the United 

States Park Police (USPP) rather than park 

rangers. The Park Police are not part of the park 

staff, but they work closely with all national park 

system units in the National Capital Region. 

Park Asset Management Planning 

All national park system units are required by 

NPS Management Policies 2006 to have a program of preventive and rehabilitative maintenance and preservation (NPS 2006e, sec. 9.1.4.1). 

For the last few years national park system units 

have been converting to new computer databases for tracking park facilities, which are 

referred to as assets. The asset management 

process is being used to identify current assets, 

their condition and management priority, and 

deferred maintenance needs throughout the 

national park system. The data are then used to 

identify projects that will be submitted for 

implementation funding. 

As previously described, the National Mall and 

Memorial Parks (NAMA) is the managing entity 

for the National Mall. According to its “Park 

Asset Management Plan,” the National Mall and 

Memorial Parks maintain 311 assets valued at 

$2.1 billion, with $508 million of deferred maintenance. New memorials that will be managed 

by the National Mall and Memorial Parks 

include the Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial 

and the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Center, 

both of which will be on the National Mall, and 

the Americans Disabled for Life Memorial and 

the Dwight D. Eisenhower Memorial, which will 

be adjacent to the National Mall. 

On the National Mall there are 126 separate 

assets distributed throughout the following areas 

— the Mall, Washington Monument, World 

War II Memorial, Constitution Gardens, 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial, Lincoln Memorial, 

Korean War Veterans Memorial, Franklin 

Delano Roosevelt Memorial, and Thomas 

Jefferson Memorial. Assets on the National Mall 

account for more than three-quarters of the total 

park current replacement value for the National 

Mall and Memorial Parks, but deferred maintenance amounts to 93.7% of the total. Table 38 

shows assets as of December 2008 for the 

National Mall and Memorial Parks. 

Nearly 60% of the assets managed by the National Mall and Memorial Parks were built 

before 1960. Construction occurred in waves 

(e.g., pre-1901, 1910s, and 1970s), indicating that 

component renewal needs will follow a similar 

pattern in future years. 

348
Park Operations: Operations Background 

In 2008 the National Park Service examined the 

deferred maintenance and capital improvement 

requirements for the National Mall and ensured 

that these deficiencies and needs were captured 

in projects in the project management information system (PMIS). For the National Mall the 

deferred maintenance backlog totaled $476 

million, and capital improvement needs totaled 

$122 million. Additional capital improvement 

needs are identified in the alternatives. 

A substantial portion of the deferred maintenance need is attributed to the repair and 

rehabilitation of seawalls, including the West 

Potomac Park seawall (south of Arlington 

Memorial Bridge), the Tidal Basin seawall, and 

the East Potomac Park seawall (outside the 

National Mall). Emergency repairs to address 

settlement at the Thomas Jefferson Memorial 

plaza seawall are currently funded. These 

projects added up to $419.5 million in total 

NAMA project costs. 

Identified capital improvement projects, before 

completion of the National Mall plan include 

installation of a vehicle barrier system around 

the Jefferson Memorial ($16.2 million) and 

enhanced and improved visitor screening at the 

Washington Monument ($5.1 million). 

TABLE 38: NAMA PARK ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN 

(DECEMBER 2008) 

Assets 

Total 

Deferred 

Maintenance 

Current 

Replacement 

Value 

Facility 

Condition 

Index 

NAMA 

Total 

311 $508.1 

million 

$2.1 billion 0.24 

National 

Mall 

126 $475.9 

million 

$1.7 billion 0.25 

Percentage 

of Total 

40.5% 93.7% 78.5% NA 

NOTE: The facility condition index is calculated by dividing the deferred 

maintenance by the current replacement value. This index is used by 

facility managers to better understand the relative condition of park 

assets. The closer the score is to zero, the better the condition of the 

asset. 

Deferred maintenance shows the total before projects were funded by 

the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. 

Operations and Maintenance and 

Deferred Maintenance 

Operations and maintenance (O&M) benchmarks, which are based on standardized 

industry data, are used to help the National Park 

Service fully account for and address maintenance needs or deferred maintenance. Proper 

maintenance of any asset requires a mix of 

operational, recurring, and preventive maintenance. A standardized plan is similar to a 

manufacturer’s recommended guidelines and 

might include: 

• operational activities — trash removal, 

mowing, basic utility costs, etc. 

• recurring maintenance — regularly 

scheduled repairs such as exterior painting, 

fence repair, road patching or re-grading, 

and masonry repointing 

• preventive maintenance — tasks undertaken at least once a year and including 

activities, such as visual inspecting assets, 

water quality testing, replacing filters, 

lubrication of equipment 

• corrective maintenance — unplanned or 

unscheduled maintenance accomplished by 

shifting resources from other areas 

The current gap between NAMA’s budget and 

estimated total O&M benchmark is $11.8 million per year. Table 39 characterizes parkwide 

asset types and funding gaps between what 

industry standards indicate is needed and 

current park budgets. 

TABLE 39: DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ANNUAL MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS AND BUDGETS,

NATIONAL MALL AND MEMORIAL PARKS

Asset Requirement Budget Difference Percent Funded 

Road Assets* $833,513 $250,619 ($582,894) 30% 

Maintained Landscapes $4,732,278 $1,817,619 ($2,914,659) 38% 

Buildings** $11,353,514 $4,651,790 ($6,701,724) 41% 

Waterfront Assets $644,605 $140,793 ($503,812) 22% 

Unique Assets $7,411,667 $6,363,934 ($1,047,733) 86% 

Other*** $737,681 $641,028 ($96,653) 87% 

Total $25,713,258 $13,865,783 ($11,847,475) 54% 

* Includes all roads, parking areas, bridges, and one FHWA-inspected trail bridge 

** Includes large monuments (e.g., Washington Monument, Lincoln Memorial, Thomas Jefferson Memorial). 

*** Includes water, wastewater, and electrical systems (from World War II Memorial), IT system, fuel system, and the Sylvan Theater. 

 349
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Additional Park Responsibilities 

and Special Demands 

Since 1995 three new memorials have been built 

on the National Mall — the Korean War Veterans Memorial, the Franklin Delano Roosevelt 

Memorial, the George Mason Memorial, and the 

World War II Memorial. When completed, the 

Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial and the 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial Center will be two 

additional park responsibilities. 

The National Mall and Memorial Parks has 

additional responsibilities outside the National 

Mall that affect work load. In 1996 what was 

then referred to as Pennsylvania Avenue National Historic Park was transferred to park 

management. Additional memorials have included the African-American Civil War Memorial, the Gandhi Memorial, the Masaryk Memorial, the National Japanese American Memorial 

to Patriotism, and the Victims of Communism 

Memorial. The Dwight D. Eisenhower Memorial, which will be constructed south of the Mall, 

will be a future park responsibility, as will as the 

Veterans Disabled for Life Memorial. 

The parks and facilities managed by the National 

Mall and Memorial Parks also complement the 

D.C. park system. Because of the National Mall’s 

prominent location in the center of Washington, 

D.C., park staff are frequently called on to 

quickly undertake unscheduled or special work. 

As a result, scheduled and regular maintenance 

is often postponed. To help address this situation, in 2008 the park established a visual quality 

team and a response tem to quickly identify and 

address problems and concerns to improve the 

park’s appearance. This approach is similar to 

best practices that are used at other sites where 

teams are used for special situations or to address special but infrequent maintenance needs. 

Annual national celebrations, such as the Fourth 

of July and the National Cherry Blossom Festival, require significant staff time among various 

divisions to plan, as well as provide programs, 

visitor services, and maintenance. Presidential 

inaugural activities, formal state functions, and 

visits by foreign heads of state also alter or place 

additional demands on day-to-day park 

operations. 

Park staff also manage or support annual events 

that occur outside park boundaries but still 

affect park operations. These include managing 

three annual concerts on the Capitol west lawn 

and providing support for the annual Lighting of 

the National Christmas Tree and Christmas 

Pathway of Peace in President’s Park (support is 

provided for construction, special events management, and maintenance). Considerable 

support is provided to President’s Park because 

that park has limited maintenance resources. 

The NAMA Maintenance Division provides a 

variety of support services, including special 

events, tree work, plumbing, electrical, paint, 

sign, masonry, carpentry, and metal work. 

ENERGY AND WATER USE

National Mall and Memorial Parks 

The National Park Service completed a required 

initial energy and water audit in July 2009. Each 

unit of the more than 390 units of the national 

park system was included. Audit findings will be 

used to develop energy conservation measures 

to meet NPS and federal goals for reduced 

energy and water use. The National Park Service 

requires sustainable, energy-efficient facilities, 

and new facilities must meet the LEED silver 

standard (NPS 2006e, sec. 9.1.1.6). The NPS 

Management Policies 2006 also require that water 

be used efficiently and sustainably (NPS 2006e, 

sec. 9.1.5.1). 

According to the July 2009 audit, the National 

Mall and Memorial Parks was first throughout 

the national park system for energy and water 

use. As previously described, the National Mall 

and Memorial Parks is larger than the focus of 

this planning effort, which focuses only on the 

National Mall. The ranking is for all park areas 

managed by the National Mall and Memorial 

Parks, which includes the National Capital 

Regional Office, park headquarters, two maintenance yard areas, and a visitor transportation 

bus facility, as well as numerous small parks 

throughout central Washington, D.C., some with 

designed water features. 

NPS facilities in Washington, D.C., are generally 

older, and many use energy and water inefficiently because of out-of-date systems. Power 

requirements in buildings have increased with 

350
Park Operations: General Maintenance 

computer use, lighting systems may need to be 

updated, and heating, ventilation and air 

conditioning (HVAC) systems replaced. 

National Mall 

Energy Use 

Energy consumption on the National Mall is 

largely due to lighting systems, water feature 

pump operations, and HVAC systems, as well as 

small-scale visitor and park facilities, several 

with elevator systems. Two visitor facilities 

constructed in 2006-7 north and south of the 

Lincoln Memorial have been designed to be 

energy efficient and sustainable. These facilities 

use a closed-loop geothermal system in their 

cooling and ice-making operations, reducing 

energy consumption, improving air quality, and 

saving millions of gallons of water. 

The largest energy use on the National Mall is 

from lighting streets, memorial areas, and 

walkways. The lighting of the Lincoln Memorial, 

the Washington Monument, and the Thomas 

Jefferson Memorial on the National Mall, along 

with the U.S. Capitol and the White House, 

establish the nighttime character of the monumental core in Washington, D.C. In addition to 

memorial lighting, there are over 20,000 light 

fixtures throughout the National Mall, including 

street lights, pedestrian pole lights, in-ground 

lights, wall-mounted lights, bollard lights, 

spotlights, landscape lights, and underwater 

lights in water features. 

Street lights generally use metal halide lighting; 

compact fluorescent lights are being used where 

feasible; and the park is experimenting with LED 

lights. Some types of light systems have not 

proven suitable for outdoor locations. Park 

rangers and the U.S. Park Police report lighting 

outages. The park stocks a wide variety of 

replacement parts and bulbs because of different 

fixtures and requirements. 

Water Use 

The high level of water use is primarily the result 

of designed water features, which use potable 

water; other uses such as irrigation, restrooms, 

and drinking fountains make a smaller contribution. Designed water features on the National 

Mall include the Lincoln and Capitol reflecting 

pools, Constitution Gardens Lake, the World 

War II Memorial, the Franklin Delano Roosevelt 

Memorial, the Korean War Veterans Memorial, 

the George Mason Memorial, and the John Paul 

Jones Memorial. Between 100 million and 110 

million gallons of water are used annually in just 

three designed water features — Constitution 

Gardens Lake, the Capitol Reflecting Pool and 

the Lincoln Reflecting Pool (see discussion of 

water resources under “Natural Resources”). 

Water features on the National Mall are subject 

to evaporation and leakage, and they need to be 

emptied, cleaned, and refilled, generally twice a 

year. With the exception of the reflecting pools 

and lake, most water features are winterized and 

drained. Permanent irrigation systems are 

supplemented occasionally by temporary 

irrigation when needed. The park has successfully used nonpotable Potomac River water for 

irrigation, and the low saline levels have not 

adversely affected plant materials. 

GENERAL MAINTENANCE

Written grounds maintenance standards for the 

National Mall are out of date and do not address 

issues related to facilities, buildings, or memorials. Based on the best practices information 

collected during this planning effort, the park 

has four projects at the World War II Memorial, 

the Lincoln Memorial, the Korean War Veterans 

Memorial, and the Vietnam Veterans Memorial 

to explore implementing more comprehensive 

operations and maintenance standards. 

Signs 

There are more than 400 visitor signs within the 

National Mall (not including road signs). Signs 

are not coordinated or consistent, resulting in 

confusing information for visitors and sign 

clutter. More than 40% of the signs (185) regulate activities to protect the visitor experience or 

provide necessary warnings. New, coordinated 

regulatory and operational signs are included in 

a 2008 Centennial Project for improved signs. 

The National Park Service requires a sign plan 

that reflects the character of the park and meets 

servicewide standards for consistency (NPS 

2006e, sec. 9.3.1.1). 

 351
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Sites and Facilities 

Many National Mall facilities such as restrooms, 

paving, and Tidal Basin seawalls, have exceeded 

their life expectancies. Also, they were built to 

accommodate far fewer visitors than the park 

currently serves. Facilities were not designed to 

withstand vandalism, so doors to some restrooms have been repeatedly damaged. Ease of 

maintenance and ergonomic designs were not 

considered, so floor-mounted toilets are more 

difficult to clean around. Circulation routes do 

not provide operational access in all locations; 

for example, Constitution Gardens does not 

have operational access for maintenance or delivery vehicles. Around the Tidal Basin, walks are 

too narrow to accommodate the electric carts 

used by park rangers. 

Special Events 

Frequent special events and associated high 

levels of use result in wear and tear on park 

facilities and infrastructure that is difficult to 

immediately address, resulting in negative public 

comments about the appearance of the National 

Mall. During major events like the Fourth of 

July, staff work overtime through the night to 

remove more than 30 tons of trash by the next 

morning, and during some events contract staff 

supplement park staff. 

Vehicle routes are identified for heavy delivery 

trucks for special events, but due to insufficient 

staffing, special events are not consistently monitored for compliance. Vehicles of all kinds park 

on turf areas and contribute to soil compaction. 

The installation of large amounts of temporary 

fencing for presidential inaugural activities, the 

Fourth of July celebration, and some First 

Amendment demonstrations is a time-consuming activity that reduces time spent on other 

maintenance activities. Complaints have been 

received about the use of snow fencing, and the 

park has been trying different products. 

Waste Management and Recycling 

The Maintenance Division now operates on two 

work shifts (6 a.m.–3 p.m., and 1:30 p.m. to 10 

p.m.) to better align with hours of visitation. 

Currently, waste containers are emptied 

throughout the day and problems are addressed 

in a timely fashion, thus improving conditions 

for visitors. 

Repeated frequent cleanings at memorials can 

adversely affect these resources, and park regulations prohibit food and drinks within memorials to protect them from damage, stains, spills, 

and difficult-to-remove gum. 

There are between 650 and 700 trash receptacles 

within the National Mall, and the park has been 

consolidating styles as it replaced more 555 on 

the National Mall in the last year. The park empties trash containers by hand, and lifting heavy 

trash bags from containers may result in staff 

injuries. The mechanized emptying of trash 

requires side-loading trash containers and 

modified trucks for lifting and dumping. 

A recycling program conducted by a corporate 

donor in the early 1900s was successful because 

the donor paid to have the trash removed and 

the different types of recyclables sorted. Since 

then, recyclable materials have been frequently 

mixed with trash, which is not acceptable to 

recycling centers. The National Park Service, the 

Trust for the National Mall, the Environmental 

Protection Agency, and others have been 

working on a number of recycling programs as 

well as solid waste (garbage) management 

studies and recommendations. 

Today lightweight plastic bottles have replaced 

glass as the most common drink containers. 

Currently well over 90% of drink containers are 

plastic, and around 40% of trash is comprised of 

food packaging. While glass breakage is no 

longer a major concern, a large amount of plastic 

containers blow around, spill out of trash containers, and float in water features. Solid waste 

and recycling containers are not concentrated 

near areas where trash is generated (such as food 

service facilities), so litter is not confined to 

specific areas. NPS Management Policies 2006 

support solid waste management practices to 

reduce trash and to encourage reuse and 

recycling (NPS 2006e, sec. 9.1.6.1). 

The National Park Service has recently signed a 

contract with Urban Service Systems Corporation for transfer station waste disposal. The 

company is advertised as a “Going Green” 

company that collects solid waste, which is then 

burned to generate up to 23 megawatts of elec352
Park Operations: Partnership, Business, and Jurisdictional Issues 

tricity and sold to Dominion Virginia Power 

Company. Contracts for single-stream recycling, 

florescent bulb recycling, and composting of 

food waste are being studied to further improve 

recycling efforts. 

Communication Infrastructure 

There is no comprehensive communication 

infrastructure on the National Mall. Temporary 

telephones and communications are provided as 

needed for events. Mass notification is undertaken by police and park rangers through personal contact, announcements on stages, bullhorns, and electronic message signs. These 

means are also used to provide directions during 

events like the Fourth of July celebration. Mass 

communication and fiber optic lines run near 

the National Mall boundaries. 

PARTNERSHIP, BUSINESS, AND 

JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES

Partnerships 

Partnerships are vital to the operation, preservation, and enjoyment of the National Mall. 

Partnership agreements detail the requirements, 

limits, and extent of the activities. Partnership 

activities must not (1) violate legal or ethical 

standards, (2) reflect adversely on the NPS 

mission or image, or (3) imply an unwillingness 

to perform an inherently governmental function. 

As of fall 2006 the park’s partnership office has 

23 written agreements on a range of subjects. 

The Trust for the National Mall is the authorized NPS fundraising partner, and Eastern 

National is the cooperating association that 

operates bookstores. There are partner groups 

for specific memorials, such as the Washington 

Monument, the World War II Memorial, the 

Korean War Veterans Memorial, and the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. There are also partner 

groups for certain activities, such as the National 

Cherry Blossom Festival. 

Public and other activities and programs such as 

Fourth of July celebrations, inaugural activities, 

the Smithsonian Folklife Festival, and the National Cherry Blossom Festival involve facilities 

and locations under multiple jurisdictions. The 

Smithsonian Institution and the National Park 

Service co-sponsor the Folklife Festival on the 

Mall each summer. The National Park Service 

also works with the Architect of the Capitol on 

annual concerts and support for state events. 

The National Park Service has consultation 

partnerships with the Commission of Fine Arts, 

the National Capital Planning Commission, the 

D.C. Historic Preservation Office, the Advisory 

Council on Historic Preservation, the Interagency Workgroup for the Mall, and the 

American Battle Monuments Commission. 

Under a memorandum of agreement with the 

D.C. government, the city issues permits for the 

use of some athletic fields on the National Mall. 

The U.S. Park Police have primary law enforcement jurisdiction on the National Mall, but also 

work with the U.S. Capitol Police, U.S. Secret 

Service, D.C. Metropolitan Police, and others to 

provide safety and security within the area. 

Lawn care services and irrigation improvements 

at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial have been 

funded by the Vietnam Veterans Memorial 

Fund, as an extension of their ongoing preservation work at the memorial. Overall, the 

Memorial Fund’s efforts will improve approximately 13.5 acres on the National Mall, 

including the knoll east of the memorial. The 

Memorial Fund has been a partner with the 

National Park Service in memorial preservation 

from the beginning, taking an active role in the 

physical needs of the wall, The Three Serviceman

statue and flagpole, and the rest of the memorial 

site. Services routinely provided by include 

insurance of the wall against damages, provision 

of copies of the names directory to assist visitors, 

and wall maintenance. The Memorial Fund also 

adds names to the wall and makes status changes 

for those whose remains have been returned 

home. 

Volunteers-in-Parks 

Volunteers-in-Parks supplement NPS staff in 

many areas managed by the National Mall and 

Memorial Parks. While the statistics for 2009 are 

incomplete, for the 10 months of the fiscal year 

beginning October 2008, more than 30,000 

hours of labor have been donated to the park. 

The National Park Service values contributions 

at $20.25 per hour. The volunteer contribution 

 353
THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

thus far in fiscal year 2009 is valued at over 

$621,000 (see Table 40). 

More than half of volunteer hours fall under 

maintenance types of work, including staining 

park benches, painting post-and-chain fencing, 

weeding, raking and bagging leaves, pruning, 

picking up trash, picking up river debris, general 

cleanup, and summer student help in the paint 

and carpentry shops. Volunteers also support 

special events and provide a variety of services 

ranging from recycling to staffing first-aid 

facilities. Volunteers support interpretation and 

education by staffing information kiosks and by 

putting on programs at World War II Memorial, 

at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, and during 

the National Cherry Blossom Festival. 

Commercial Visitor Services 

In accordance with NPS Management Policies 

2006 (sec. 10.2.2), commercial visitor services 

that are necessary and appropriate for visitor use 

and enjoyment are provided on the National 

Mall. Two businesses have contracts with the 

National Park Service to operate on the National 

Mall. Guest Services, Inc., (GSI) provides refreshments, gifts, and recreation equipment 

rentals (paddleboats). Landmark Services, Inc., 

operates the Tourmobile service, an interpretive 

visitor transportation service. Both contracts are 

nearing the end of their contract time periods. 

Other businesses, such as taxis or pedicabs, and 

guided tours (walking, bicycling, sightseeing, or 

Segway® HTs), can operate within the National 

Mall in compliance with laws and federal regulations for the National Park Service. Areas of 

operation and stops related to these services are 

designated by the superintendent. 

TABLE 40: VOLUNTEER HOURS, OCTOBER 2008–

JULY 2009 

2008 Volunteer Category 

2008 Volunteer 

Hours 

Cultural Resource Management 1,503 

Interpretation 13,969 

Maintenance 12,251 

Natural Resource Management 662 

Protection/Operations/Law 

Enforcement/Public Health 

2,159 

Training 130 

Total Hours 30,674 

Number of Volunteers 3,265 

Value of Volunteer Hours at $20.25/hour $621,148 

Program Costs $36,430 

Jurisdictional Issues 

Various jurisdictions overlap on the National 

Mall. The National Park Service and Washington, D.C., each maintain different roads within 

the National Mall, and city roads run through or 

tunnel under the park. A mix of NPS, city, federal highway, and downtown D.C. Department of 

Transportation signs provide information. The 

city has some maintenance facilities in the 

Watergate area, and city parking meters provide 

income to the city. The Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) Metrobus 

lines run through and stop on the National Mall, 

and four Metrorail (subway) lines run beneath it. 

An interagency working group of federal and 

local agencies addresses streetscape issues 

(Interagency Initiative for National Mall Road 

Improvement Program 1992). 

There are some uniquely federal coordination 

concerns, such as the condition of the GSA 

steamlines that traverse the park, or the security 

needs of federal office and museum buildings on 

or adjacent to the National Mall. 

354
ENVIRONMENTAL

CONSEQUENCES

DRAFT 

NATIONAL MALL PLAN / 

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT

THE NATIONAL MALL

LINCOLN

MEMORIAL

CONTENTS: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ............................................................................................... 355

Methodology for Impact Analysis ..................................................................................................................357

Cumulative Impacts .................................................................................................................................357

Impairment................................................................................................................................................364

Unacceptable Impacts .............................................................................................................................365

Future Compliance ..................................................................................................................................366

Cultural Resources ...........................................................................................................................................367

Methodology for Analyzing Impacts.....................................................................................................367

Impact Intensity Levels...................................................................................................................367

Type of Impact .................................................................................................................................367

Duration............................................................................................................................................367

Regulations and Policies .................................................................................................................368

Impacts Common to All Alternatives ....................................................................................................371

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................371

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................373

Impacts of the No-Action Alternative...................................................................................................373

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................374

Cumulative Impacts.........................................................................................................................375

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................376

NHPA Section 106 Summary .........................................................................................................376

Impacts of the Preferred Alternative .....................................................................................................377

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................377

Cumulative Impacts.........................................................................................................................380

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................380

NHPA Section 106 Summary .........................................................................................................380

Impacts of Alternative A..........................................................................................................................380

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................380

Cumulative Impacts.........................................................................................................................382

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................382

NHPA Section 106 Summary .........................................................................................................382

Impacts of Alternative B ..........................................................................................................................382

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................383

Cumulative Impacts.........................................................................................................................385

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................385

NHPA Section 106 Summary .........................................................................................................385

Impacts of Alternative C..........................................................................................................................385

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................385

Cumulative Impacts.........................................................................................................................388

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................388

NHPA Section 106 Summary .........................................................................................................388

Natural Resources ............................................................................................................................................389

Water Resources.......................................................................................................................................389

Methodology for Impact Analysis.................................................................................................389

NPS Policies .....................................................................................................................................389

Impacts Common to All Alternatives............................................................................................390

Impacts of the No-Action Alternative ..........................................................................................390

Impacts of the Preferred Alternative.............................................................................................392

Impacts of Alternative A .................................................................................................................393

i
CONTENTS

Impacts of Alternative B..................................................................................................................394

Impacts of Alternative C .................................................................................................................395

Soils ............................................................................................................................................................396

Methodology for Impact Analysis.................................................................................................396

NPS Policies .....................................................................................................................................396

Impacts Common to All Alternatives............................................................................................396

Impacts of the No-Action Alternative ..........................................................................................396

Impacts of the Preferred Alternative.............................................................................................398

Impacts of Alternative A .................................................................................................................399

Impacts of Alternative B..................................................................................................................400

Impacts of Alternative C .................................................................................................................400

Vegetation .................................................................................................................................................401

Methodology for Impact Analysis.................................................................................................401

NPS Policies .....................................................................................................................................402

Impacts Common to All Alternatives............................................................................................402

Impacts of the No-Action Alternative ..........................................................................................402

Impacts of the Preferred Alternative.............................................................................................403

Impacts of Alternative A .................................................................................................................405

Impacts of Alternative B..................................................................................................................405

Impacts of Alternative C .................................................................................................................407

Fish and Wildlife ......................................................................................................................................407

Methodology for Impact Analysis.................................................................................................407

NPS Policies .....................................................................................................................................408

Impacts of the No-Action Alternative ..........................................................................................409

Impacts of the Preferred Alternative.............................................................................................409

Impacts of Alternative A .................................................................................................................410

Impacts of Alternative B..................................................................................................................411

Impacts of Alternative C .................................................................................................................412

Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations .....................................................................414

Methodology for Analyzing Impacts.....................................................................................................414

Impact Intensity Levels...................................................................................................................414

Type of Impacts ...............................................................................................................................415

Duration of Impacts ........................................................................................................................415

User Capacity Estimates .................................................................................................................415

Regulations and Policies .................................................................................................................415

Impacts Common to All Alternatives ....................................................................................................416

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................416

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................418

Impacts of the No-Action Alternative...................................................................................................418

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................418

Cumulative Impacts.........................................................................................................................422

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................423

Impacts of the Preferred Alternative .....................................................................................................423

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................423

Cumulative Impacts.........................................................................................................................428

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................428

Impacts of Alternative A..........................................................................................................................428

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................428

Cumulative Impacts.........................................................................................................................432

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................432

Impacts of Alternative B ..........................................................................................................................432

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................432

Cumulative Impacts.........................................................................................................................436

ii
Contents 

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................436

Impacts of Alternative C..........................................................................................................................436

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................436

Cumulative Impacts.........................................................................................................................439

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................440

Access and Circulation.....................................................................................................................................441

Methodology for Impact Analysis .........................................................................................................441

Impact Intensity Levels...................................................................................................................441

Type of Impact .................................................................................................................................441

Duration of Impacts ........................................................................................................................441

Regulations and Policies .................................................................................................................442

Impacts Common to All Alternatives ....................................................................................................443

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................443

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................444

Impacts of the No-Action Alternative...................................................................................................444

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................444

Cumulative Impacts.........................................................................................................................447

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................450

Impacts of the Preferred Alternative .....................................................................................................450

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................450

Cumulative Impacts.........................................................................................................................455

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................455

Impacts of Alternative A..........................................................................................................................455

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................455

Cumulative Impacts.........................................................................................................................456

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................456

Impacts of Alternative B ..........................................................................................................................456

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................456

Cumulative Impacts.........................................................................................................................463

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................463

Impacts of Alternative C..........................................................................................................................463

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................463

Cumulative Impacts.........................................................................................................................467

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................467

Visitor Experience ............................................................................................................................................468

Methodology for Impact Analysis .........................................................................................................468

Impact Intensity Levels...................................................................................................................469

Type of Impacts ...............................................................................................................................469

Duration of Impacts ........................................................................................................................469

Laws, Regulations, and Policies .....................................................................................................469

User Capacity ...................................................................................................................................471

Impacts Common to All Alternatives ....................................................................................................471

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................471

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................473

Impacts of the No-Action Alternative...................................................................................................473

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................473

Cumulative Impacts.........................................................................................................................478

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................479

Impacts of the Preferred Alternative .....................................................................................................479

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................479

Cumulative Impacts.........................................................................................................................485

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................485

 iii
CONTENTS

Impacts of Alternative A..........................................................................................................................485

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................485

Cumulative Impacts.........................................................................................................................489

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................489

Impacts of Alternative B ..........................................................................................................................490

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................490

Cumulative Impacts.........................................................................................................................495

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................495

Impacts of Alternative C..........................................................................................................................495

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................495

Cumulative Impacts.........................................................................................................................500

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................500

Socioeconomic Environment..........................................................................................................................501

Methodology for Impact Analysis .........................................................................................................501

Impact Intensity Levels...................................................................................................................501

Type of Impact .................................................................................................................................501

Duration of Impacts ........................................................................................................................501

Regulations and Policies .................................................................................................................502

Impacts Common to All Alternatives ....................................................................................................502

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................502

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................503

Impacts of the No-Action Alternative...................................................................................................504

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................504

Cumulative Impacts.........................................................................................................................504

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................506

Impacts of the Preferred Alternative .....................................................................................................507

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................507

Cumulative Impacts.........................................................................................................................508

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................508

Impacts of Alternative A..........................................................................................................................509

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................509

Cumulative Impacts.........................................................................................................................509

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................510

Impacts of Alternative B ..........................................................................................................................510

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................510

Cumulative Impacts.........................................................................................................................511

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................511

Impacts of Alternative C..........................................................................................................................512

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................512

Cumulative Impacts.........................................................................................................................513

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................513

Park Operations ................................................................................................................................................514

Methodology for Impact Analysis .........................................................................................................514

Impact Intensity Levels...................................................................................................................514

Type of Impact .................................................................................................................................514

Duration of Impacts ........................................................................................................................514

Legislations, Regulations, and Policies .........................................................................................514

Impacts Common to All Alternatives ....................................................................................................516

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................516

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................518

Impacts of the No-Action Alternative...................................................................................................518

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................518

iv
Contents 

Cumulative Impacts.........................................................................................................................522

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................524

Impacts of the Preferred Alternative .....................................................................................................524

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................524

Cumulative Impacts.........................................................................................................................528

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................528

Impacts of Alternative A..........................................................................................................................528

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................528

Cumulative Impacts.........................................................................................................................531

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................531

Impacts of Alternative B ..........................................................................................................................531

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................531

Cumulative Impacts.........................................................................................................................535

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................535

Impacts of Alternative C..........................................................................................................................535

Direct and Indirect Impacts ...........................................................................................................535

Cumulative Impacts.........................................................................................................................539

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................539

Other NEPA Impact Analysis Requirements ................................................................................................540

Unavoidable Adverse Impacts................................................................................................................540

Relationship Between Short-Term Uses of the Environment and Long-Term Productivity........540

Irreversible and Irretrievable Resource Commitments ......................................................................540

 v
CONTENTS

PLAN MAPS 

Recent, Ongoing, and Future Cumulative Projects..................................................................................... 359

Area of Potential Effect ................................................................................................................................... 369

Civic Stage — No-Action Alternative............................................................................................................ 419

Civic Stage — Preferred Alternative.............................................................................................................. 424

Civic Stage — Alternative A ............................................................................................................................ 429

Civic Stage — Alternative B ............................................................................................................................ 433

Civic Stage — Alternative C............................................................................................................................ 437

Circulation — No-Action Alternative........................................................................................................... 445

Circulation — Preferred Alternative ............................................................................................................. 451

Circulation — Alternative A ........................................................................................................................... 457

Circulation — Alternative B............................................................................................................................ 459

Circulation — Alternative C ........................................................................................................................... 465

vi
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 

355
This page has been left blank intentionally. 
METHODOLOGY FOR IMPACT ANALYSIS

Impacts of the alternatives are analyzed in 

accordance with the guidelines of the Council 

on Environmental Quality (CEQ) for implementing the National Environmental Policy Act 

(40 CFR Part 1500) and the National Historic 

Preservation Act. The impact analysis for all 

topics is qualitative and is based on research, 

knowledge of park resources, and the best 

professional judgment of planners and resource 

specialists. Federal laws, regulations, and 

policies that have a bearing on the impact 

analysis are summarized for each topic. The 

methodology for cumulative impacts is 

presented below. 

The impact analysis considers direct, indirect, 

and cumulative impacts. Direct impacts are 

caused by an action and occur at the same time 

and place as the action. Indirect impacts are 

caused by the action and occur later or farther 

away but are still reasonably foreseeable. 

Impacts are also analyzed as their context, 

intensity, duration, and type. Context generally 

refers to the geographic extent of the impact 

(e.g., site-specific, localized, regional). Intensity 

is the magnitude or degree to which a resource 

would be affected. The impact intensity is described in terms of negligible, minor, moderate, 

or major, with threshold definitions for these 

terms presented individually for each impact 

topic. Statements of impact intensity assume 

implementation of identified mitigation measures. Impact duration refers to how long an 

impact would last (i.e., short- or long-term), and 

the type of impact refers to whether the effect 

would be beneficial or adverse. These terms are 

also defined individually under each impact 

topic. 

Impacts of the action alternatives are determined by comparing their effects to those of the 

no-action alternative. Impacts of the no-action 

alternative are determined by comparing current 

impacts of continuing present management with 

those projected at the end of the planning 

period. 

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

CEQ regulations to implement the National 

Environmental Policy Act require the assessment of cumulative impacts in the decisionmaking process for federal projects. A cumulative impact is defined as “the impact on the environment which results from the incremental 

impact of the action when added to other past, 

present, and reasonably foreseeable future 

actions regardless of what agency (federal or 

non-federal) or person undertakes such other 

actions” (40 CFR 1508.7). A cumulative impact 

can result from individually minor, but collectively significant actions, taking place over a 

period of time. 

Cumulative impacts are analyzed and disclosed 

for all alternatives, including the no-action alternative, under each impact topic. Current projects that were discussed under “Interrelationships with Other Plans and Projects,” beginning 

on page 42, and that are also considered in the 

analysis of cumulative impacts include the 

following: 

Architect of the Capitol 

Capitol Complex Master Plan 

District of Columbia 

City Center Action Agenda 

National Capital Planning Commission 

Extending the Legacy 

Memorials and Museums Master Plan 

Monumental Core Framework Plan

National Park Service 

Visitor Transportation Study for the 

National Mall and Surrounding Park 

Areas 

Comprehensive Design Plan for the White 

House and President’s Park 

Design Guidelines for the White House and 

President’s Park

Interagency Planning Efforts 

CapitalSpace — District of Columbia, 

National Capital Planning Commission, 

and National Park Service 

Planning Together for Central Washington —

Architect of the Capitol, Commission of 

357
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Fine Arts, District of Columbia, National 

Capital Planning Commission, and 

National Park Service 

Because some of these cumulative actions are in 

the early planning or project development 

stages, the evaluation of cumulative effects was 

based on a general description of the project. 

Additional plans and projects are discussed 

below. 

The locations of ongoing and proposed projects 

are shown on three different plan maps for NPS 

projects, NCPC Monumental Core Framework 

Plan opportunities, and recent and ongoing 

projects. 

Interagency Planning Efforts 

Interagency Initiative for National Mall Road 

Improvement Program. In 1992 the Streetscape 

Manual was developed to provide guidelines for 

a coordinated and consistent streetscape in the 

vicinity of the National Mall (Interagency 

Initiative for National Mall Road Improvement 

Program 1992). The manual identifies and provides specifications for streetscape components 

such as curbs, gutters, and step outs; curb cuts; 

bus pads; street lighting; tree planting areas, lawn 

curbs, and post-and-chain fencing. Updates and 

related issues are addressed during regularly 

scheduled interagency meetings. Other interagency efforts are underway to discuss signs, 

information, and technology. 

Architect of the Capitol 

United States Botanic Garden. The 7-acre 

Botanic Garden, which lies at the foot of the U.S. 

Capitol on the National Mall. The Botanic 

Garden is a living plant museum that demonstrates the ecological, economic, therapeutic, 

cultural, and aesthetic importance of plants. It 

includes outdoor ornamental gardens and 

greenhouses, including the Conservatory, 

Bartholdi Park, and the National Garden (which 

opened in October 2006). 

Capitol Visitor Center. The Capitol Visitor 

Center opened in December 2008. Expanded 

space for the House and Senate will be completed later (Architect of the Capitol 2005). 

Library of Congress. The library reopened 

renovated permanent history exhibits in 2008. 

U.S. Senate Youth Park and U.S. Botanic 

Garden Education and Outreach Center.

Future projects are envisioned for the area north 

of Union Square and Pennsylvania Avenue. 

District of Columbia 

The 14th Street Bridge Corridor. The 14th 

Street bridge corridor is essential in connecting 

the traffic systems of northern Virginia and the 

District of Columbia. In December 2000 the 

Federal Highway Administration, in cooperation 

with the D.C. Department of Transportation 

(DDOT), the National Park Service, and the 

Virginia Department of Transportation, initiated 

studies and actions to address congestion in the 

14th Street bridge corridor (DDOT 2008). With 

increasing commuters, travelers, public transit 

users, pedestrians, and bicyclists; the safety and 

mobility of this link has become a priority 

(DDOT 2008). An environmental impact 

statement is now being prepared to address 

current and future needs. Among the objectives 

that the alternatives are intended to address are 

the following: 

• improve safety and mobility for all modes 

of transportation 

• minimize long travel times and delays 

• minimize driver confusion and distraction 

• improve traveler information 

• improve transportation system efficiency/enhance mobility 

• protect/maintain parklands, wetlands, and 

the Potomac River 

• enhance gateway corridor features, aesthetics, and appearance. 

The Anacostia Waterfront Initiative Framework Plan. The Anacostia Waterfront plan is 

intended to guide the revitalization of the 

Anacostia waterfront area. The five themes in 

the plan include creating a clean and active river; 

eliminating barriers to neighborhoods and 

providing access to residents; improving the 

urban riverfront park system; providing cultural 

destinations of distinct character; and building 

strong waterfront neighborhoods (DC 2003a). 

358
Methodology for Impact Analysis: Cumulative Impacts 

Recent, Ongoing, and Future 

Cumulative Projects 

 359
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Southwest Waterfront Plan. The Southwest 

Waterfront Plan is a redevelopment framework 

for nearly 50 acres of waterfront in the southwest quadrant of Washington. The plan envisions replacing parking lots and underutilized 

streets with a mix of public plazas, cultural 

venues, restaurants, shops, and residences to 

create a vibrant neighborhood and regional 

waterfront destination. More than 2 million 

square feet of new construction are proposed, 

including 14 acres of new parks along the 

waterfront, three times the existing open space 

(DC 2003b). 

The District of Columbia Bicycle Master Plan.

The Bicycle Master Plan generally recommends 

more and better bicycle facilities, including a 

bike route system with more bike facilities on 

roadways, more bicycle friendly policies, and 

more bicycle-related education, promotion, and 

enforcement. It also suggests upgrades of National Mall roadways and multi-use trails, improved bridge access, bike-friendly traffic calming, exclusive bus and bicycle lanes, and intersection safety and visibility improvements to 

better accommodate bicycling (DDOT 2005a). 

The District of Columbia Pedestrian Master 

Plan. The draft plan identifies pedestrian potential, as well as problems to be addressed, such as 

walking along roadways and crossing roads 

(DDOT 2008a). The plan recommends improved pedestrian access and safety at controlled crossings and intersections to meet the 

needs of pedestrians of all ability levels, as well 

as programs that support pedestrian travel. The 

related vision statement fits well with National 

Mall plan goals: 

Washington, DC will be a city where any trip 

can be taken on foot safely and comfortably, 

and where roadways equally serve pedestrians, bicyclists, transit users and motorists. 

L’Enfant Promenade Urban Planning Study.

The D.C. Department of Transportation, in 

coordination with the Federal Highway Administration, the National Park Service, and the 

Washington Interdependence Council, is 

pursuing an urban planning study to identify and 

evaluate rehabilitation options and modifications to the existing roadway and sidewalks for 

the L’Enfant Promenade, in southwest Washington, including connections to the southwest 

waterfront (DDOT 2003). One of the proposals 

is for a multi-level parking and intermodal transportation facility below the 10th Street Overlook, which would provide approximately 1,200 

parking spaces and a terminal and parking 

facility for commuter and tour buses. The 

Monumental Core Framework Plan proposes an 

alternative intermodal transportation facility 

linked to the L’Enfant Metro station that could 

provide tour bus and visitor parking beneath 

10th Street (NCPC 2009). 

New York Avenue Corridor Study. The study’s 

goals for New York Avenue from 7th Street NW 

to the intersection with Baltimore-Washington 

Parkway, and 7th Street from H to N streets NW 

(including three blocks to the east and west of 

7th Street NW) are (1) to facilitate the more efficient and safe movement of people while minimizing the negative impacts of commuter traffic 

on nearby neighborhoods; (2) to provide a 

transportation system to include autos, trucks, 

rail, bus, bicycles, and pedestrians; (3) to investigate opportunities for an intermodal transportation center; (4) to accommodate local and regional transportation needs over the next 30 to 

50 years; (5) to create capacity for new commercial and residential development; and (6) to 

avoid displacing residents or excluding income 

diversity (DDOT 2005b). 

National Capital Planning Commission 

The National Capital Urban Design and Security Plan. This plan for Washington’s monumental core and the downtown focuses on 

perimeter building security to protect employees, visitors, and federal functions and property 

from threats generated by unauthorized vehicles 

approaching or entering sensitive buildings 

(NCPC 2002). It specifically addresses the proliferation of makeshift barriers and identifies 

various security design solutions, including 

“hardened” street furniture and landscaped 

planting walls, that can enhance local streetscapes, while still providing security. 

NCPC’s New Vision for South Capitol Street.

As envisioned, South Capitol Street will include 

a combination of parkland, retail, residential, 

and cultural establishments, such as a museum 

or performing arts venue (NCPC 2005b). 

360
Methodology for Impact Analysis: Cumulative Impacts 

Washington’s Waterfronts. Six waterfront 

areas are identified for potential development: 

the east and west banks of the Anacostia River;

the Bolling-Anacostia waterfront; the southeast 

waterfront; the southwest waterfront; and the 

Georgetown/northwest waterfront (NCPC 

1999). 

National Park Service 

American Veterans Disabled for Life Memorial. The National Park Service and the Disabled 

Veterans’ Life Memorial Foundation have proposed a national memorial for disabled veterans 

at Washington Avenue and 2nd Street SW, near 

the National Mall. The National Capital Planning Commission approved this site in August 

2001. The memorial will consist of a grove of 

trees, a reflecting pool, and a central fire in the 

middle of a water element. Stone and glass walls 

will enclose the site and define pathways (NPS 

2005a). 

Anacostia Park — Anacostia Park’s new general 

management plan will serve as the park’s 

decision-making foundation over the next 10 to 

15 years. Elements common to the alternatives 

include taking better advantage of existing 

Metro access, improving vehicular access within 

the park, and improving the trail system (NPS 

2003c). 

Anacostia Riverwalk. The proposed Anacostia 

riverwalk project would create a multi-use trail 

and connecting points on the east side of the 

Anacostia River from the Washington Navy 

Yard to Benning Road, and on the west side of 

the river from the Anacostia Naval Station to 

Bladensburg Trail in Prince George’s County, 

Maryland (NPS 2004a). 

Centennial Initiative. In 2006 President George 

W. Bush and Secretary of the Interior Dirk 

Kempthorne proposed a 10-year initiative to 

upgrade the condition of the national park 

system by its 100th anniversary in 2016 (NPS 

2007c). Additional operating funds will be 

provided to supplement budgets, along with 

specific projects at parks. To provide incentives, 

matching funds are to be raised for projects by 

private/public partnerships. 

The National Mall and Memorial Parks has been 

selected for the Centennial Initiative, and the 

first project is for park signage and graphics. The 

Trust for the National Mall is providing matching funds (NPS 2008b). The project, which is 

underway, will develop and update a sign system 

for all National Mall and Memorial Parks, which 

will include pedestrian wayfinding signs and directories; identification signs for park areas, 

memorials, and monuments; orientation, information, and map locations; general information 

signs; park rules and regulations; temporary 

signs; and interactive signs. The project will be 

implemented in phases. 

Constitution Avenue Roadwork. Constitution 

Avenue roadwork will repair and resurface the 

travel lanes and a concrete lane for bus drop-offs 

from 17th to 19th streets, as well as provide new 

granite curbs, curb cuts, new concrete sidewalks 

on both sides of the street, concrete walks connecting bus drop-offs to the main east-west 

sidewalk on the south side, new street lights, and 

a new stormwater drainage system. Portions of 

travel lane work could begin earlier. The project 

is scheduled for 2014, but it could be accelerated 

under the American Recovery and Reinvestment 

Act of 2009. 

D.C. War Memorial. Rehabilitation of the D. C. 

War Memorial is being funded by the American 

Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. 

Eisenhower National Memorial. The Dwight 

D. Eisenhower Memorial Commission is in the 

planning stages to create an Eisenhower National Memorial. The approved site is directly 

south of the National Air and Space Museum, 

between 4th and 6th streets SW, and Independence Avenue SW and C Street SW (Dwight D. 

Eisenhower Memorial Commission 2006). 

Georgetown Waterfront Park and C&O Canal 

National Historical Park. The National Park 

Service has submitted final site development 

plans for a portion of the Georgetown Waterfront Park, which were approved by the National Capital Planning Commission on June 2, 

2005. 

Lincoln Memorial Circle Roadway and Security Project. The purpose of this project is to improve bicycle and pedestrian safety, enhance 

traffic flow, upgrade visitor facilities, and reduce 

tour bus congestion. The project includes improving the pedestrian plaza on the east side of 

 361
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

the circle, adding concrete bus pads, improving 

drainage and lighting, replacing curbs and sidewalks, installing new signalized pedestrian 

crossings and drinking fountains, coordinating 

traffic patterns, and adding security barriers 

(NPS 2005b). This project was completed in 

2008, with the exception of the design and 

construction of a permanent vehicular security 

barrier on the east side of the memorial. A new 

project that includes the permanent security 

barrier along with repairs to the reflecting pool, 

the lower approachway, and elm walkways is 

being funded by the American Recovery and 

Reinvestment Act of 2009. 

Madison Drive Roadwork. Milling and overlay 

of road surfaces is proposed for 2011 but could 

be accelerated under the American Recovery 

and Reinvestment Act of 2009.

Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial. A national 

memorial to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. will be 

built on a 4-acre site on the northwest corner of 

the Tidal Basin. Plans were approved by the 

Commission of Fine Arts in September 2008. 

After construction, the National Park Service 

will maintain and operate the memorial (NPS 

2005c).

National Mall and Memorial Parks Concession Contracts and Commercial Services. The 

National Mall and Memorial Parks has concession contracts to provide visitor services such as 

food/retail and recreation equipment rentals. 

Economic feasibility assessments would 

determine the nature and scope of commercial 

business services.

Ohio Drive Roadwork. The project will repair 

and resurface the travel lanes on Ohio Drive 

from 23rd Street and Independence Avenue to 

the Constitution Avenue belvedere, and it will 

realign the road by 2 feet away from the river to 

develop a wider, safer, multipurpose trail where 

it passes under Arlington Memorial Bridge and 

Parkway Drive. The project will add new granite 

curbs and a concrete sidewalk on the river side 

of the street, reset the granite cobble sidewalk on 

the memorial side of the street, and install a new 

stormwater drainage system. The project is 

scheduled for 2010, but it could be accelerated 

under the American Recovery and Reinvestment 

Act of 2009. 

Potomac Park Levee Project. The National 

Park Service, in cooperation with U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers and the National Capital 

Planning Commission, has evaluated three 

action alternatives and a no-action alternative to 

improve the reliability of river flood protection 

provided by the Potomac Park levee system to a 

portion of the monumental core and downtown 

Washington D.C. Without adequate flood protection measures, several downtown locations, 

including portions of the monumental core, 

portions of Pennsylvania and Constitution 

avenues, and other public and private facilities 

south of the U.S. Capitol to Fort McNair, are at 

risk of flooding from a major (100-year plus) 

flood event (NPS 2008d). 

Rehabilitation of Rock Creek and Potomac 

Parkway. The National Park Service, in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration’s Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division, 

proposes to rehabilitate Rock Creek and 

Potomac Parkway from Virginia Avenue to the P 

Street bridge and the Thompson Boat Center, 

along with the access road, bridge, and parking 

area at the Thompson Boat Center (NPS 2005e). 

Rock Creek Park. The National Park Service’s 

preferred alternative for the Final General 

Management Plan and Environmental Impact 

Statement provides for the broadest use of the 

park by improving resource protection, enhancing recreational opportunities, and continuing 

the traditional visitor experience of automobile 

touring along the length of the park (NPS 2005f). 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial Permanent Security Improvements. This project will create a 

vehicle barrier system around the memorial 

while maintaining pedestrian flow across the 

grounds. The design is scheduled to begin in 

2009. 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial Plaza Wall. The 

National Park Service is continuing to work on 

repairing the seawalls near the plaza. Construction is being funded by the American Recovery 

and Reinvestment Act of 2009.

Victims of Communism Memorial. The National Park Service and the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation have proposed an 

international memorial as a tribute to the millions of people throughout the world who have 

362
Methodology for Impact Analysis: Cumulative Impacts 

fallen victim to communism. The approved site 

is at the intersection of Massachusetts Avenue, 

New Jersey Avenue, and G Street NW (NPS 

2005h). 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial Center. The 

underground center will be west of the Vietnam 

Veterans Memorial along 23rd Street NW. It will 

affect circulation and visitor experiences in the 

vicinity of Lincoln Circle and Henry Bacon 

Drive from 21st to 23rd streets (NPS 2007f). 

Washington Monument Permanent Security 

Improvements. Completed in 2007, this project 

reconfigured the grounds of the Washington 

Monument to create a vehicle barrier system 

around the monument while maintaining pedestrian flow across the grounds. Work included 

site walls, sidewalks and plaza, new flagpoles, 

lighting, irrigation, utility work, and rehabilitation of Monument Lodge (NPS 2002). Remaining work includes replacing the temporary 

screening facilities with permanent measures. 

Washington Mall Plan 1973–1976. This plan 

was prepared for the National Park Service by 

Skidmore, Owings and Merrill in preparation for 

the 1976 Bicentennial (Skidmore, Owings and 

Merrill 1973). As a result of this plan, Adams and 

Washington drives were converted from streets 

to wide pedestrian walks. Early plan drafts also 

recommended tunneling more roads under the 

National Mall and providing underground 

parking. The plan recognized that “the Mall in 

its present form is not a satisfactory pedestrian 

environment” and intended to restore the 

pedestrian role by removing surface traffic; 

providing visitor amenities such as refreshments, 

orientation, and resting facilities; providing a 

visitor transportation system (Tourmobile); 

adding new plantings to enhance year-round 

attractiveness, and embellishing the 8th Street 

axis. Access would be provided for bicyclists, 

pedestrians, Tourmobile buses, and service 

vehicles on narrower roads. Visitor parking was 

to be removed. The plan illustrated several 

different approaches to the Mall tree planting, 

however additional tree planting was rejected. 

Wetland Restoration and Canada Goose Management Plan for Anacostia. The National Park 

Service is preparing a wetland restoration plan, 

including resident goose management strategies 

to control undesired impacts of Canada geese at 

Anacostia Park. 

Smithsonian Institution 

Arts and Industries Building. A stabilization 

program for the building is being funded by the 

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 

2009. 

National Museum of the American Indian.

The museum at 4th Street and Independence 

Avenue SW opened on September 21, 2004 

(Smithsonian Institution 2005b). 

National Museum of American History Renovation. After three years of renovation the museum was reopened in November 2008. While 

the building footprint did not change, there is 

the potential for a future underground pedestrian and service connection to the. National 

Museum of African American History and 

Culture. This potential connection could affect 

circulation near 14th Street and Madison Drive. 

The Smithsonian Institution is seeking a new 

home for the bandstand gazebo located west of 

the museum. 

National Museum of African American History and Culture. The site for this new museum 

is Constitution Avenue between 14th and 15th 

streets NW. A draft environmental impact 

statement has been prepared, and design and 

compliance are to be started. 

Smithsonian Institution Mall-Wide Perimeter 

Security Improvements. In consideration of the 

National Capital Planning Commission’s National Capital Urban Design and Security Plan 

(NCPC 2002), the Smithsonian Institution has 

proposed perimeter security improvements. In 

October 2004 the National Capital Planning 

Commission approved preliminary plans for 

perimeter security measures for nine Smithsonian Institution museums on the Mall. The 

plans include establishing security lines within 

the building yard rather than in the public space; 

incorporating security into already existing site 

features when possible; respecting the 

monumentality of Independence and 

Constitution Avenues; custom designing 

solutions at entryways and plaza areas; and 

establishing a comprehensive tree planting 

program. Along Independence Avenue, for 

 363
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

example, existing walls will be hardened and 

custom-designed bollards will be used to secure 

pedestrian and vehicular entrances. Along Constitution Avenue the design calls for new freestanding walls on the inside edge of the sidewalk. Custom-designed benches, light poles, and 

urns will complement the historic fabric of the 

Mall precinct (NCPC 2004b). 

U.S. Department of Agriculture 

The Jamie L. Whitten Building, the central administration headquarters for the U.S. Department of Agriculture, is located across from the 

National Mall at 1400 Independence Avenue, 

SW. The neoclassical building was completed in 

1930. The NCPC Monumental Core Framework 

Plan (NCPC 2009) proposes that the Whitten 

building could become a cultural destination on 

the National Mall. Any such action would 

require congressional legislation. 

U.S. Department of Defense 

Air Force Memorial. The Air Force Memorial 

honors men and women who have served in the 

U.S. Air Force and its predecessors. On 3 acres 

of the Naval Annex site, the memorial includes 

three spires ranging from approximately 200 feet 

to 270 feet high, a parade ground, an honor 

guard sculpture, contemplative outdoor rooms 

and seating areas, pedestrian walkways, and a 

parking area (US DOD 2003). 

Pentagon September 11th Memorial. The 

memorial honors those who lost their lives in the 

2001 terrorist attack on the Pentagon. It opened 

on September 11, 2008. 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

The District of Columbia Tour Bus Management Initiative. The Tour Bus Management 

Initiative examines the impact of tour buses, 

explores best practices, identifies potential 

strategies, recommends counting methods and 

locations to get a better sense of the demand, 

and recommends the completion of a plan (US 

DOT 2003). The initiative identifies a shortage of 

parking and loading/unloading space, associated 

traffic and safety issues, adverse environmental 

impacts from buses, and obstruction of view 

corridors. The study also concluded that the 

National Mall does not have sufficient curbside 

loading/unloading space for demand. Some 

potential strategies include increased peripheral 

parking outside the monumental core and 

downtown, centrally located parking facilities, 

encouraging walking among clustered destinations, pricing strategies for parking or permits/licenses, and defined routes and driver facilities/shuttles between parking lots and hotels.

Other Reasonably Foreseeable Actions 

National Aquarium. Currently located in the 

basement of the Commerce Building, the aquarium entrance will be relocated to Constitution 

Avenue, making access more convenient for 

visitors on the National Mall. 

United States Institute of Peace Headquarters 

— A permanent headquarters facilities is to be 

built on the northwest corner of the National 

Mall at the intersection of Constitution Avenue 

and 23rd Street NW. 

Steamlines. The current replacement of the 

GSA steamline system under the Ellipse will 

have a short-term impact on circulation in the 

area north of the National Mall. 

The steamline serving the Washington Monument will also be replaced in the near future. 

This will have a short-term impact on circulation 

on the east side of the monument grounds. 

Maryland Avenue. Proposals for renovation of 

Maryland Avenue have included decking over 

rail lines to restore the avenue to the prominence envisioned in the L’Enfant plan.

Southwest Waterfront Development. A plan by 

a private developer aims to produce an active, 

mixed-use, urban riverfront that showcases 

distinctive cultural destinations and that builds 

on the existing, strong waterfront community. 

IMPAIRMENT

In addition to determining the environmental 

consequences of implementing the alternatives, 

NPS Management Policies 2006 require the analysis of potential effects to determine whether 

actions would impair park resources (NPS 

2006e). 

364
Methodology for Impact Analysis: Unacceptable Impacts 

The fundamental purpose of the national park 

system, established by the 1916 Organic Act and 

reaffirmed by the General Authorities Act of 

1970, as amended, begins with a mandate to 

conserve park resources and values. NPS managers must always seek ways to avoid, or to minimize to the greatest degree practicable, adverse 

impacts on park resources and values. However, 

the laws do give the National Park Service the 

management discretion to allow impacts to park 

resources and values when necessary and appropriate to fulfill the purposes of a park, as long as 

the impact does not constitute impairment of the 

affected resources and values. Nevertheless, that 

discretion is limited by the statutory requirement that the National Park Service must leave 

park resources and values unimpaired, unless a 

particular law directly and specifically provides 

otherwise. 

The prohibited impairment is an impact that, in 

the professional judgment of the responsible 

NPS manager, would harm the integrity of park 

resources or values, including the opportunities 

that otherwise would be present for the enjoyment of those resources or values. An impact to 

any park resource or value might constitute 

impairment. According to the NPS Management 

Policies 2006 (NPS 2006e, sec. 1.4.5), an impact 

would be more likely to constitute impairment 

to the extent that it affects a resource or value 

whose conservation is: 

• necessary to fulfill specific purposes 

identified in the park’s establishing 

legislation or proclamation; 

• key to the park’s natural or cultural 

integrity; or 

• identified as a goal in the park’s management plan or other relevant NPS planning 

documents. 

Impairment may result from NPS activities in 

managing the park, visitor activities, or activities 

undertaken by concessioners, contractors, and 

others operating in the park. The potential for 

impairment is discussed in the conclusion 

section of each natural and cultural resource 

impact topic. In accordance with the criteria 

defined above for park resources and values, 

determinations of impairment are not required 

for topics such as demonstrations, events, and 

national celebrations, access and circulation, 

visitor experience, socioeconomic environment, 

or park operations. 

UNACCEPTABLE IMPACTS

The impact threshold at which impairment 

occurs is not always readily apparent. Therefore, 

the National Park Service will apply a standard 

that offers greater assurance that impairment 

will not occur. The National Park Service will do 

this by avoiding impacts that it determines to be 

unacceptable. These are impacts that fall short of 

impairment, but are still not acceptable within a 

particular park’s environment. Park managers 

must not allow uses that would cause unacceptable impacts; they must evaluate existing or 

proposed uses and determine whether the associated impacts on park resources and values are 

acceptable. 

Virtually every form of human activity that takes 

place within a park has some degree of impact 

on park resources or values, but that does not 

mean the impact is unacceptable or that a particular use must be disallowed. Therefore, for 

the purposes of these policies, unacceptable 

impacts are impacts that, individually or 

cumulatively, would 

• be inconsistent with a park’s purposes or 

values, or 

• impede the attainment of a park’s desired 

future conditions for natural and cultural 

resources as identified through the park’s 

planning process, or 

• create an unsafe or unhealthful environment for visitors or employees, or 

• diminish opportunities for current or future 

generations to enjoy, learn about, or be 

inspired by park resources or values, or 

• unreasonably interfere with park 

◦ programs or activities, or 

◦ an appropriate use, or 

◦ the atmosphere of peace and tranquility, 

or the natural soundscape maintained in 

wilderness and natural, historic, or commemorative locations within the park, or 

◦ NPS concessioner or contractor 

operations or services. 

 365
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

In accordance with Management Policies 2006, 

park managers must not allow uses that would 

cause unacceptable impacts to park resources. 

To determine if unacceptable impact could 

occur to the resources and values of the National Mall, the impacts of proposed actions in 

this environmental impact statement have been 

evaluated based on the above criteria. A determination on unacceptable impacts is made in 

the conclusion section for each of the natural 

and cultural resource topics carried forward in 

this chapter. 

FUTURE COMPLIANCE

This environmental impact statement describes 

the impacts associated with a management plan 

for the National Mall. As specific elements of the 

plan are implemented, the NEPA environmental 

analysis will be reviewed to determine that (1) all 

impact topics have been analyzed in site-specific 

detail adequate for this particular action, (2) 

there are no changes to the proposal, (3) there 

are no appreciable changes in the affected environment (e.g., listing of a resource on the 

National Register of Historic Places), and (4) 

there are no changes to impacts to environmental resources. If all of these criteria apply, a 

memo-to-file will be used to document that sitespecific compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act has been documented in this 

environmental impact statement. If changes 

have occurred or if the site-specific detail is 

insufficient, additional compliance documentation will be required. 

Projects would continue to be assessed for their 

impacts on historic properties, and consultation 

under section 106 of the National Historic 

Preservation Act would occur as needed (see 

“Consultation and Coordination”). Required 

reviews and approvals by the Commission of 

Fine Arts and the National Capital Planning 

Commission would occur in accordance with 

legislation, as would reviews by the U.S. Park 

Police.

366
CULTURAL RESOURCES 

METHODOLOGY FOR ANALYZING 

IMPACTS

Potential impacts to contributing elements or 

character-defining features of a resource (direct, 

indirect, and cumulative) are described in terms 

of type, intensity, and duration, as described 

below. This analysis is consistent with the CEQ 

regulations for the National Environmental 

Policy Act. Unless otherwise noted, the context 

for all impacts would be direct and site-specific. 

Memorials on the National Mall are protected 

by authorities under the Commemorative Works 

Act. Potential impacts to the memorials resulting 

from actions described in the alternatives are 

evaluated in this chapter by area. 

Impact Intensity Levels 

The following impact thresholds were defined 

for impacts on cultural landscapes: 

• Negligible — Negligible impacts would be 

at the lowest levels of detection — barely 

perceptible and not measurable. There 

would be no change to defining features 

that contribute to the eligibility of a resource for listing on the National Register 

of Historic Places. For purposes of a determination under section 106 of the National 

Historic Preservation Act, the determination of effect would be no adverse effect.

• Minor — Impacts would not affect the 

character-defining features of a historic 

resource listed or eligible for listing on the 

National Register of Historic Places. Impacts would be detectable but would not 

diminish the overall integrity of the resource. For purposes of a determination 

under section 106 of the National Historic 

Preservation Act, the determination of 

effect would be no adverse effect.

• Moderate — Moderate impacts would alter 

a character-defining feature or features of a 

significant historic resource, and would 

diminish the overall integrity of the resource to the extent that its eligibility for 

the National Register of Historic Places 

could be jeopardized. Mitigation measures 

would be identified to reduce the level of 

impact and would be implemented with a 

high degree of success. For purposes of a 

determination under section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, the determination of effect would be adverse effect. 

• Major — Major impacts would result from 

substantial and highly noticeable changes 

that would alter the character-defining features of a historic resource, and diminish 

the integrity of the resource to the extent 

that it would no longer be eligible for listing 

on the National Register of Historic Places. 

Mitigation measures would be identified to 

reduce the level of impact and adopted not 

knowing the degree of success. For purposes of a determination under section 106 

of the National Historic Preservation Act, 

the determination of effect would be 

adverse effect.

Type of Impact 

Beneficial impacts would occur as a result of the 

restoration or rehabilitation of resources, or the 

removal of incompatible or noncontributing 

features. Adverse impacts would generally occur 

as a result of modifying a significant characteristic of a historic structure or landscape resource; removing a significant structure or landscape resource; or adding new, incompatible 

facilities in proximity to a historic site or 

structure. 

Duration 

Impacts could be temporary, short-term, longterm, or permanent. 

• Temporary — The impact would last no 

longer than two days. 

• Short-term — The impact would generally 

last up to one year or the life of a construction project. 

• Long-term — The impact would last longer 

than one year or for the life of the plan (up 

to 50 years). 

367
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

• Permanent — The impact would last beyond the life of the plan (or longer than 50 

years). 

Regulations and Policies 

Current laws and policies that apply to the management of cultural resources include the 

following: 

• National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, 

as amended (16 USC 470(f)) 

• Archeological and Historic Preservation 

Act of 1974 (16 USC 469 et seq.) 

• The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards 

and Guidelines for Archeology and Historic 

Preservation (NPS 1983) 

• The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for 

the Treatment of Historic Properties, with 

Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, 

Restoring and Reconstructing Historic 

Buildings (NPS 1995)

• The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for 

the Treatment of Historic Properties, with 

Guidelines for the Treatment of Cultural 

Landscapes (NPS 1996c) 

• “Nationwide Programmatic Memorandum 

of Agreement between the National Park 

Service, the Advisory Council on Historic 

Preservation, and the National Council of 

State Historic Preservation Officers” 

• NPS Management Policies 2006 (NPS 

2006e); Director’s Order #28: Cultural 

Resource Management; NPS-28: Cultural 

Resource Management Guideline (NPS 

1998b) 

Historic structures are inventoried and evaluated under National Register of Historic Places 

criteria. The qualities that contribute to the 

listing or eligibility for listing of historic structures on the national register are protected in 

accordance with The Secretary of the Interior’s 

Standards and Guidelines for Archeology and 

Historic Preservation. 

National Historic Preservation Act 

Section 106 Analysis 

The assessment of impacts on cultural resources 

for this project was made in accordance with 

regulations of the Advisory Council on Historic 

Preservation for implementing section 106 of the 

National Historic Preservation Act (36 CFR 

800). The project is being reviewed in accordance with the 2008 “Nationwide Programmatic 

Agreement between the National Park Service, 

the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, 

and the National Council of Historic Preservation Officers.” This programmatic agreement 

stipulates that section 106 compliance will be 

undertaken for all major planning efforts and 

will be in accordance with the servicewide 

programmatic agreement. 

In accordance with the Advisory Council on 

Historic Preservation’s (ACHP) regulations for 

implementing section 106 (36 CFR 800), impacts 

to cultural resources were identified and evaluated by (1) determining the area of potential 

effect; (2) identifying cultural resources present 

in this area that are either listed on or eligible for 

listing on the National Register of Historic 

Places; (3) applying the criteria of adverse effect 

to affected resources; and (4) considering ways to 

avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects. Each 

of these requirements is further described below: 

• Area of Potential Effect — The area of 

potential effect is the area within which an 

action could be expected to have some 

effect upon cultural resources listed on, or 

eligible for listing on, the National Register 

of Historic Places. The impact could be 

direct or indirect, or possibly visual in 

nature. The area of potential effect for the 

National Mall plan was defined broadly 

during the historic preservation consultation process. The Area of Potential Effect 

map represents the area that the D.C. Historic Preservation Office and the National 

Park Service determined could potentially 

be affected. 

• Resources within the Area of Potential 

Effect — Resources on the National Mall 

are discussed in the “Affected Environment” (beginning on page 260). 

• Determination of Effect — Under the 

ACHP regulations a determination of either 

adverse effect or no adverse effect must also 

be made for affected properties that are 

listed on or eligible for listing on the 

National Register of Historic Places. 

368
Cultural Resources: Methodology for Analyzing Impacts — Regulations and Policies 

Area of Potential Effect 

◦ Adverse effect — An adverse effect occurs whenever an impact alters, directly 

or indirectly, any characteristic of a cultural resource that qualifies it for listing 

on the National Register of Historic 

Places, e.g. diminishing the integrity (or 

the extent to which a resource retains its 

historic appearance) of location, design, 

setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, 

or association. An adverse effect also 

includes reasonably foreseeable effects 

caused by the alternatives that would 

occur later in time, be farther removed 

in distance, or be cumulative (36 CFR 

800.5). 

◦ No Adverse Effect — A determination of 

no adverse effect means there is an effect, 

but the effect would not diminish the 

characteristics of the cultural resource 

that qualify it for listing on the National 

Register of Historic Places. 

CEQ regulations and NPS Director’s Order #12:

Conservation Planning, Environmental Impact 

Analysis and Decision Making (NPS 2001a) also 

call for a discussion of mitigation, along with an 

analysis of how effective the mitigation would be 

in reducing the intensity of a potential impact, 

for example, reducing an impact intensity from 

major to moderate or minor. Any resultant reduction in impact intensity due to mitigation, 

however, is an estimate of the effectiveness of 

mitigation only under the National Environmental Policy Act. It does not suggest that the level of 

effect as defined by section 106 would be similarly reduced. Cultural resources are nonrenewable resources, and adverse effects generally 

consume, diminish, or destroy the original historic materials or form, resulting in a loss in the 

 369
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

integrity of the resource that can never be recovered. Therefore, although actions determined to 

have an adverse effect under section 106 might 

be mitigated, the effect would remain adverse. 

The final assessment of effect for each action 

described in the management alternatives will be 

undertaken in consultation with D.C. Historic 

Preservation Office and the Advisory Council on 

Historic Preservation. All future consultation 

and compliance on the National Mall plan will 

be undertaken according to the terms and 

conditions of a programmatic agreement 

between the National Park Service, the D.C. 

Historic Preservation Office, and the Advisory 

Council on Historic Preservation. The agreement will be signed before the record of decision 

for the plan.

The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards 

for the Treatment of Historic Properties 

The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the 

Treatment of Historic Properties, with Guidelines 

for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring and 

Reconstructing Historic Buildings (NPS 1995) 

identifies four treatment approaches that apply 

to a wide variety of resource types, including 

buildings, sites, structures, objects, districts, and 

landscape features and patterns. Three of these 

treatments are included in this plan — preservation, rehabilitation, and restoration — and they 

are defined below (the fourth treatment, reconstruction, is not considered in this plan): 

• Preservation — The act or process of applying the measures necessary to sustain the 

existing form, integrity, and materials of a 

historic property. Work, including preliminary measures to protect and stabilize the 

property, generally focuses on ongoing 

maintenance and repair of historic materials and features rather than extensive 

replacement and new construction. 

• Rehabilitation — The act or process of 

making possible a compatible use for a 

property through repair, alterations, and 

additions while preserving those portions 

or features that convey its historical, 

cultural, or architectural values. 

• Restoration — The act or process of accurately depicting the form, features, and 

character of a property as it appeared at a 

particular period of time by removing features from other periods in its history and 

reconstructing missing features from the 

restoration period. 

• Reconstruction — The act or process of 

depicting by means of new construction, 

the form, features, and detailing of a nonsurviving site, landscape, building, 

structure, or object for the purpose of 

replicating its appearance at a specific 

period of time and in its historic location. 

These treatment approaches apply to a wide 

variety of resource types, including buildings, 

sites, structures, objects, districts, and landscape 

features and patterns. 

Most of the proposed actions for the National 

Mall fall under rehabilitation, and the standards 

that would apply to the National Mall include 

the following: 

1. A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires 

minimal change to its distinctive materials, 

features, spaces, and spatial relationships. 

2. The historic character of a property will be 

retained and preserved. The removal of 

distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that 

characterize a property will be avoided. 

3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. 

Changes that create a false sense of 

historical development, such as adding 

conjectural features or elements from 

other historic properties, will not be 

undertaken. 

4. Changes to a property that have acquired 

historic significance in their own right 

shall be retained and preserved. 

5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, 

and construction techniques or examples 

of craftsmanship that characterize a 

property will be preserved. 

6. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the 

severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, 

texture, and, where possible, materials. 

370
Cultural Resources: Impacts Common to All Alternatives — Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Replacement of missing features will be 

substantiated by documentary and 

physical evidence. 

7. [Relates to chemical or physical treatments.] 

8. [Relates to archeological resources.] 

9. New additions, exterior alterations, or 

related new construction will not destroy 

historic materials, features, and spatial 

relationships that characterize the property. The new work will be differentiated 

from the old and will be compatible with 

the historic materials, features, size, scale 

and proportion, and massing to protect 

the integrity of the property and its environment. 

10. New additions and adjacent or related 

new construction will be undertaken in a 

such a manner that, if removed in the 

future, the essential form and integrity of 

the historic property and its environment 

would be unimpaired. 

NPS Management Policies 2006 

The NPS Management Policies 2006 state that the 

National Park Service will protect, preserve, and 

foster appreciation of the cultural resources in 

its custody (NPS 2006e, ch. 5). The Park Service’s cultural resource management program 

involves 

• research to identify, evaluate, document, 

register, and establish basic information 

about cultural resources 

• planning to ensure that management processes for making decisions and setting 

priorities integrate information about 

cultural resources and provide for consultation and collaboration with outside entities 

• stewardship to ensure that cultural resources are preserved and protected, receive appropriate treatments (including 

maintenance) to achieve desired conditions, and are made available for public 

understanding and enjoyment 

The treatment of a cultural landscape will preserve significant physical attributes, biotic 

systems, and uses when those uses contribute to 

historical significance. Treatment decisions will 

be based on a cultural landscape’s historical 

significance over time, existing conditions, and 

use, and they will consider both the natural and 

built characteristics and features of a landscape. 

There are three types of treatment for extant 

cultural landscapes: preservation, rehabilitation, 

and restoration (NPS 2006e, sec. 5.3.5.2). A 

cultural landscape may be rehabilitated for 

contemporary use if 

• it cannot adequately serve an appropriate 

use in its present condition; and 

• rehabilitation will retain its essential 

features and not alter its integrity and 

character or conflict with approved park 

management objectives (NPS 2006e, sec. 

5.3.5.2.2). 

Contemporary alterations and additions to a 

cultural landscape must not radically change, 

obscure, or destroy its significant spatial organization, materials, and features. New buildings, structures, landscape features, and utilities 

may be constructed in a cultural landscape if 

• existing structures and improvements do 

not meet essential management needs; 

• new construction is designed and sited to 

preserve the landscape’s integrity and 

historic character; and 

• the alterations, additions, or related new 

construction is differentiated from yet 

compatible with the landscape’s historic 

character — unless associated with an 

approved restoration or reconstruction. 

New additions will meet The Secretary of 

the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation 

(NPS 2006e, sec. 5.3.5.2.7).

IMPACTS COMMON TO ALL 

ALTERNATIVES

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Because of the unusually long timeframe for the 

approved National Mall plan, the actions 

described are conceptual in nature and their 

effect on the historic character of contributing 

features of the National Mall cannot be definitively stated. The actions are referred to as 

potential effects. Final determinations o f effect 

for all actions will be determined in future 

 371
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

consultations with the D.C. Historic Preservation Office and the Advisory Council on Historic 

Preservation. A park-specific programmatic 

agreement as previously described would be 

developed in consultation with the D.C. Historic 

Preservation Office and the Advisory Council on 

Historic Preservation to facilitate the 

compliance process. 

Regarding impacts within the area of potential 

effect, land use and general vegetation patterns 

on the National Mall would not change, nor 

would the monumental character and essential 

relationships of the planned open space, memorials, and museums to the city. The National 

Park Service would continue consultation with 

the D.C. Historic Preservation Office, and if 

needed the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, to address any potential adverse effects, which would be appropriately documented through compliance with section 106 of the 

National Historic Preservation Act. 

As each action was more fully developed, appropriate compliance would be undertaken in 

consultation with the D.C. Historic Preservation 

Office and the Advisory Council on Historic 

Preservation. 

A comprehensive design and consultation process would be undertaken for new projects resulting from the National Mall plan (see “Consultation and Coordination” beginning on page 

543). Specific actions that could adversely affect 

cultural resources would be evaluated on a caseby-case basis as they were proposed for implementation, and appropriate compliance with 

section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, would be undertaken 

before implementation. Associated impacts 

could be direct, indirect, or cumulative over 

time; site-specific or localized within the area of 

potential effect; and negligible to major and 

adverse, depending on the action taken. 

All memorials would be preserved and protected, along with receiving periodic preventive 

maintenance. Resulting impacts would be longterm and beneficial, but generally only negligible 

in intensity because visitors should not notice 

any change in the condition of a memorial, with 

the exception of restoration of the Ulysses S. 

Grant Memorial under the action alternatives, 

which would result in a minor to moderate, 

beneficial impact. 

The discussion of impacts below is based on 

assumptions about design decisions yet to be 

made. It is an estimate as to what the impacts 

would be based on an understanding of what the 

proposed alternatives might detail. 

The Mall 

Under every alternative, contributing elements 

of the Mall, such as the type of vegetation, 

circulation patterns, small-scale features, and 

views and vistas would be preserved. Impacts 

would be long-term, negligible to minor, and 

beneficial. 

Washington Monument and Grounds 

The Washington Monument and adjacent historic structures (Monument Lodge and Survey 

Lodge) and the historic theater function would 

be preserved. The impact would be long-term, 

negligible, and beneficial. The condition of the 

non-contributing German-American Friendship 

Garden would be improved, resulting in a longterm, negligible, beneficial impact. Contributing 

vegetation would be preserved, and many noncontributing tree plantings (cherry groves, street 

trees) would also be preserved, resulting in longterm, negligible, beneficial impacts. 

West Potomac Park (North of 

Independence Avenue) 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial 

The Vietnam Veterans Memorial and its features 

(walks, vegetation, and an information station 

near the Lincoln Memorial) would be preserved 

and protected. Impacts would be long-term, 

negligible, and beneficial. 

World War II Memorial 

The World War II Memorial would be preserved 

and protected, a long-term, negligible, beneficial 

impact. 

Lincoln Memorial and Grounds 

The Lincoln Memorial would be preserved and 

protected. The impact would be long-term, 

negligible, and beneficial. 

372
Cultural Resources: Impacts of the No-Action Alternative — Conclusion 

The renovation of the exhibit area and the 

restrooms on the lower level of the Lincoln 

Memorial, along with the bookstore relocation, 

would not affect contributing elements of the 

memorial. Therefore, impacts would be longterm, minor, and beneficial. 

Braddock’s Memorial Rock Well and the Constitution Avenue belvedere would both be 

preserved and protected under every alternative. 

Impacts would be long-term, minor, and 

beneficial. 

Korean War Veterans Memorial 

The Korean War Veterans Memorial would be 

preserved and protected, resulting in long-term, 

negligible, beneficial impacts. 

West Potomac Park (South of 

Independence Avenue) 

Tidal Basin Area 

The Thomas Jefferson Memorial would be 

preserved and protected, and it would undergo 

regular preventive maintenance. The impact 

would be long-term, negligible, and beneficial. 

Implementing the recommendations of engineering studies to improve Tidal Basin flushing 

and to ensure seawall stability would have longterm, minor, beneficial impacts. 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial 

The Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial and 

the surrounding landscape (pools, lighting, 

walks, vegetation, and facilities) would be preserved and protected, and regular preventive 

maintenance would be undertaken. Impacts 

would be long-term, negligible, and beneficial. 

George Mason Memorial 

Rehabilitating the historic fountain at the 

George Mason Memorial, undertaken according 

to The Secretary of Interior’s Standards for the 

Treatment of Historic Properties, would likely 

have no effect on this significant characterdefining constructed water features. The impact 

would be long-term, negligible, and beneficial. 

Conclusion 

The impacts of actions common to all alternatives would be long-term, negligible to minor, 

and beneficial as the result of protecting and 

preserving contributing features, along with 

actions at the Lincoln Memorial (regular 

preventive maintenance, renovation of the 

exhibit area and restrooms, and protection of 

associated features), protection of cherry trees at 

the Tidal Basin, and rehabilitation of the historic 

fountain at the George Mason Memorial. 

IMPACTS OF THE NO-ACTION 

ALTERNATIVE

Under the no-action alternative the National 

Park Service would continue to preserve and 

protect all identified cultural resources (buildings, sites, structures, objects, and districts) to 

the best of its ability given the limitation of available funds. Prioritization decisions would be 

based on such factors as listing on or eligibility 

for listing on the National Register of Historic 

Places, the identified fundamental resources, 

interpretive values, resource condition, and 

suitability for NPS operations. Individual actions 

would require consultation with the D.C. Historic Preservation Office and the Advisory 

Council on Historic Preservation, if needed, and 

would be appropriately documented through 

compliance with section 106 of the National 

Historic Preservation Act. 

All preservation, rehabilitation, or restoration 

efforts would be undertaken in accordance with 

The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the 

Treatment of Historic Properties (NPS 1995). Any 

materials removed during rehabilitation or restoration efforts would be evaluated to determine 

their value to the National Mall and Memorial 

Park’s museum collection and/or for their comparative use in future preservation work at the 

sites. Preservation, rehabilitation, or restoration 

could result in beneficial impacts on cultural 

resources. 

In addition to the impacts common to all alternatives, the following direct or indirect impacts 

would occur. 

 373
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

The Mall 

Union Square 

The Ulysses S. Grant Memorial would be 

preserved and protected, resulting in a longterm, negligible, beneficial impact. 

Union Square would be preserved in its current 

condition. Without rehabilitation efforts, the 

Capitol Reflecting Pool, walkways, and other 

contributing features would continue to deteriorate, which would result in long-term, minor to 

moderate, adverse impacts to contributing 

features such as the designed water feature. 

The Mall 

The historic landscape of the National Mall 

would be preserved in its existing condition. 

Without rehabilitation efforts, the tree panels, 

grass panels, walkways, and other contributing 

features would continue to deteriorate, which 

would result in long-term, minor to moderate 

(potentially major), adverse impacts on contributing features such as vegetation, which if 

lost could also alter the character and planned 

views and vistas. 

Washington Monument and Grounds 

Replacing the existing temporary visitor service 

tent with a more compatible facility designed to 

fit within the historic landscape would remove an 

adverse visual intrusion, resulting in long-term, 

minor, beneficial impacts. Depending on the 

location (examined in other alternatives), the 

facility would be a new element in the historic 

setting. Even though it would replace another 

facility, it would potentially affect components 

of the cultural landscape, such as views and 

vistas, spatial organization and noncontributing 

vegetation. Impacts would have the potential to 

be long-term, moderate, and adverse.

West Potomac Park (North of 

Independence Avenue) 

Constitution Gardens 

The area would be preserved, but some features 

of the cultural landscape (pool, walks, trees, refreshment stand) could be affected as a result of 

high visitor use, erosion, climate change, and 

natural aging that routine maintenance might 

not be able to keep up with. Impacts would be 

long-term, negligible, and adverse. 

The Lockkeeper’s House would be preserved in 

its present location, a long-term, negligible, 

beneficial impact. 

Korean War Veterans Memorial 

While the Korean War Veterans Memorial 

would be preserved, designed landscape features 

could begin to deteriorate as a result of high 

visitation that could exceed the capacity of the 

circulation system (walks, vegetation). Impacts 

would be long-term, minor, and adverse. 

Ash Woods

Ash Woods and the U.S. Park Police stables are 

not contributing features listed on the national 

register nomination for West Potomac Park. 

Preserving the woods as a naturalized, thickly 

wooded area would retain the historic character 

of this portion of West Potomac Park, resulting in 

long-term, negligible, beneficial impacts. Rehabilitating the restroom would have no impact 

because the structure is not historic. 

West Potomac Park (South of 

Independence Avenue) 

Tidal Basin Area 

Repairs to the Tidal Basin seawalls would be 

made in kind. Impacts would be long-term, 

negligible, and beneficial. Ongoing high levels of 

use would continue to adversely affect contributing features of the cultural landscape, such as 

circulation and vegetation. Impacts would be 

long-term, minor to moderate, and adverse. 

West Potomac Park Riverfront 

Associated features of the cultural landscape 

(walks, vegetation) would continue to be preserved. Continuing to stabilize the river walls 

south of Arlington Memorial Bridge with riprap 

would result in long-term, negligible to minor, 

beneficial impacts. 

The contributing feature of dry-laid seawalls 

would continue to deteriorate as a result of 

erosion due to wave action, periodic flooding, 

374
Cultural Resources: Impacts of the No-Action Alternative — Cumulative Impacts 

and rising sea levels. Impacts would be longterm, minor, and adverse. 

Summary 

Impacts on cultural resources under the noaction alternative would be long-term and 

would range from negligible to minor, and 

would be adverse or beneficial. Some of the 

actions described under this alternative would 

likely pose long-term, negligible to minor, 

adverse impacts on the overall cultural 

landscape or its contributing resources. 

Cumulative Impacts 

Past Actions 

Following the filling of the Potomac River tidal 

flats in the late 19th century to create East Potomac Park and West Potomac Park, a number of 

commemorative memorials and monuments 

were created. Park features were designed to 

provide an appropriate setting for the new 

monuments and to extend the National Mall to 

the west. The McMillan plan was largely 

responsible for the National Mall’s present size, 

layout, and the completion of the Mall as well as 

the Grant, Lincoln, and Thomas Jefferson memorials. 

From World War I until the 1970s temporary 

Department of Defense structures kept the various areas from being completed. Subsequent to 

the removal of these temporary facilities, additional memorials were added, along with more 

parklike amenities. The designed landscape for 

Union Square by Frederick Law Olmsted Jr., 

which implemented the McMillan plan, was 

removed in the 1970s to accommodate a freeway 

tunnel. Spatial organization, circulation, views 

and vistas, and vegetation were affected, resulting in a permanent, moderate, adverse impact. 

In 2003 Congress declared the National Mall to 

be a completed work of civic art. That action was 

intended to stop the future addition of monuments, memorials, statues, and visitor centers 

throughout the National Mall. The memorials 

and monuments, as well as associated landscapes, are preserved in accordance with The

Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the 

Treatment of Historic Properties (NPS 1995). 

Altogether, the impacts of all of these actions 

have been long-term to permanent, major, and 

beneficial. 

Present Actions 

Present actions described in this plan either have 

already undergone or would undergo consultation with the D.C. Historic Preservation Office 

and/or the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation to minimize effects on the National Mall’s 

cultural resources. Designs for projects funded 

under the American Recovery and Reinvestment 

Act of 2009 (the Lincoln reflecting pool area, the 

D.C. War Memorial, and the Thomas Jefferson 

Memorial seawall/plaza) are underway, as are 

designs for modifying the Potomac Park levee 

and installing security measures around the 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial. Other projects 

would include the rehabilitation of paving on 

Madison Drive between 3rd and 14th streets 

NW and the rehabilitation of Ohio Drive from 

23rd Street to Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway. While every effort will be made to protect 

contributing elements of the cultural landscapes 

through a consultation process, the impacts 

could potentially be permanent, minor, and 

adverse. 

The construction of the Martin Luther King, Jr. 

Memorial, the Smithsonian Institution’s Museum of African American History and Culture, 

and the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Center 

would affect existing spatial organization and 

pedestrian circulation on the National Mall, as 

well as views and vistas. Consultations are 

ongoing. Impacts on the overall landscape 

would be permanent, negligible to minor, and 

potentially adverse. 

The development and implementation of a wayfinding and sign plan within the boundaries of 

the National Mall is also underway. Ongoing 

consultation, along with careful design and 

siting, would ensure that any signs erected 

would minimally affect the scale and visual 

relationships among landscape features. Impacts 

would be long-term, minor, and beneficial. 

Other ongoing actions include mostly routine 

maintenance actions, such as the repair of walkways and roads, tree pruning and planting, sod 

replacement, addition of post and chain, and 

other landscape work. All stabilization, preser-

 375
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

vation, and rehabilitation efforts would be 

undertaken in accordance with The Secretary of 

the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of 

Historic Properties (NPS 1995). Impacts would 

be long-term, negligible to minor, and beneficial. 

Taken as a whole, the cumulative impacts of all 

present actions would be long-term to permanent, negligible to minor, and beneficial as a 

result of ongoing consultation to mitigate 

impacts on contributing features of the cultural 

landscape. 

Reasonably Foreseeable Actions 

Some of the reasonably foreseeable actions 

described in this plan will undergo consultation 

with the D.C. Historic Preservation Office and 

the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, 

resulting in an agreement that will detail management strategies to minimize impacts. 

A permanent security screening function for the 

Washington Monument would be developed, 

and the temporary structure located on the east 

side of the monument would be removed. The 

impact would be long-term, minor, and 

beneficial. 

Installing parking meters or kiosks on Madison 

and Jefferson drives, as recommended by the 

2006 NPS Visitor Transportation Study, would 

not be likely to impact views along these streets, 

resulting in long-term, negligible, adverse impacts. However, paid parking could improve 

circulation patterns on the drives, a possible 

long-term, minor, beneficial impact. 

Future actions that would occur adjacent to the 

National Mall include security projects for the 

Smithsonian Institution museums, memorials for 

Dwight D. Eisenhower and American Veterans 

Disabled for Life, the U.S. Institute of Peace 

headquarters, improvements of the 14th Street 

Bridge corridor, and the development of the 

southwest waterfront. Sensitive designs of new 

structures and features, including the use of 

appropriate materials and colors and select 

vegetation plantings as visual buffers, if appropriate, would minimally affect the scale and 

visual relationships among important landscape 

features of the National Mall. In addition, the 

topography, circulation features, and land use 

patterns of the National Mall would remain 

largely unaltered by such actions. Impacts would 

be long-term, minor to moderate, and beneficial. 

The relocation of steamlines around the Ellipse 

would have little, if any, effect on existing 

topography, spatial organization, or land use 

patterns. Once the steamlines were installed and 

the trenches backfilled, the disturbed ground 

would be restored to its pre-construction 

contour and condition. Any impacts would be 

long-term, negligible, and adverse. 

Summary 

The impacts of past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions would be long-term to permanent, negligible to minor, and adverse, as well 

as negligible to major and beneficial. The noaction alternative would result in long-term impacts on cultural resources that would be negligible to minor and adverse, as well as negligible 

to minor and beneficial. These impacts, in 

combination with the impacts of past, present, 

and reasonably foreseeable actions, would result 

in long-term, major, beneficial cumulative 

impacts. The beneficial impacts of the no-action 

alternative, however, would be a very small 

component of overall cumulative impacts. 

Conclusion 

The no-action alternative would result in longterm, negligible to minor impacts on cultural resources that would either be adverse or beneficial. The overall impacts of past, present, and 

reasonably foreseeable actions combined with 

the impacts of the no-action alternative would 

result in long-term, major, beneficial cumulative 

impacts. The impacts associated with the noaction alternative would be a very small component of the beneficial cumulative impacts. 

There would be no impairment of cultural 

resources under the no-action alternative. 

NHPA Section 106 Summary 

After applying the Advisory Council on Historic 

Preservation’s criteria of adverse effects (36 CFR 

Part 800.5, “Assessment of Adverse Effects”), the 

National Park Service concludes that the noaction alternative would have potential adverse 

effects on cultural resources. 

376
Cultural Resources: Impacts of the Preferred Alternative — Direct and Indirect Impacts 

IMPACTS OF THE PREFERRED 

ALTERNATIVE

Under the preferred alternative all identified 

cultural resources (memorial, buildings, sites, 

structures, objects, landscapes, and districts) on 

the National Mall would continue to be preserved and protected by the National Park 

Service. Prioritization decisions would be based 

on such factors as listing on or eligibility for 

listing on the National Register of Historic 

Places, identified fundamental resources, 

interpretive values, resource condition, and 

suitability for NPS operations. Individual actions 

would require consultation with the D.C. 

Historic Preservation Office and the Advisory 

Council on Historic Preservation, and would be 

appropriately documented through compliance 

with section 106 of the National Historic 

Preservation Act. 

All preservation, rehabilitation, or restoration 

efforts would be undertaken in accordance with 

The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the 

Treatment of Historic Properties (NPS 1995). Any 

materials removed during rehabilitation or 

restoration efforts would be evaluated to determine their value to the National Mall and Memorial Park’s museum collection and/or for 

their comparative use in future preservation 

work at the sites. Preservation, rehabilitation, or 

restoration conducted according to The Secretary of Interior’s Standards could result in beneficial impacts on cultural resources. 

In addition to the impacts common to all alternatives, the following impacts are analyzed. 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

The Mall 

Union Square (1st to 3rd Streets) 

The Ulysses S. Grant Memorial would be restored, resulting in a long-term, minor to 

moderate, beneficial impact. 

The redesign of Union Square would incorporate elements from the other action alternatives 

and would protect key contributing elements of 

the cultural landscape, such as the Grant Memorial, the preservation of historic vistas, the protection of historic trees, and the provision of 

visitor services outside historic vistas. The 

redesign would alter the existing 1970s design by 

redesigning the Capitol Reflecting Pool, paving, 

and adding visitor facilities and demonstration/ 

event infrastructure. These actions would meet 

anticipated use levels now and in the future and 

would protect the Mall’s cultural landscape from 

overuse, but the 1970s design of Union Square 

would be altered, resulting in a permanent, 

major, adverse impact on the designed water 

feature that might be eligible for inclusion on the 

National Register of Historic Places. The 

square’s redesign could also affect views to and 

from the Grant Memorial, the Mall, and the U.S. 

Capitol. Impacts on Union Square would be 

long-term, minor to major, and adverse. 

The Mall (3rd to 14th Streets) 

Compacted soils would be removed and replaced with engineered soils capable of withstanding intensive use, and new drainage and 

irrigation systems would be installed, resulting in 

beneficial impacts on the health of contributing 

features of grass and elm trees and the important 

views and vistas of the Mall. Installing underground event utility infrastructure would result 

in the removal of visually intrusive aboveground 

utilities and temporary utility support systems, 

such as generator trucks and power lines. Impacts would be long-term, minor to moderate, 

and beneficial. 

Other actions proposed to address the impacts 

of overuse and permitted events on the Mall’s 

cultural landscape could potentially adversely 

affect the Mall and would need to be carefully 

designed to minimize effects. These actions 

include such things as widening or removing 

walkways, replacing gravel with paved surfaces, 

installing curbing, paving walks or widened 

areas for event and staging purposes, developing 

a paved welcome plaza with a visitor contact 

station and restroom, developing a flexible 

office/restroom facility, developing a restroom 

near the National Air and Space Museum, and 

adding seating and pedestrian enhancements 

such as interactive water features. While the 

criteria for incorporating such actions would 

include preserving vistas and vegetation, these 

actions could pose potential changes to contributing characteristics of the Mall’s cultural land-

 377
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

scape, such as circulation. Impacts would likely 

be long-term, minor, and adverse. 

Washington Monument and Grounds 

Developing underground infrastructure for 

demonstrations and special events and adaptively reusing Survey Lodge could visually 

enhance the Washington Monument and 

grounds. Impacts would be long-term, negligible, and beneficial. 

Constructing a new multipurpose indoor/outdoor visitor service facility to replace the Sylvan 

Theater facility and the existing circular restroom could have a long-term, minor, beneficial 

impact on the Washington Monument grounds. 

(Neither the restroom nor the Sylvan Theater 

structures are on or eligible for listing on the 

National Register of Historic Places, nor are they 

or related plantings a contributing feature of the 

grounds.) The location of the facility would be 

outside the planned vistas of the National Mall,

Replacing damaged walks would rehabilitate the 

overall appearance of this portion of the historic 

landscape, resulting in long-term, negligible, 

beneficial impacts on the visual quality of the 

historic landscape. 

Redesigning roads and parking south of Independence Avenue, along with developing bicycle 

trails, could have long-term, negligible to minor, 

adverse impacts on historic vistas of the 

National Mall. 

West Potomac Park (North of 

Independence Avenue) 

Constitution Gardens 

The possible relocation of the Lockkeeper’s 

House, which is listed on the National Register 

of Historic Places, away from its current location 

immediately adjacent to Constitution Avenue 

could provide greater protection from potential 

damage by vehicles. The structure is significant 

for its historical association with the old Washington City Canal, which no longer exists. In 

1915 the structure was relocated 49 feet west 

and 6 feet north of its original location, when 

17th Street was extended. Since then, Constitution Avenue has been widened, reducing the 

amount of space between the avenue and the 

north side of the house. After the completion of 

the Potomac Park levee project, the possible 

relocation of the Lockkeeper’s House within the 

present grounds, keeping the structure’s original 

orientation to the former canal, and adaptively 

rehabilitating it could result in long term, minor, 

beneficial impacts. 

Important landscape features of Constitution 

Gardens would be rehabilitated. Soils and vegetation would be restored, walkways would be 

repaved, and the lake would be rebuilt to include 

circulation systems and self-sustaining aquatic 

vegetation. Rehabilitation would enhance the 

general appearance of important contributing 

features of this historic landscape. Impact would 

be long-term, minor to moderate, and beneficial. 

A new food service facility with restrooms 

would be built in the area identified in the 1970s 

design for Constitution Gardens and would be 

compatible with existing spatial organization, 

vegetation, and circulation. Limited sidewalk 

widening would somewhat alter the completed 

design; therefore, the impacts of these actions 

would be long-term, minor, and adverse. 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial 

Potential circulation and pedestrian enhancements, such as seating, could affect the character 

of the memorial, but that effect would depend 

on the design and location. The impact would be 

long-term, negligible to minor, and adverse. 

Lincoln Memorial and Grounds 

Constructing a new restroom facility near the 

south concession refreshment stand would 

introduce a nonhistoric feature to meet visitor 

needs in this area. Depending on the design and 

location, the facility could potentially result in 

adverse impacts to vegetation and spatial 

organization in the Lincoln Circle and along the 

radial roads. The use of previously approved 

architectural styles would allow the restroom to 

appear as part of the recent design for the 

refreshment stand. Impacts would be long term, 

negligible to minor, and adverse. 

Potentially removing the Vietnam Veterans Memorial information station once the Vietnam 

Veterans Memorial Center was completed 

would have a long-term, negligible, beneficial 

impact. 

378
Cultural Resources: Impacts of the Preferred Alternative — Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Korean War Veterans Memorial 

Widening walks on the west side of the Korean 

War Veterans Memorial would affect the original design and circulation of the memorial and 

the view of the memorial from the west. 

However, the widened walks would be in areas 

leading to the memorial from the sidewalks 

along the diagonal road and would follow the 

existing walks and circulation patterns. Impacts 

would be long-term, negligible, and adverse. 

Ash Woods 

Ash Woods is not a contributing feature listed 

on the national register nomination for West 

Potomac Park. Converting Ash Woods road to 

pedestrian circulation would reuse a noncontributing circulation element in a manner that 

would better meet the needs of visitors today 

and retain a circulation function. Redeveloping 

the U.S. Park Police facilities at Ash Woods, 

including new stables (parking area, administrative and support facilities, and a new access road 

from Independence Avenue) would have longterm, negligible, beneficial impacts, since it 

would not affect contributing vistas or spatial 

organization. 

West Potomac Park (South of 

Independence Avenue) 

Tidal Basin Area 

The Tidal Basin is a contributing feature of the 

West Potomac Park national register listing. 

Rebuilding the Tidal Basin seawalls and installing adequate width walks would better protect 

the cherry trees but would affect the historic 

characteristics of the Tidal Basin, such as shape, 

walks, and vegetation. The basin would be 

noticeably changed on the southeast side to 

accommodate pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular 

circulation. While this would alter the historic 

appearance of the basin in this area, the scale of 

the Tidal Basin is so large that it could absorb 

these changes in a manner that would appear 

natural to new visitors. 

Providing additional space for both bicyclists 

and pedestrians near Kutz, Inlet, and Outlet 

bridges would more safely meet today’s level of 

visitation, but would alter the original design and 

shape of the Tidal Basin landscape, while retaining the appearance of the historic seawalls. The 

design of the seawall and walks would consider 

the need for pedestrian lighting, additional seating, and some widened areas to accommodate 

safe pedestrian movement. Adding separate 

bicycle trails through the area for safety would 

change existing circulation patterns. 

A new refreshment stand, new recreation equipment rental facilities, and new restrooms would 

replace noncontributing facilities but could also 

affect the appearance of the Tidal Basin area. 

Altogether, impacts would be long-term, minor 

to moderate, and adverse 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial 

Providing food service and restrooms between 

the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial and 

the future Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial 

could result in long-term, negligible to minor, 

adverse impacts since the facility could potentially be seen from the north entry to the Roosevelt Memorial and from the south side of the 

King Memorial. 

West Potomac Park Riverfront 

Developing a partially vegetated shoreline and 

stabilizing the deteriorated dry-laid stone seawall against seasonal flooding and erosion would 

have long-term, negligible to minor, beneficial 

impacts. The vegetated shoreline and stabilized 

stone seawall could affect the visual appearance 

of the shoreline when seen from West Potomac 

Park, a long-term, negligible, adverse impact, 

because it would affect the historic fabric of a 

contributing feature of West Potomac Park. The 

overall impact would be long-term, negligible, 

and adverse. 

Constructing separate bike and pedestrian lanes 

to provide additional visitor safety could visually 

affect the grounds and circulation along the 

riverfront of West Potomac Park, resulting in 

long-term, minor, adverse impacts. 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial and Grounds 

Redesigning the tour bus drop-off and replacing 

the noncontributing refreshment stand and adding restrooms, as well as developing new bicycle 

lanes and trails, would alter existing spatial 

organization and circulation patterns, resulting 

in long-term, minor, adverse impacts. 

 379
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Summary 

Long-term impacts on cultural resources under 

the preferred alternative would be negligible to 

major and adverse , as well as negligible to moderate and beneficial. Some of the actions described under this alternative would likely pose 

an adverse effect for the landscape or its contributing resources, with long-term, negligible to 

moderate, adverse impacts.

Cumulative Impacts 

The impacts of past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions would be the same as 

described under the no-action alternative and 

would be long-term to permanent, negligible to 

moderate, and adverse, as well as negligible to 

major and beneficial. 

As described above, implementing the preferred 

alternative would result in long-term, negligible 

to major, adverse impacts on cultural resources, 

along with long-term, negligible to moderate, 

beneficial impacts. These impacts, in combination with the impacts of past, present, and 

reasonably foreseeable projects, would result in 

long-term, major, beneficial cumulative impacts. 

The beneficial impacts of the preferred alternative would be a noticeable component of the 

beneficial cumulative impacts. 

Conclusion 

Impacts on cultural resources under the preferred alternative would be long-term, negligible 

to major, and adverse and also long-term, 

negligible to moderate, and beneficial. The 

overall impacts of past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions, combined with the impacts 

of the preferred alternative, would result in 

long-term, major, beneficial cumulative impacts. 

The impacts associated with the preferred 

alternative would be a noticeable component of 

the beneficial cumulative impacts. There would 

be no impairment of cultural resources under 

the preferred alternative. 

NHPA Section 106 Summary 

After applying the Advisory Council on Historic 

Preservation’s criteria of adverse effects (36 CFR 

800.5), the National Park Service concludes that 

implementing the preferred alternative would 

have potential adverse effects on cultural resources. Further consultation would be required 

to make a final determination of effect and to 

identify appropriate mitigation measures. 

IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE A 

Under alternative A all identified cultural resources on the National Mall would be preserved and protected by the National Park Service to the best of its ability. Prioritization decisions would be based on such factors as listing or 

eligibility for listing on the National Register of 

Historic Places, identified fundamental resources, interpretive values, resource condition, 

and suitability for NPS operations. Individual 

actions would require consultation with the D.C. 

Historic Preservation Office and the Advisory 

Council on Historic Preservation, if needed, and 

would be appropriately documented through 

compliance with section 106 of the National 

Historic Preservation Act. 

All preservation, rehabilitation, or restoration 

efforts would be undertaken in accordance with 

The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the 

Treatment of Historic Properties (NPS 1995). Any 

materials removed during rehabilitation or restoration efforts would be evaluated to determine 

their value to the National Mall and Memorial 

Park’s museum collection and/or for their comparative use in future preservation work at the 

sites. Preservation, rehabilitation, or restoration 

conducted according to The Secretary of Interior’s Standards could result in beneficial impacts 

on cultural resources. 

In addition to the impacts common to all alternatives, the following impacts are analyzed. 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

The Mall 

Union Square (1st to 3rd Streets) 

The Grant Memorial would be restored, resulting in a long-term, minor to moderate, beneficial 

impact. 

A redesign for Union Square as a civic square 

focusing on the Grant Memorial would preserve 

historic vistas, provide visitors services outside 

historic vistas, preserve historic trees, and result 

380
Cultural Resources: Impacts of Alternative A — Direct and Indirect Impacts 

in a smaller reflecting pool that would recall the 

historic Washington City Canal. These actions 

would protect the cultural landscape of the Mall. 

While no redesign plans have been developed, 

any redesign would alter the existing 1970s 

design, affecting the reflecting pool and paving, 

and adding visitor facilities. The impact on a 

designed water feature that may be eligible for 

inclusion on the National Register of Historic 

Places would be long-term, major, adverse. Impacts on Union Square would be long-term, 

minor to major, and adverse. 

The Mall (3rd to 14th Streets) 

Actions designed to protect the lawns and elm 

trees, such as replacing compacted soils with 

engineered soils capable of withstanding intensive use, installing new drainage and irrigation 

systems, and installing underground event utility 

infrastructure, would have long-term, minor, 

beneficial impacts on the appearance of the 

Mall. The National Park Service would work 

with the city to remove vehicle parking along 

north-south streets (3rd, 4th, and 7th streets) 

within the east-west vista. Impacts would be 

long-term, minor, and beneficial as a result of 

enhancing views. 

Washington Monument and Grounds 

Actions on the Washington Monument grounds, 

such as the development of a partially underground visitor services/food service structure 

directly east of the monument between 14th and 

15th streets would affect the east-west vista and 

would be highly visible from the monument and 

plaza, as well as somewhat change the terrain in 

the area. Impacts would be long-term, moderate, 

and adverse. Replacing the circular restroom 

facility southeast of the monument with a larger 

restroom structure that would continue to be 

screened from the monument would result in 

long-term, minor, beneficial impacts. 

West Potomac Park (North of 

Independence Avenue) 

Constitution Gardens 

The lake within Constitution Gardens, a contributing feature of the West Potomac Park national 

register listing, would be rehabilitated. The existing restrooms and refreshment stand on the west 

side would be replaced with new facilities. Impacts would be long-term, negligible, and adverse. 

Lincoln Memorial and Grounds 

Working with others to remove the cloverleaf 

ramp from Arlington Memorial Bridge to Rock 

Creek Parkway would affect historic circulation 

patterns at the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington 

Memorial Bridge. Impacts on historic circulation 

patterns would be long-term, minor, and 

adverse. 

Korean War Veterans Memorial 

As described under the no-action alternative, the 

Korean War Veterans Memorial would be preserved, but features of the designed landscape 

could begin to deteriorate as a result of high 

visitation that exceeds the capacity of the circulation system (walks, vegetation). Impacts would 

be long-term, minor, and adverse. 

Ash Woods 

Ash Woods is not a contributing feature listed 

on the national register nomination for West 

Potomac Park. Rehabilitating the U.S. Park 

Police stables and replacing the restroom would 

have long-term, negligible, beneficial impacts. 

West Potomac Park (South of 

Independence Avenue) 

Tidal Basin 

The Tidal Basin is a character-defining feature of 

the West Potomac Park national register listing. 

Rehabilitating and raising the height of the Tidal 

Basin walls in their current location so they 

would not be overtopped by tidewater could 

have long-term, negligible to minor, adverse 

visual impacts. 

Installing paving around the Tidal Basin and 

reconfiguring Kutz Bridge for safer pedestrian 

use would change historic circulation patterns 

and the existing appearance of the contributing 

elements of the cultural landscape around the 

Tidal Basin. Impacts would be long-term, minor 

to moderate, and adverse. 

New visitor facilities to replace the noncontributing existing refreshment stand and recreation 

equipment rental facility on the northeast side of 

 381
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

the Tidal Basin would include new restrooms, 

rental facilities, and refreshment stands. Impacts 

could potentially be long-term, minor, and 

adverse on the portions of character-defining 

features of the West Potomac Park cultural 

landscape, including views and vistas, spatial 

organization, circulation, and vegetation. 

West Potomac Park Riverfront 

Rehabilitating the dry-laid stone river walls 

would result in long-term, negligible, beneficial 

impacts, but could be expected to be a high-cost 

ongoing activity due to changing water levels. 

Summary 

Overall long-term impacts on cultural resources 

under alternative A would be both adverse and 

beneficial; adverse impacts would be negligible 

to major, and beneficial impacts would be 

negligible to minor. 

Cumulative Impacts 

The impacts of past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions would be the same as described under the no-action alternative and 

would be long-term to permanent, negligible to 

moderate, and adverse, as well as long-term, 

negligible to major, and beneficial. 

Long-term impacts on cultural resources under 

alternative A, as described above, would be 

negligible to major and adverse, as well as negligible to minor and beneficial. These impacts, in 

combination with the impacts of other past, 

present, and reasonably foreseeable actions, 

would result in long-term, major, beneficial 

cumulative impacts. The beneficial impacts of 

alternative A, however, would be a very small 

component of the beneficial cumulative impacts. 

Conclusion 

Impacts on cultural resources under alternative 

A would be long-term, negligible to major, and 

adverse, as well as long-term, negligible to minor, and beneficial. The overall impacts of past, 

present, and reasonably foreseeable actions 

added to those of alternative A would result in 

long-term, major, beneficial cumulative impacts. 

The impacts associated with alternative A would 

be a very small component of the beneficial 

cumulative impacts. There would be no 

impairment of cultural resources under 

alternative A. 

NHPA Section 106 Summary 

After applying the Advisory Council on Historic 

Preservation’s criteria of adverse effects (36 CFR 

800.5), the National Park Service concludes that 

implementation of alternative A would have 

potential adverse effects on cultural resources. 

Further consultation would be required to make 

a final determination of effect on these resources 

and identify appropriate mitigation measures. 

IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE B 

Under alternative B all of the identified cultural 

resources on the National Mall would continue 

to be preserved and protected by the National 

Park Service to the best of its ability. As described under the other alternatives, prioritization decisions would be based on such factors 

as listing on or eligibility for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, identified 

fundamental resources, interpretive values, resource condition, and suitability for NPS operations. Individual actions would require consultation with the D.C. Historic Preservation Office 

and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, if needed, and would be appropriately 

documented through compliance with section 

106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. 

All preservation, rehabilitation, or restoration 

efforts would be undertaken in accordance with 

The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the 

Treatment of Historic Properties (NPS 1995). Any 

materials removed during rehabilitation or 

restoration efforts would be evaluated to determine their value to the National Mall and 

Memorial Park’s museum collection and/or for 

their comparative use in future preservation 

work at the sites. Preservation, rehabilitation, or 

restoration conducted according to The Secretary of Interior’s Standards could result in 

beneficial impacts on cultural resources. 

In addition to the impacts common to all alternatives, the following impacts are analyzed. 

382
Cultural Resources: Impacts of Alternative B — Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

The Mall 

Union Square (1st to 3rd Streets) 

The Grant Memorial would be restored, a longterm, minor to moderate, beneficial impact. 

A redesign of Union Square would include removing the Capitol Reflecting Pool to create a 

paved civic square, preserving historic vistas, 

providing visitors services outside historic vistas, 

and preserving historic trees. Removing the reflecting pool would alter the existing 1970s 

design, a long-term, major, adverse impact on a 

designed water feature that may be eligible for 

inclusion on the National Register of Historic 

Places. 

The Mall (3rd to 14th Streets) 

Installing interactive water features at the 8th 

Street cross axis and at other areas around the 

Mall would add nonhistoric features into a 

landscape listed on the National Register of Historic Places, intruding on the east-west vista and 

affecting turf grass. Resulting impacts would be 

long-term, minor to moderate, and adverse. 

An underground parking facility below the Mall 

between 12th and 15th streets NW and entered 

from 15th Street would result in a short-term, 

minor, adverse impact during construction. 

While its impact cannot be known at this point, 

it is highly likely that the portals would be visible 

from the Washington Monument and that the 

garage could affect circulation patterns. These 

actions could cause long-term, moderate to 

major, adverse impacts. 

Actions to protect the lawns and elm trees, such 

as replacing compacted soils with engineered 

soils capable of withstanding intensive use, 

installing new drainage and irrigation systems, 

and providing underground event utility infrastructure, would have long-term, minor to 

moderate, beneficial impacts on the health of 

contributing Mall features. 

Constructing a visitor contact station and restroom facilities would introduce new elements 

into the cultural landscape. While these facilities 

would be outside vistas and tree panels, they 

could result in long-term, negligible to minor, 

adverse impacts on the character-defining features of the Mall. Enlarging and paving walkways and providing additional paved areas for 

demonstrations and special events would add 

nonhistoric elements to the cultural landscape, 

resulting in long-term, minor, adverse impacts. 

Washington Monument and Grounds 

Removing the restroom facility and constructing 

a new multipurpose indoor/outdoor visitor service facility in the vicinity, which would also replace the Sylvan Theater, could have long-term, 

minor, beneficial impacts on the Washington 

Monument grounds. None of these features — 

the restroom facility, the Sylvan Theater, and 

related vegetation — is on or eligible for listing 

on the National Register of Historic Places, nor 

are they a contributing feature of the Washington Monument grounds. At the same time these 

elements could potentially affect spatial organization, a long-term, negligible to minor, adverse 

impact. 

Providing infrastructure designed to facilitate 

demonstrations and events would have a longterm, negligible, beneficial impact since it would 

be underground and there are already visible 

utility boxes. 

Providing pedestrian bridges or underpasses and 

underground parking below the south grounds 

to meet the needs to high levels of visitation, and 

covering over Maine Avenue on the south 

grounds would likely be very noticeable, could 

affect circulation patterns, some immediate 

views, and vegetation. Impacts would be shortterm, moderate, and adverse during construction and long-term, minor, and adverse 

afterward. 

West Potomac Park (North of 

Independence Avenue) 

Constitution Gardens 

Moving the Lockkeeper’s House away from its 

current location immediately adjacent to Constitution Avenue would provide greater protection 

from potential damage by vehicles on Constitution Avenue. The structure is significant for its 

association with the Washington City Canal, 

which no longer exists, and it was relocated to its 

present site in 1915. After the completion of the 

 383
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Potomac Park levee project, moving the structure to a nearby location, keeping its orientation 

to the former canal, and adaptively rehabilitating 

it could result in long term, minor, beneficial 

impacts. 

A new food service and retail facility would be 

built on the east side of the lake, as included in 

the 1970s design. The introduction of new features would result in long-term, minor, adverse 

impacts. 

Redesigning the lake to be shallow and drainable 

so that it could accommodate demonstrations 

and special events, would retain its reflective 

capability and pastoral character, but would 

temporarily result in the loss of character when 

it was drained for events. While the design intent 

for Constitution Gardens was for a festival 

grounds, draining the lake for events was not 

envisioned and would therefore affect a contributing designed water feature of the West 

Potomac Park national register nomination. The 

resulting impact would be long-term, minor, and 

adverse. 

Lincoln Memorial and Grounds 

Installing additional restroom facilities near the 

north and south concession refreshment stands 

could potentially affect the planting plan. The 

facilities would be designed to be architecturally 

compatible with the existing stands. Impacts 

would be long-term, minor, and adverse. 

Removing the Vietnam Veterans Memorial 

information station once the Vietnam Veterans 

Memorial Center was completed would have a 

long-term, negligible, beneficial impact. 

Korean War Veterans Memorial 

East side entry walks would be constructed to 

accommodate high volumes of pedestrian traffic. 

This would somewhat alter the original design 

intent to approach the memorial from the west, 

resulting in a long-term, negligible to minor, 

adverse impact. 

Ash Woods 

Ash Woods is not a contributing feature on the 

national register nomination for West Potomac 

Park. Converting Ash Road into a pedestrian 

walkway, replacing the U.S. Park Police stables, 

removing the existing restroom, and constructing a new restroom closer to the stables would 

not affect contributing views and vistas, spatial 

organization, vegetation, or circulation. Impacts 

would be long-term, negligible, and beneficial. 

West Potomac Park (South of 

Independence Avenue) 

Tidal Basin 

The Tidal Basin is a contributing feature of the 

West Potomac Park national register listing. 

Widening walkways around the Tidal Basin 

would affect the size and appearance of the 

Tidal Basin somewhat, but the scale of the basin 

can absorb these changes. Constructing three 

pedestrian bridges, replacing the refreshment 

stand and restrooms, and upgrading the recreation equipment rental facilities would have longterm, minor, adverse impacts in terms of views, 

spatial organization, and circulation. 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial 

Providing food service and restrooms between 

the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial and 

the future Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial 

could result in long-term, negligible to minor, 

adverse impacts since the facility could potentially be seen from the north entry to the Roosevelt Memorial and from the south side of the 

King Memorial. 

West Potomac Riverfront Park 

The riverwalls are a contributing feature of the 

West Potomac Park national register nomination. Constructing higher stone-faced structural 

walls to limit overtopping by tidewater along the 

Potomac River would affect the remaining 

historic fabric of dry-laid stone walls. The higher 

wall would also likely affect the visual appearance of the shoreline from West Potomac Park, 

resulting in long-term, minor to moderate, 

adverse impacts. 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial and Grounds 

Replacing the noncontributing refreshment 

stand with a new structure that would be more 

compatible with the overall unified design 

scheme of the National Mall would result in a 

long-term, negligible to minor, adverse impact, 

384
Cultural Resources: Impacts of Alternative C — Direct and Indirect Impacts 

since it could potentially affect some views and 

spatial organization. 

Summary 

Overall long-term impacts on cultural resources 

under alternative B would be minor to major and 

adverse, as well as negligible to moderate and 

beneficial. 

Cumulative Impacts 

The impacts of past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions would be the same as described under the no-action alternative and 

would be long-term to permanent, negligible to 

moderate, and adverse, as well as negligible to 

major and beneficial. 

As described above, impacts to cultural resources under alternative B would be long-term, 

minor to major, and adverse, as well as longterm, negligible to moderate, and beneficial. The 

impacts of this alternative, in combination with 

the impacts of past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions, would result in long-term, 

major, beneficial cumulative impacts. The 

beneficial effects of alternative B, however, 

would be a small component of the beneficial 

cumulative impacts. 

Conclusion 

Overall impacts on cultural resources under 

alternative B would be long-term, minor to major, and adverse and long-term, minor to moderate, and beneficial. The overall impacts of past, 

present, and reasonably foreseeable actions 

added to those described for alternative B would 

result in long-term, major, beneficial impacts. 

The impacts associated with this alternative 

would be a small component of the beneficial 

cumulative impacts. There would be no impairment of cultural resources under alternative B. 

NHPA Section 106 Summary 

After applying the Advisory Council on Historic 

Preservation’s criteria of adverse effects (36 CFR 

Part 800.5), the National Park Service concludes 

that implementation of alternative B would have 

potential adverse effects on cultural resources. 

Further consultation is required to make a final 

determination of the effect on this resource and 

to identify appropriate mitigation measures. 

IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE C 

Under alternative C identified cultural resources 

on the National Mall would continue to be preserved and protected by the National Park Service to the best of its ability. As described under 

the other alternatives, prioritization decisions 

would be based on such factors as listing on or 

eligibility for listing on the National Register of 

Historic Places, the identified fundamental 

resources, interpretive values, resource conditions, and suitability for NPS operations. Individual actions would require consultation with 

the D.C. Historic Preservation Office and, if 

required, the Advisory Council on Historic 

Preservation, and would be appropriately documented through compliance with section 106 of 

the National Historic Preservation Act. 

All preservation, rehabilitation, or restoration 

efforts would be undertaken in accordance with 

The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the 

Treatment of Historic Properties (NPS 1995). Any 

materials removed during rehabilitation or restoration efforts would be evaluated to determine 

their value to the National Mall and Memorial 

Park’s museum collection and/or for their comparative use in future preservation work at the 

sites. Preservation, rehabilitation, or restoration 

conducted according to The Secretary of Interior’s Standards could result in beneficial impacts 

on cultural resources. 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

The Mall 

Union Square (1st to 3rd Streets) 

The Grant Memorial would be restored, resulting in a long-term, minor to moderate, beneficial 

impact. 

The redesign of Union Square would protect key 

contributing elements of the cultural landscape, 

such as the Grant Memorial, the preservation of 

historic vistas, the protection of historic trees, 

and the provision of visitors services outside 

historic vistas. The redesign would alter the 

existing 1970s design by redesigning the Capitol 

Reflecting Pool, paving, and adding visitor 

 385
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

facilities and demonstration/event infrastructure. These actions would meet anticipated use 

levels now and in the future and protect the 

Mall’s cultural landscape from overuse, but the 

1970s design of Union Square would be altered, 

resulting in a long-term, major, adverse impact 

on the designed water feature that might be 

eligible for inclusion on the National Register of 

Historic Places. The square’s redesign could also 

affect views to and from the Grant Memorial, 

the Mall, and the U.S. Capitol. Impacts on Union 

Square would be long-term, minor to major, and 

adverse. 

The Mall (3rd to 14th Streets) 

Compacted soils would be removed and replaced with engineered soils capable of withstanding intensive use, and new drainage and 

irrigation systems would be installed, resulting in 

beneficial impacts on the health of contributing 

features of grass and elm trees and the important 

views and vistas of the Mall. Installing underground event utility infrastructure would result 

in the removal of visually intrusive aboveground 

utilities and temporary utility support systems, 

such as generator trucks and power lines. Impacts would be long-term, minor to moderate, 

and beneficial. 

Facilitating more informal recreation on the 

Mall by removing a few north-south walks near 

the 8th Street axis, installing interactive water 

features, a children’s play area, and paving walkways, along with adding new restroom facilities 

and refreshment stands, could affect the character-defining features of the cultural landscape 

and circulation patterns. Recreation already 

occurs within the vista, and the scale of recreation does not alter the vista; removing some 

walks would make a more continuous swath of 

turf to support the concept of the tapis verte or 

green lawn. Additional amenities would be 

located outside the east-west vista along shaded 

walks and would affect some views. Impacts 

would be long-term, minor, and adverse. 

A new 14th Street vehicular tunnel under the 

Mall would change the historic views up and 

down the Mall by removing vehicular traffic. It 

would also adversely affect historic circulation 

patterns and the spatial organization of the Mall. 

Impacts would be short-term, minor, and 

adverse during construction, but long-term, 

minor, and beneficial as a result of removing 

traffic. Retaining the definition of the roadbed 

would adaptively reuse historic circulation 

patterns in a way that would create more space 

for pedestrians as well as increase sustainable 

space for temporary event facilities. 

Washington Monument and Grounds 

New restrooms and a reconstructed Sylvan 

Theater would replace existing facilities, but the 

historic uses of the site would remain. These 

facilities are not contributing features of the 

monument and grounds, and they are not 

usually visible from the monument. Impacts 

would be long-term, negligible, and beneficial. 

Constructing a new permanent food service and 

retail facility between 14th and 15th streets and 

north of Independence Avenue would be outside primary view corridors. The proposed 

location is one that has not been previously disturbed, and it might be visible from the Washington Monument and grounds. It would also 

likely affect circulation, vegetation, and spatial 

organization. Impacts would be long-term, 

minor, and adverse. 

Independence and Maine avenues would be 

redesigned and Maine Avenue would be decked 

over to connect the south grounds with the 

Tidal Basin area. While pedestrian circulation 

would be improved, motorists’ views of the 

Tidal Basin would be affected, and the action 

could affect circulation patterns and some 

vegetation. Impacts on the Washington Monument and grounds would be long-term, minor, 

and adverse because of changes to historic 

circulation patterns. 

West Potomac Park (North of 

Independence Avenue) 

Constitution Gardens 

Moving the Lockkeeper’s House away from its 

current location immediately adjacent to Constitution Avenue would provide greater protection 

from potential damage by vehicles on Constitution Avenue. The structure is significant for its 

association with the Washington City Canal, 

which no longer exists, and it was relocated to its 

present site in 1915. After the completion of the 

386
Cultural Resources: Impacts of Alternative C — Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Potomac Park levee project, moving the structure to a nearby location, keeping its orientation 

to the former canal, and adaptively rehabilitating 

it could result in long term, minor, beneficial 

impacts. Constitution Gardens is a contributing 

feature of the West Potomac Park national register nomination. 

The lake, an original constructed water feature 

of the garden’s cultural landscape, would be 

rehabilitated to be self-sustaining but would 

keep the same configuration and edge. A new 

food service facility with restrooms would be 

built in the area identified in the 1970s design 

and would be compatible with existing spatial 

organization, vegetation, and circulation. 

Similarly, limited sidewalk widening would not 

alter the original finished design. The impacts of 

these actions would be long-term, minor, and 

adverse. 

Lincoln Memorial and Grounds 

Constructing a new restroom facility near the 

south refreshment stand would introduce a nonhistoric feature to meet visitor needs in this area. 

Depending on the design and location, the facility could potentially result in adverse impacts to 

vegetation and spatial organization in the Lincoln Circle and along the radial roads. The use 

of previously approved architectural styles 

would allow the restroom to appear as part of 

the recent design for the stand. Impacts would 

be long term, negligible to minor, and adverse. 

Korean War Veterans Memorial 

East side entry walks would be constructed to 

accommodate high volumes of pedestrian traffic. 

This would somewhat alter the original design 

intent to approach the memorial from the west, 

resulting in a long-term, negligible to minor, 

adverse impact. 

Ash Woods 

Ash Woods is not a contributing feature listed in 

the national register nomination for West Potomac Park. Rebuilding the U.S. Park Police 

stables, removing the restroom and providing a 

new restroom near the stables, and providing 

upgraded vehicular access and parking for park 

use and recreational activities would result in 

long-term, negligible to minor, beneficial 

impacts, since vistas, circulation, or spatial 

organization would not be affected. 

West Potomac Park (South of 

Independence Avenue) 

Tidal Basin Area 

The Tidal Basin is a character-defining feature of 

the West Potomac Park national register nomination. Filling in the bay north of Kutz Bridge to 

provide additional recreation fields would be a 

permanent, major, adverse impact to the original 

design of the Tidal Basin and West Potomac 

Park. The setting of the John Paul Jones Memorial, a national register property, would be 

significantly altered, resulting in a permanent, 

moderate, adverse impact. 

Rehabilitating the Tidal Basin walls to address 

flooding would prevent damage to the walks and 

landscape, a long-term, minor, beneficial impact. 

Altering the area surrounding the Tidal Basin by 

adding wider walkways, redesigning roads and 

parking, and constructing new pedestrian 

bridges, new recreation fields, a new restroom, 

and food service and recreation equipment 

rental facilities would change the original design, 

shape, and appearance of the Tidal Basin area. 

While the scale of the Tidal Basin is very large, 

the resulting impacts would be long-term, minor 

to moderate, and adverse. 

West Potomac Park Riverfront 

Developing a partially vegetated shoreline and 

stabilizing the deteriorated dry-laid stone seawall against seasonal flooding and erosion would 

have long-term, negligible to minor, beneficial 

impacts. The vegetated shoreline and stabilized 

stone seawall could affect the visual appearance 

of the shoreline when seen from the park, a longterm, negligible, adverse impact, because it 

would affect the historic fabric of a contributing 

feature of West Potomac Park national register 

listing. The overall impact would be long-term, 

negligible, and adverse. 

Constructing separate bike and pedestrian lanes 

to provide additional visitor safety could have a 

visual impact on the grounds and circulation 

along the riverfront of West Potomac Park, 

resulting in long-term, minor, adverse impacts. 

 387
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Thomas Jefferson Memorial and Grounds 

The change in the bus drop-off area would not 

alter existing circulation patterns, visitor access, 

or circulation at the tour bus drop-off. Nor would 

these changes alter visual elements in the historic 

landscape. The impact of redesigning the tour 

bus drop-off would likely be long-term, negligible to minor, and beneficial. Relocating the 

refreshment stand would be long-term, 

negligible to minor, and beneficial. 

Summary 

Overall impacts of alternative C on cultural 

resources would be long-term to permanent, 

negligible to major, and adverse, as well as longterm, negligible to moderate, and beneficial. 

Cumulative Impacts 

The impacts of past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions would be the same as described under the no-action alternative and 

would be long-term to permanent, negligible to 

moderate, and adverse, as well as long-term to 

permanent, negligible to major, and beneficial. 

As described above, alternative C would result in 

long-term to permanent, negligible to major, 

adverse impacts to cultural resources, as well as 

long-term, negligible to moderate, beneficial 

impacts. These impacts, in combination with the 

impacts of other past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions, would result in long-term, 

major, beneficial cumulative impacts. The 

overall adverse impacts of alternative C would 

be a noticeable adverse component of the 

overall beneficial cumulative impacts. 

Conclusion 

Alternative C would result in long-term to 

permanent, negligible to major, adverse impacts, 

along with long-term, negligible to moderate, 

beneficial impacts on cultural resources. Under 

this alternative several actions could affect 

character-defining features. The overall impacts 

of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable 

actions added to those for alternative C would 

result in long-term, major, beneficial cumulative 

impacts. The impacts associated with alternative 

C would be a noticeable adverse component of 

the overall beneficial cumulative impacts. There 

would be no impairment of cultural resources 

from implementation of alternative C. 

NHPA Section 106 Summary 

After applying the Advisory Council on Historic 

Preservation’s criteria of adverse effects (36 CFR 

Part 800.5), the National Park Service concludes 

that implementation of alternative C would have 

potential adverse effects on cultural resources. 

Further consultation is required to make a final 

determination of effect on Union Square and 

identify appropriate mitigation measures. 

388
NATURAL RESOURCES 

The analysis of anticipated impacts to natural 

resources was based on research, knowledge of 

park resources, and the best professional judgment of planners, biologists, hydrologists, and 

botanists who have experience with similar types 

of projects. Information on natural resources 

was gathered from several sources, including the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and site-specific 

resource inventories for wetlands, water quality, 

wildlife, fisheries, and vegetation. As appropriate, additional sources of data are identified 

under each topic heading. 

Where possible, map locations of sensitive resources were compared with the locations of 

proposed developments and modifications. 

Predictions about short- and long-term site 

impacts were based on previous case studies of 

use and development impacts on natural 

resources. 

The definitions and impact analyses used in this 

section assume that mitigation would be implemented. It is also assumed that NPS policies, 

sustainability guidelines, and other best practices 

would be adhered to in implementing any 

alternative. 

For this document, the planning team qualitatively evaluated the impact intensity for natural 

resources using resource-specific methodology 

and the threshold definitions that are described 

below. 

WATER RESOURCES

Methodology for Impact Analysis 

This topic includes water quality, water quantity, 

floodplains and stormwater, and use of potable 

water. The impact topic on wetlands was 

dismissed from further consideration, as explained on page 36. Potential impacts of actions 

comprising the alternatives often cannot be 

defined relative to site-specific locations. Consequently, water resource impacts of the 

alternatives were assessed qualitatively. 

Impact Intensity Levels 

The following categories were used to evaluate 

the potential impacts on water resources: 

• Negligible — Impacts on water resources 

would not be readily measurable or 

detectable and would have no impact 

outside the National Mall. 

• Minor — Impacts on water resources 

would be small, detectable, and measurable, but with few impacts beyond the 

National Mall. 

• Moderate — Impacts on water resources 

would be easily detectable, with potential 

effects outside the National Mall. 

• Major — Impacts on water resources 

would be substantial and obvious, with 

impacts extending outside the National 

Mall. 

Type of Impact 

Impacts associated with water resources could 

be beneficial or adverse. Beneficial impacts 

would improve water quality or reduce the use 

of potable water. Adverse impacts would result 

in deteriorated water quality or increased use of 

potable water. 

Duration of Impacts 

Impacts could be short- or long-term. 

• Short-term — The impact would generally 

last up to one year or the life of a construction project. 

• Long-term — The impact would last longer 

than one year or for the life of the plan (up 

to 50 years). 

NPS Policies 

NPS Management Policies 2006 state that the 

National Park Service will build a science-based 

understanding of park resources (NPS 2006e, 

sec. 4.1). The Park Service will determine the 

quality of park surface and groundwater 

resources and avoid, whenever possible, the 

pollution of park waters by human activities 

389
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

occurring within and outside the parks (NPS 

2006e, sec. 4.6.3). The Park Service will 

• work with appropriate governmental 

bodies to obtain the highest possible 

standards available under the Clean Water 

Act for the protection for park waters 

• take all necessary actions to maintain or 

restore the quality of surface waters and 

groundwaters within the parks consistent 

with the Clean Water Act and all other 

applicable federal, state, and local laws and 

regulations 

• enter into agreements with other agencies 

and governing bodies, as appropriate, to 

secure their cooperation in maintaining or 

restoring the quality of park water 

resources. 

NPS Director’s Order 77-2: Floodplain Management (NPS 2003b) states that when it is not 

practicable to locate or relocate development or 

inappropriate human activities to a site outside 

the floodplain, the National Park Service will: 

• prepare and approve a statement of findings, in accordance with procedures described in Procedural Manual 77-2: Floodplain Management (NPS 2004d) 

• take all reasonable actions to minimize the 

impact to the natural resources of floodplains 

• use nonstructural measures as much as 

practicable to reduce hazards to human life 

and property 

• ensure that structures and facilities are designed to be consistent with the intent of 

the standards and criteria of the National 

Flood Insurance Program (44 CFR Part 60) 

Impacts Common to All 

Alternatives 

Under all alternatives water quality problems in 

designed water features would continue to be 

addressed, and alternative management methods, such as addressing algae growth in designed 

water features, would help improve water quality. This would be a long-term, minor, beneficial 

impact on water quality. 

None of the alternative actions proposed in this 

plan would affect natural floodplains or cause a 

meaningful change in development or use of 

existing floodplains. For additional information, 

see the “Draft Statement of Findings for Floodplains” in appendix E. Under any alternative the 

National Park Service would work with the District of Columbia and other entities in designing 

and constructing structures such as retention 

ponds and other means to manage stormwater 

runoff within the National Mall. 

Under any alternative, as projects were implemented, mitigation measures would need to be 

in place before construction permits were 

issued. 

Park managers would monitor conditions affected by global climate change (e.g., temperature, rainfall, and sea level) and develop strategies to mitigate the effects of climate change, 

especially sea level rise. 

Impacts of the No-Action 

Alternative 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

The no-action alternative would allow existing 

water quality issues to continue. Most large 

man-made water features on the National Mall 

have a problem with algae growth caused by 

poor water circulation or aeration. This growth 

adversely affects aesthetics and the quality of 

water for other aquatic life. Treatments to control the algae include mechanical removal and 

the application of chemical algicides. This, in 

turn, may continue to cause a long-term, minor, 

adverse impact on regional water quality when 

the pools are periodically drained into the Tidal 

Basin or another water body. 

Due to soil compaction, some of the lawn 

treatment chemicals (fertilizers, etc.) used on 

turfgrass areas would continue to wash into the 

area’s surface waters, resulting in the continuation of short- and long-term adverse impacts to 

water quality. This impact varies greatly 

depending on the level of soil compaction, by 

timing of application, and precipitation, so it is 

difficult to determine the level of impact. 

The Potomac River walls along West Potomac 

Park were constructed by the Army Corps of 

390
Natural Resources: Water Resources — Impacts of the No-Action Alternative 

Engineers in the 1880s and 1890s, and they have 

begun to deteriorate. Some erosion along the 

Potomac River would continue to introduce a 

low level of sediment to river waters, a longterm, negligible, adverse impact to water quality. 

Large volumes of potable water provided by the 

District of Columbia would continue to be used 

annually in ornamental water features as the 

result of loss to evaporation and the need to 

refill pools during semi-annual cleaning. This 

would continue long-term, moderate, adverse 

impacts on potable water use. 

Nothing in this alternative would increase or 

reduce the amount of impervious surfaces in the 

planning area more than negligibly; however, 

constrained water infiltration caused by these 

surfaces would continue to contribute to 

accelerated stormwater runoff and potential for 

urban drainage flooding. 

Cumulative Impacts 

Water quality and quantity have been adversely 

affected to various degrees since the region has 

been settled. Water has been removed from the 

streams for domestic, agricultural, and industrial 

uses for about 200 years. Several types of pollutants as well as sediment are contained in effluent discharges that return to surface waters, 

causing long-term, minor to moderate, adverse 

impacts to water quality. Previously free-flowing 

streams and other drainages have been channeled, rerouted, or shunted underground 

through pipes, resulting in long-term, minor to 

moderate, adverse impacts on water resources. 

Approximately 68% of the drainage area that 

encompasses the planning area currently consists of surfaces that are more than 50% impervious (see the Impervious Surfaces map on page 

295). Soil compaction is so great in some areas of 

the National Mall that even the soil may be considered impervious. The reduction in precipitation retention results in increased sediment 

discharge into local waterways and a decrease in 

the percolation of water to the water table, both 

long-term, adverse impacts. The construction of 

the National Museum of African American 

History and Culture, the Vietnam Veterans 

Memorial Center, and the Martin Luther King, 

Jr. Memorial would increase the amount of 

impervious surfaces in the study area. A goal of 

ongoing planning efforts in the Washington area 

is to minimize any increase in the amount of 

impervious surfaces. 

The National Park Service has been cooperating 

with the Army Corps of Engineers and the District of Columbia to design and build a permanent solution for the flood control levee as it 

crosses 17th Street. This would reduce the potential for river overflow flooding north of the 

National Mall, a long-term, major, beneficial 

impact on the protection of buildings as well as 

flood insurance costs for facilities within the 

100-year floodplain, but it would have no effect 

on natural floodplains within the National Mall. 

The ongoing Chesapeake Bay Program, of which 

the National Park Service is a partner with other 

federal and state agencies, was established to 

protect and improve the quality of water resources in the greater Chesapeake Bay watershed. Implementing sustainability guidelines for 

urban resource management would also improve the condition of water resources. The 

long-term effects of these ongoing programs are 

expected to be moderate and beneficial. 

The National Park Service recognizes that global 

climate change could lead to a rise in sea level, 

with estimates of between 5 and 37 inches (0.13– 

0.95 meter) in the United States over the next 

century (Resources for the Future 2009). A sea 

level rise of 20 inches or more could result in the 

inundation of large areas of the National Mall. 

Adaptive management and regional cooperation 

would be used to plan and implement strategies 

for dealing with the effects of global warming 

and for reducing the contribution of NPS 

operations to global warming. 

In summary, long-term, minor to moderate, 

adverse impacts to water quality would continue 

as a result of pollutants and sediment discharges 

in surface water runoff; the channeling, rerouting, or shunting underground of streams and 

other drainages; and reduced percolation of 

water and increased runoff because of impervious surfaces. Long-term, beneficial impacts 

would result from a flood-control levee at 17th 

Street (a major, beneficial impact on the 

downtown area, but no effect on natural floodplains within the National Mall), and from 

improved water quality in the greater Chesapeake Bay (a moderate, beneficial impact). 

 391
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

These adverse actions and impacts would be 

reduced somewhat by implementing mitigation 

and sustainability practices. This alternative 

would make a large contribution to the effects of 

other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable 

actions. The overall cumulative effects would be 

long-term, moderate, and adverse. 

Conclusion 

Implementing the no-action alternative would 

result in the continuation of short- and longterm, minor to moderate, adverse impacts on 

potable water use, groundwater, and surface 

water resources. The overall cumulative impacts 

would be long-term, moderate, and adverse. 

There would be no impairment of a key park 

resource. 

Impacts of the Preferred 

Alternative 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Under the preferred alternative nonpotable 

water sources would be used in ornamental 

features, resulting in a reduction in potable 

water use, and water infiltration would be enhanced as a result of improved soil conditions 

that would, in turn, reduce runoff. Water features would be rehabilitated and water quality 

improved through recirculation, filtration, and 

improved equipment. The National Park Service 

would seek sound, natural ways to improve 

water quality. The National Park Service would 

seek to manage more stormwater on-site, as well 

as seek sustainable water use and reuse of 

graywater. These actions would result in longterm, moderate, beneficial impacts on water 

resources. 

The Capitol Reflecting Pool would be redesigned for sustainable water management in 

order to substantially reduce the volume of 

water needed. It could be redesigned to be 

drained for events or frozen for ice skating. 

Changing the management of this pool would 

result in long-term, negligible, beneficial impacts 

on water use. 

Constitution Gardens Lake would be redesigned 

to be self-sustaining and support fish and desirable plant populations. This change would 

reduce the need for chemical and mechanical 

algae control, and nonpotable water sources 

would be explored. These actions would result 

in long-term, minor, beneficial impacts on water 

quality and use. 

Some areas of turf south of the National Gallery 

of Art Sculpture Garden and along 3rd, 4th, 7th, 

and 14th streets would be paved. In addition 

some existing sidewalks could be widened in 

Constitution Gardens, at the Korean War 

Veterans and the Vietnam Veterans memorials, 

and around the Tidal Basin. These actions would 

increase the area of impervious surfaces by 

about 5 acres. However, new and replaced 

paving would use sustainable materials and 

methods to increase water infiltration and 

reduce water runoff. Paving would result in 

long-term, minor, adverse impacts on 

groundwater percolation and quality. 

Constructing or replacing visitor amenities (e.g., 

restrooms, food service facilities, and retail 

spaces) near Union Square, the Washington 

Monument, and the Lincoln Memorial would 

increase the amount of impervious surfaces, resulting in long-term, negligible, adverse impacts 

because of the small, previously disturbed areas 

affected. These adverse impacts would be essentially offset by improved soil management techniques on large areas of the Mall, which would 

reduce compaction and use of chemicals and 

would increase percolation of precipitation, 

resulting in long-term, minor, beneficial impacts 

on water quality, quantity, and groundwater 

replenishment. 

Naturalized riverbanks would be established in 

some areas along the Potomac River frontage 

where existing river walls have deteriorated. 

Aging and deteriorating seawalls around the 

Tidal Basin would be rebuilt in accordance with 

engineering studies and would eliminate regular 

overflowing and bank erosion while allowing 

wider pedestrian sidewalks. These actions would 

reduce the amount of sediment being washed 

into the river, resulting in long-term, negligible, 

beneficial impacts to water quality. Short-term, 

moderate, adverse impacts to water quality 

could occur from increased siltation during 

construction. 

In summary under the preferred alternative 

nonpotable water sources would be used in 

ornamental features where feasible, resulting in 

392
Natural Resources: Water Resources — Impacts of Alternative A 

a reduction in potable water use. The National 

Park Service would seek to manage more stormwater onsite, as well as seek sustainable water 

use and reuse of graywater. Water infiltration 

would be improved as a result of improved soil 

conditions, which would reduce runoff. These 

actions would result in long-term, minor, 

beneficial impacts on water quality and use. 

Cumulative Impacts 

Impacts of other past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions would be the same as those 

described for the no-action alternative. In 

summary, long-term, minor to moderate, 

adverse impacts to water quality would continue 

as a result of pollutants and sediment discharges 

in surface water runoff; the channeling, rerouting, or shunting underground of streams and 

other drainages; and reduced percolation of 

water and increased runoff because of impervious surfaces. Long-term, beneficial impacts 

would result from a flood-control levee at 17th 

Street (a major, beneficial impact on the 

downtown area, but no effect on natural floodplains within the National Mall), and from 

improved water quality in the greater Chesapeake Bay (a moderate, beneficial impact). 

The impacts on water resources of the preferred 

alternative, in combination with the impacts of 

other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable 

actions, would result in long-term, moderate, 

adverse cumulative impacts. The preferred 

alternative would have a slight beneficial contribution to cumulative impacts. 

Conclusion 

Implementing the preferred alternative would 

result in short-term, moderate, adverse impacts 

during construction activities at the Tidal Basin 

and along the Potomac River, but over the longterm impacts on potable water use and on 

groundwater and surface water resources would 

be minor and beneficial. Cumulative impacts 

would be long-term, moderate, and adverse, 

with this alternative making a slight beneficial 

contribution. Because there would be no major, 

adverse impacts to a key park resource, there 

would be no unacceptable impacts or impairment of a key park resource. 

Impacts of Alternative A 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Under alternative A water features would be 

rehabilitated and water quality improved 

through recirculation, filtration, and improved 

equipment. 

Under this alternative Constitution Gardens 

Lake would be redesigned to be self-sustaining 

and to support desirable plant populations. Less 

chemical and mechanical algae control would be 

needed. This would result in long-term, minor, 

beneficial impacts on water quality. There would 

be no other impacts to wetlands. 

Constructing or replacing visitor amenities (e.g., 

restrooms, food service facilities, or gift shops) 

near the Washington Monument, Constitution 

Gardens, and the Lincoln Memorial would also 

increase the amount of impervious surfaces, 

causing long-term, negligible, adverse impacts 

because of the relatively small areas affected. 

Improved soil management techniques would 

reduce compaction, require less chemical use, 

and increase percolation of precipitation on 

large areas of the Mall, having long-term, minor, 

beneficial impacts on water quality and flows. 

Seawalls along the Tidal Basin and the Potomac 

River would be rebuilt in place. Short-term, 

moderate, adverse impacts would occur to water 

quality from increased siltation during construction. 

Cumulative Impacts 

Impacts of other past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions would be the same as those 

described for the no-action alternative. In 

summary, long-term, minor to moderate, 

adverse impacts to water quality would continue 

as a result of pollutants and sediment discharges 

in surface water runoff; the channeling, rerouting, or shunting underground of streams and 

other drainages; and reduced percolation of 

water and increased runoff because of impervious surfaces. Long-term, beneficial impacts 

would result from a flood-control levee at 17th 

Street (a major, beneficial impact on the 

downtown area, but no effect on natural floodplains within the National Mall), and from 

improved water quality in the greater Chesapeake Bay (a moderate, beneficial impact). 

 393
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

The impacts of alternative A, when considered 

with the impacts of other past, present, and 

reasonably foreseeable actions, would result in 

long-term, moderate, adverse cumulative impacts to water resources. Alternative A would 

make a slight beneficial contribution to these 

impacts. 

Conclusion 

Implementing alternative A would result in 

short-term, negligible, adverse impacts to water 

resources during the construction of new Tidal 

Basin seawalls but long-term, negligible to minor, beneficial impacts. Cumulative impacts 

under this alternative would be long-term, moderate, and adverse, with a slight beneficial 

contribution from this alternative. Because there 

would be no major adverse impacts to a key park 

resource, there would be no unacceptable 

impacts or impairment of a key park resource. 

Impacts of Alternative B 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Under alternative B, like alternative A, water 

features would be rehabilitated and water 

quality improved through recirculation, filtration, and upgraded equipment. 

Under alternative B some existing sidewalks in 

Constitution Gardens and around the Tidal 

Basin would be widened and repaved. These 

actions could increase the area of impervious 

surfaces by about 3.25 acres. However, new and 

replaced paving would use sustainable materials 

and methods to increase water infiltration and 

reduce water runoff. Paving would result in 

long-term, negligible to minor, adverse impacts 

on groundwater percolation and quality. 

Constructing or replacing visitor amenities (e.g., 

restrooms, food service facilities, or gift shops) 

near the Washington Monument, Constitution 

Gardens, and the Lincoln Memorial would increase the amount of impervious surfaces, causing long-term, negligible, adverse impacts 

because of the relatively small areas affected. 

Improved soil management techniques on large 

areas of the Mall would reduce compaction and 

chemical use and would increase percolation of 

precipitation, resulting in long-term, minor, 

beneficial impacts on water quality and flows. 

Seawalls along the Tidal Basin and the Potomac 

River frontage would be reconstructed to eliminate regular overflowing and bank erosion. This 

would reduce the amount of sediment being 

washed into these waterways, resulting in longterm, negligible, beneficial impacts to water 

quality. Short-term, moderate, adverse impacts 

to water quality would occur from increased 

siltation during construction. 

If underground parking garages were determined to be feasible by engineering, security, 

geotechnical, and economic studies, any impacts 

on water resources as a result of garage construction would be assessed during the 

subsequent environmental analysis for these 

projects. 

Cumulative Impacts 

Impacts of other past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions would be the same as those 

described for the no-action alternative. In 

summary, long-term, minor to moderate, 

adverse impacts to water quality would continue 

as a result of pollutants and sediment discharges 

in surface water runoff; the channeling, rerouting, or shunting underground of streams and 

other drainages; and reduced percolation of 

water and increased runoff because of impervious surfaces. Long-term, beneficial impacts 

would result from a flood-control levee at 17th 

Street (a major, beneficial impact on the 

downtown area, but no effect on natural floodplains within the National Mall), and from 

improved water quality in the greater Chesapeake Bay (a moderate, beneficial impact). 

The impacts of alternative B, in combination 

with the impacts of other past, present, and 

reasonably foreseeable actions, would result in 

long-term, moderate, adverse, cumulative 

impacts to water resources. Alternative B would 

have slight adverse and beneficial contributions 

to these effects. 

Conclusion 

Implementing alternative B would result in 

short-term, moderate, adverse impacts during 

construction at the Tidal Basin and along the 

Potomac River. Over the long-term impacts on 

potable water use, and on the park’s groundwater and surface water resources, would be 

394
Natural Resources: Water Resources — Impacts of Alternative C 

both adverse and beneficial, with the combined 

impacts being neutral. Cumulative impacts 

would be long-term, moderate, and adverse, 

with this alternative having slight adverse and 

beneficial contributions. Because there would be 

no major adverse impact to a key park resource, 

there would be no unacceptable impacts or impairment of a key park resource. 

Impacts of Alternative C 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Under alternative C water features would be 

rehabilitated and water quality improved 

through recirculation, filtration, and improved 

equipment. Additionally, the National Park 

Service would seek environmentally sound, 

natural ways to improve water quality. 

Constitution Gardens Lake would be redesigned 

to be self-sustaining and to support fish and 

desirable plant populations. Less chemical and 

mechanical algae control would be needed. This 

would result in long-term, minor, beneficial impacts on water quality. The Capitol Reflecting 

Pool could be drained for events or frozen for 

ice skating. 

Some existing sidewalks in Constitution 

Gardens and around the Tidal Basin would be 

widened and repaved. 

These actions could increase the area of 

impervious surfaces by about 3.25 acres. 

However, new and replaced paving would use 

sustainable materials and methods to increase 

water infiltration and reduce water runoff. 

Paving would result in long-term, negligible to 

minor, adverse impacts on groundwater 

percolation and quality. 

Constructing visitor amenities (e.g., restrooms, 

food service facilities, or retail spaces) near the 

Washington Monument and the Lincoln Memorial would also increase the amount of impervious surfaces, causing long-term, negligible, 

adverse impacts. These adverse impacts would 

be essentially offset by improved soil management techniques on large areas of the Mall, 

which would reduce compaction and chemical 

use and would increase percolation of precipitation, resulting in long-term, minor, beneficial 

impacts on water quality and flows. 

The results of engineering studies to maximize 

the ability of the Tidal Basin to flush and absorb 

tidal surges would be implemented. This would 

result in long-term, minor, beneficial impacts. 

The northern bay of the Tidal Basin would be 

filled in under this alternative. This action would 

eliminate a small area (5.6 acres) of the shallow, 

human-made basin that is not currently serving 

any hydrologic purpose and so would most 

likely not result in any impacts to water resources. Seawalls along the Tidal Basin and 

Potomac River frontage would be rebuilt to 

eliminate regular overflowing and bank erosion. 

Seawalls in some areas along the Potomac River 

would be replaced with sustainable wetland 

shorelines. These actions would reduce the 

amount of sediment being washed into these 

waterways, resulting in long-term, negligible 

beneficial impacts to water quality. Short-term, 

moderate, adverse impacts could occur to water 

quality from increased siltation during construction. 

Cumulative Impacts 

Impacts of other past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions would be the same as those 

described for the no-action alternative. In 

summary, long-term, minor to moderate, 

adverse impacts to water quality would continue 

as a result of pollutants and sediment discharges 

in surface water runoff; the channeling, rerouting, or shunting underground of streams and 

other drainages; and reduced percolation of 

water and increased runoff because of impervious surfaces. Long-term, beneficial impacts 

would result from a flood-control levee at 17th 

Street (a major, beneficial impact on the 

downtown area, but no effect on natural floodplains within the National Mall), and from 

improved water quality in the greater Chesapeake Bay (a moderate, beneficial impact). 

The impacts on water resources of alternative C, 

when considered in combination with the 

impacts of other past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions, would result in long-term, 

moderate, adverse cumulative impacts. Alternative C would make a slight beneficial contribution to these effects. 

 395
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Conclusion 

Implementing alternative C would result in 

short-term, moderate, adverse impacts to water 

quality during construction at the Tidal Basin 

and along the Potomac River. Over the longterm impacts on potable water use, and on 

groundwater and surface water resources, would 

be negligible to minor and beneficial. Cumulative impacts would be long-term, moderate, and 

adverse, with this alternative having a slight 

beneficial contribution. Because there would be 

no major adverse impact to a key park resource, 

there would be no unacceptable impacts or impairment of a key park resource. 

SOILS

Methodology for Impact Analysis 

Predictions about site impacts were based on 

knowledge of soil characteristics and the impact 

on soils from use and the development of other 

visitor and operation facilities under similar 

circumstances. 

Impact Intensity Levels 

The following thresholds were used to evaluate 

the potential impacts on soils: 

• Negligible — Impacts on soils would be 

slight and largely unnoticeable compared to 

healthy native soils typical of the soil type 

and profile. Any effects on productivity, 

compaction, infiltration, subsidence, or 

erosion potential would not be measurable. 

• Minor — Impacts on soils would be noticeable compared to healthy native soils typical for the soil type and profile. Any effects 

on productivity, compaction, infiltration, 

subsidence, or erosion potential would be 

measurable but localized to a small area. 

• Moderate — Impacts on soils would be 

readily apparent compared to healthy native soils typical for the soil type and profile. 

Any effects on productivity, compaction, 

infiltration, subsidence, or erosion potential 

would be measurable and would cover 

several acres. 

• Major — Impacts on soils would 

substantially alter healthy native soils 

typical for the soil type and profile. Any 

effects on productivity, compaction, 

infiltration, subsidence, or erosion potential 

would be measurable and would affect a 

relatively large area (more than 5 acres). 

Type of Impact 

Soil-related impacts could be beneficial or 

adverse. Beneficial impacts would improve soil 

conditions in terms of productivity, compaction, 

infiltration, subsidence, or erosion potential. 

Adverse impacts would degrade these soil 

conditions. 

Duration of Impacts 

Impacts could be short- or long-term. 

• Short-term — The impact would generally 

last up to one year or the life of a construction project. 

• Long-term — The impact would last longer 

than one year or for the life of the plan (up 

to 50 years). 

NPS Policies 

The NPS Management Policies 2006 state that 

action will be taken by superintendents to 

prevent or at least minimize adverse, potentially 

irreversible impacts on soils. Soil conservation 

and soil amendment practices may be implemented to reduce impacts. Importation of offsite soil or soil amendments may be used to 

restore damaged sites (NPS 2006e, sec. 4.8.2.4). 

Impacts Common to All 

Alternatives 

Soils would be rehabilitated and managed to 

restore natural processes and functions, with 

long-term, moderate, beneficial impacts. 

Impacts of the No-Action 

Alternative 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Under the no-action alternative existing adverse 

impacts on soil conditions would continue. 

There would be no change in how quickly various areas of the National Mall would be able to 

sustain continued high levels of use and recover 

because of the impacts of demonstrations and 

396
Natural Resources: Soils — Impacts of the No-Action Alternative 

events. Some locations would be more affected 

than others because of near nonstop use from 

spring through fall. Certain events like the 

annual spring Public Employees Roundtable 

(which displays large vehicles such as mobile 

laboratories and military equipment) and the 

biennial autumn Solar Decathlon (with displays 

of solar houses) would continue to have disproportionate impacts because of the weight of 

delivery vehicles and heavy displays that affect 

extensive areas of soil for several days. 

Poor soil quality and productivity resulting from 

severe compaction would continue on heavily 

used portions of the Mall. This would continue a 

long-term, moderate to major, adverse impact 

on soils. Indirectly, these conditions would have 

long-term adverse effects on hundreds of American elm trees and many acres of turf, affecting 

the historic tapis verte (see the cultural resource 

sections). 

Adverse impacts caused by social trails (compaction, wind and water erosion) would continue 

and could increase unless corrective actions 

were taken. Compacted trail impacts are generally localized and less than 3 acres total. Conditions in affected areas are being improved 

through aeration and resodding. Because of this 

mitigation, the impacts would be long-term, 

adverse, and minor. 

Until permanent fixes can be completed, land 

subsidence along the southern side of the Tidal 

Basin would continue to cause sinking of the 

seawall. This land subsidence would be a longterm, minor, adverse impact. 

Cumulative Impacts 

Soil conditions throughout large parts of the 

planning area are less than ideal because of 

adverse impacts from past and present heavy 

daily foot traffic, recreational activities, and large 

events. Soils in some test pits on the National 

Mall have been found to be “as dense as concrete” when density and pore space are calculated (NPS 1975). This compaction has resulted 

in long-term, moderate to major, adverse 

impacts to soil quality and productivity because 

of the reduced capacity to hold water and air. 

Concentrated visitor use along certain routes has 

created social trails that compact the soil and 

destroy vegetative cover, which leads to soil loss 

from wind and water erosion. 

The National Park Service manages three concerts annually (Memorial Day, Fourth of July, 

and Labor Day) on the west grounds of the 

Capitol, reducing direct impacts on the National 

Mall and resulting in a long-term, major, beneficial impacts. The impacts on natural resources 

in areas managed by the Architect of the Capitol 

would continue to be temporary, moderate, and 

adverse. However, these impacts are somewhat 

mitigated by using a number of best practices, 

which include requiring a minimum one-month 

scheduling gap between concerts, locating the 

stage and related facilities in the same space, and 

using temporary surfacing for vehicular access to 

reduce compaction, closing 1st Street near the 

Ulysses S. Grant Memorial for support facilities, 

and restoring the site at the end of the season. 

Also, the overall event duration is four months. 

New paved walkways constructed near the Lincoln Reflecting Pool would add to the amount of 

hardened surfaces but would reduce the level of 

impacts to adjacent soils, resulting in long-term, 

minor, beneficial and adverse impacts. 

The construction of the National Museum of 

African American History and Culture, the 

Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial, and the 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial Center would 

cause short- and long-term, minor, adverse 

impacts on soils in these areas. Site-specific 

impacts would be addressed in subsequent 

environmental analyses for these projects. 

The no-action alternative would allow the continuation of these adverse actions and effects, 

although they would be reduced somewhat by 

implementing mitigation and sustainability 

practices. The effects of this alternative when 

combined with the effects of other past, present, 

and reasonably foreseeable actions would result 

in overall cumulative effects being long-term, 

moderate to major, and adverse. This alternative 

would contribute a considerable amount to the 

overall impacts on soils. 

Conclusion 

Implementing the no-action alternative would 

result in continuing short- and long-term 

adverse impacts on soils that range from minor 

 397
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

to major because of heavy daily foot traffic, 

recreational activities, and large events, affecting 

soil quality and productivity. Combining the 

impacts of this alternative with the impacts of 

other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable 

actions would result in long-term, moderate to 

major, adverse cumulative impacts, with a large 

adverse contribution from the no-action alternative. This level of impact is considered unacceptable because it would continue to impede 

the attainment of the park’s desired future 

conditions for natural and cultural resources. 

There would be no impairment of a key park 

resource. 

Impacts of the Preferred 

Alternative 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Actions taken under the preferred alternative 

would improve the physical ability of areas on 

the National Mall to sustain high levels of use 

and to recover quickly. The improvements 

would be both highly visible and subtle, improving convenience and creating sustainable spaces 

for all. Measures would be taken to ensure that 

natural resources would be protected from injury and compaction during setup and takedown 

operations, as well as during the events 

themselves. 

Soil conditions would be improved under the 

preferred alternative by replacing or augmenting 

soils or implementing other sustainable technologies in heavily used areas in the center of the 

Mall. Soil conditions would be improved in 

areas such as Constitution Gardens as well. 

These measures would decrease compaction and 

increase soil quality and productivity by 

increasing the soil’s capacity to hold water and 

air and enhance the soils’ ability to naturally 

filter percolating water. This would result in 

long-term, moderate, beneficial impacts to soil 

resources. 

Installing barriers (e.g., curbs, fencing, or some 

other measure) in various places and closing elm 

tree panels on the Mall to event facilities would 

reduce the amount of pedestrian and vehicle 

trampling. The National Park Service would 

undertake efforts to restore and improve soil 

conditions in the top 2 feet of soil that comprises 

the tree root zone. As trees die and were replaced, efforts to restore soil would become 

more extensive. This would result in long-term, 

moderate, beneficial impacts to soil resources. 

This alternative would result in paving turf areas 

in Union Square, south of the National Gallery 

of Art Sculpture Garden, and along 3rd, 4th, 7th, 

and 14th streets, and in widening some sidewalks in Constitution Gardens and at the Korean War Veterans and the Vietnam Veterans 

memorials. Paving materials would be as 

sustainable as possible, but these actions would 

reduce the area of “natural” surfaces by about 5 

acres, resulting in long-term, minor, adverse 

impacts on soil resources. 

Constructing or replacing visitor amenities (e.g., 

restrooms, food service facilities, or retail space) 

near the Washington Monument, the Lincoln 

Memorial, Union Square, Constitution Gardens, 

the Tidal Basin, and along the Mall would result 

in short-term, adverse impacts on soil due to 

wind and water erosion. However, mitigating 

measures would make these impacts negligible. 

Long-term effects would be adverse but negligible because most development would occur on 

unnatural fill soils. 

Seawalls along the Potomac River frontage 

would be rebuilt or replaced with self-sustaining 

naturalized shorelines to eliminate soil loss due 

to bank erosion. This would result in long-term, 

negligible to minor, beneficial impacts. 

Cumulative Impacts 

Impacts of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions would be the same as those 

described under the no-action alternative. In 

summary, compacted soils throughout large 

parts of the planning area have resulted in longterm, moderate to major, adverse impacts to soil 

quality and productivity because of the reduced 

capacity to hold water and air. Future construction projects would cause short- and long-term, 

minor, adverse impacts on soils in specific areas, 

including new paved walkways near the Lincoln 

Reflecting Pool, which would add to the amount 

of hardened surfaces but would reduce the level 

of impacts to adjacent soils. 

The impacts of the preferred alternative on soil 

resources, when considered with the effects of 

other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable 

398
Natural Resources: Soils — Impacts of Alternative A 

actions, would result in long-term, moderate to 

major, adverse cumulative effects. The preferred 

alternative would have modest beneficial and 

adverse contributions to these impacts. 

Conclusion 

Implementing the preferred alternative would 

result in short-term, minor, adverse impacts to 

park soil resources from construction and longterm, moderate, beneficial impacts from soil 

augmentation or replacement. The overall cumulative impacts of combining the impacts of this 

alternative with the impacts of other actions 

would be long-term, moderate to major, and 

adverse, with this alternative making a modest 

adverse and beneficial contribution. Because 

there would be no major adverse impact to a key 

park resource, there would be no unacceptable 

impacts to or impairment of a key park resource. 

Impacts of Alternative A 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Compared to the no-action alternative, lower 

use levels under alternative A and no use of the 

elm tree panels during special events would 

result in long-term, negligible to moderate, 

beneficial impacts on the ability of various 

venues to sustain use and recover quickly. 

Soil conditions on the Mall would be improved 

under alternative A by replacing or augmenting 

soils or implementing other sustainable technologies in heavily used areas (about 33 acres), 

similar to the preferred alternative. Augmentation or similar technologies would decrease soil 

compaction, which would improve soil quality 

and productivity by increasing the capacity to 

hold water and air. This would result in longterm, moderate, beneficial impacts to soil 

resources. 

Installing barriers (e.g., curbs or fencing) in 

various places and widening sidewalks would 

reduce the amount of trampling and social trails. 

This would result in long-term, minor, beneficial 

impacts to soil resources. 

This alternative calls for constructing or replacing visitor amenities (e.g., restrooms, food service facilities, or retail space) near the Washington Monument, Constitution Gardens, the 

Lincoln Memorial, and along the Mall. 

Construction activities would result in shortterm, adverse impacts on soils from wind and 

water erosion, but mitigating measures would 

make these impacts negligible. Long-term impacts would be adverse but negligible because 

most development would occur on unnatural fill 

soils. 

Seawalls along the Potomac River frontage 

would be rebuilt to eliminate loss of soil due to 

bank erosion. This would be a long-term, 

negligible to minor, beneficial impact. 

Cumulative Impacts 

Impacts of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions would be the same as those 

described under the no-action alternative. In 

summary, compacted soils throughout large 

parts of the planning area have resulted in longterm, moderate to major, adverse impacts to soil 

quality and productivity because of the reduced 

capacity to hold water and air. Future construction projects would cause short- and long-term, 

minor, adverse impacts on soils in specific areas, 

including new paved walkways near the Lincoln 

Reflecting Pool, which would add to the amount 

of hardened surfaces but would reduce the level 

of impacts to adjacent soils. 

The impacts of alternative A on soil resources, in 

combination with the impacts of other past, 

present, and reasonably foreseeable actions, 

would result in long-term, moderate to major, 

adverse cumulative effects. Alternative A would 

make a modest beneficial contribution to these 

effects. 

Conclusion 

Alternative A would result in short-term, 

negligible, adverse impacts from construction 

and long-term, moderate, beneficial impacts on 

the park’s soil resources from soil augmentation 

or replacement. The overall cumulative impacts 

of combining the impacts of this alternative with 

the impacts of other actions would be long-term, 

moderate to major, and adverse, with this 

alternative having a modest beneficial 

contribution. Because there would be no major 

adverse impact to a key park resource, there 

would be no unacceptable impacts to or 

impairment of a key park resource. 

 399
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Impacts of Alternative B 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Soil conditions would be improved under this 

alternative by replacing or augmenting soil or 

implementing other sustainable technologies on 

about 33 heavily used acres on the Mall, similar 

to the preferred alternative. Augmentation or 

similar technologies would increase the soil’s 

capacity to hold water and air, thus enhancing 

soil quality and productivity. This would result 

in long-term, moderate, beneficial impacts to 

soil resources. 

Installing barriers (e.g., curbs or fencing) in 

various places and widening sidewalks would 

reduce the amount of trampling and social trails. 

This would result in long-term, minor, beneficial 

impacts to soil resources. 

Constructing or replacing visitor amenities (e.g., 

restrooms, food service facilities, or retail space) 

near the Washington Monument, Constitution 

Gardens, the Lincoln Memorial, and the Mall 

would result in short-term, adverse impacts on 

soils during construction from wind and water 

erosion, but mitigating measures would make 

these impacts negligible. Long-term effects of 

these actions would be adverse but negligible 

because most development would occur on 

unnatural fill soils. 

Seawalls along the Potomac River frontage 

would be rebuilt to eliminate soil loss due to 

bank erosion. This would be a long-term, 

negligible to minor, beneficial impact. 

If underground parking garages were determined to be feasible by engineering, security, 

geotechnical, and economic studies, there would 

be impacts on soils as a result of garage construction. These site-specific impacts would be 

assessed during the subsequent environmental 

analysis for this construction project. 

Cumulative Impacts 

Impacts of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions would be the same as those described under the no-action alternative. In 

summary, compacted soils throughout large 

parts of the planning area have resulted in longterm, moderate to major, adverse impacts to soil 

quality and productivity because of the reduced 

capacity to hold water and air. Future construction projects would cause short- and long-term, 

minor, adverse impacts on soils in specific areas, 

including new paved walkways near the Lincoln 

Reflecting Pool, which would add to the amount 

of hardened surfaces but would reduce the level 

of impacts to adjacent soils. 

The impacts of alternative B on soil resources, 

when considered with the impacts of other past, 

present, and reasonably foreseeable actions, 

would result in long-term, moderate to major, 

adverse cumulative effects. Alternative B would 

make a modest beneficial contribution to these 

effects. 

Conclusion 

Implementing alternative B would result in 

short-term, negligible, adverse impacts from 

construction and long-term, moderate, beneficial impacts from soil augmentation or replacement. The overall cumulative impacts of 

combining the impacts of this alternative with 

the impacts of other actions would be long-term, 

moderate to major, and adverse, with this alternative making a modest beneficial contribution. 

Because there would be no major adverse impact 

to a key park resource, there would be no unacceptable impacts to or impairment of a key park 

resource. 

Impacts of Alternative C 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Soil conditions would be improved in this 

alternative by replacing or augmenting soils or 

implementing other sustainable technologies in 

heavily used areas on the Mall (on about 33 

acres), similar to the preferred alternative. 

Augmentation or similar technologies would 

decrease the level of soil compaction, which 

would increase soil quality and productivity by 

increasing the capacity to hold water and air. 

This would result in long-term, moderate, 

beneficial impacts to soil resources. 

Installing barriers (e.g., curbs or fencing) in 

various places and widening sidewalks would 

reduce the amount of trampling and social trails. 

This would result in long-term, minor, beneficial 

impacts to soil resources. 

400
Natural Resources: Vegetation — Methodology for Impact Analysis 

Constructing or replacing visitor amenities (e.g., 

restrooms, food service facilities, or retail space) 

near the Washington Monument, the Lincoln 

Memorial, and along the Mall would result in 

short-term, adverse impacts from wind and 

water erosion, but mitigating measures would 

make these impacts negligible. Long-term 

impacts would be adverse but negligible because 

most facilities would be on unnatural fill soils. 

Seawalls along the Potomac River would be 

rebuilt or replaced with self-sustaining wetland 

shorelines to eliminate soil loss due to bank 

erosion. This would result in long-term, 

negligible to minor, beneficial impacts. 

Cumulative Effects 

Impacts of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions would be the same as those described under the no-action alternative. In summary, compacted soils throughout large parts of 

the planning area have resulted in long-term, 

moderate to major, adverse impacts to soil 

quality and productivity because of the reduced 

capacity to hold water and air. Future construction projects would cause short- and long-term, 

minor, adverse impacts on soils in specific areas, 

including new paved walkways near the Lincoln 

Reflecting Pool, which would add to the amount 

of hardened surfaces but would reduce the level 

of impacts to adjacent soils. 

The impacts on soil resources of alternative C, 

when considered with the impacts of other past, 

present, and reasonably foreseeable actions, 

would result in long-term, moderate to major, 

adverse cumulative impacts. Alternative C would 

have a modest beneficial contribution to these 

effects. 

Conclusion 

Alternative C would result in short-term, 

negligible, adverse impacts from construction 

and long-term, moderate, beneficial impacts 

from soil augmentation or replacement. The 

overall cumulative impacts of combining the 

impacts of this alternative with the impacts of 

other actions would be long-term, moderate to 

major, and adverse, with this alternative making 

a modest beneficial contribution. Because there 

would be no major adverse impact to a key park 

resource, there would be no unacceptable 

impacts or impairment of a key park resource. 

VEGETATION

Methodology for Impact Analysis 

Impacts to the health of vegetation (individual 

plants and/or communities) were assessed 

qualitatively. Information was taken from 

general documents such as the park’s “Resource 

Management Plan” and the results of sitespecific surveys. Predictions about impacts were 

based on previous experience with development 

impacts on natural resources. 

Impact Intensity Levels 

The following impact thresholds were defined: 

• Negligible — Impacts on vegetation 

would not be measurable. The abundance 

or distribution of native or cultivated 

vegetation would be only slightly affected. 

Ecological processes, biological productivity, or sustainability would not be affected. Irrigation would not be needed or 

would function properly to support 

healthy vegetation. 

• Minor — Impacts on vegetation would be 

measurable. The abundance or distribution of native or cultivated vegetation 

would affect small areas or affect several 

trees. Ecological processes, biological 

productivity, or sustainability would be 

affected slightly. Irrigation would not be 

needed or would function properly to 

support healthy vegetation. 

• Moderate — Impacts on vegetation 

would be measurable and clearly evident 

in visible areas. The abundance or distribution of native or cultivated vegetation 

would affect areas of up to 10 acres or up 

to two dozen trees. Ecological processes, 

biological productivity, or sustainability 

would be affected. Irrigation would or 

would not function properly to support 

healthy vegetation. 

• Major — Impacts on vegetation would be 

measurable and clearly evident in areas 

that are prominent and highly visible. The 

abundance or distribution of native or 

 401
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

cultivated vegetation would affect areas of 

more than 10 acres or several dozen trees. 

Ecological processes, biological productivity, or sustainability would be affected. 

Irrigation would or would not function 

properly to support healthy vegetation. 

Type of Impact 

Impacts could be beneficial or adverse. Beneficial impacts would improve growing conditions and the health of vegetation growing on 

the National Mall. Ecological processes, 

biological productivity, or sustainability would 

be enhanced. Adverse impacts would result in 

deteriorated growing conditions and/or the loss 

of vegetation, and ecological processes, biological productivity, or sustainability would be 

affected. 

Duration of Impacts 

Impacts could be short- or long-term: 

• Short-term — The impact would generally 

last up to one year or the life of a construction project. 

• Long-term — The impact would last longer 

than one year or for the life of the plan (up 

to 50 years). 

NPS Policies 

The NPS Management Policies 2006 state that 

where necessary to preserve and protect the 

desired condition of specific cultural resources

and landscapes, plants and plant communities 

generally will be managed to reflect the character of the landscape that prevailed during the 

historic period (NPS 2006e, sec. 4.4.2.5). 

More specifically with regard to cultural 

landscapes, the policies state that the treatment 

of a cultural landscape will preserve significant 

physical attributes, biotic systems, and uses 

when those uses contribute to historical 

significance (sec. 5.3.5.2). Biotic cultural 

resources, which include plant and animal 

communities associated with the significance of 

a cultural landscape, will be duly considered in 

treatment and management. The cultural 

resource and natural resource components of 

the park’s resource stewardship strategy will 

jointly identify acceptable plans for the 

management and treatment of biotic cultural 

resources (sec. 5.3.5.2.5). 

Impacts Common to All 

Alternatives 

Vegetation health would be managed to improve 

health and appearance, with long-term, moderate, beneficial impacts. 

Impacts of the No-Action 

Alternative 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Under the no-action alternative existing conditions and situations affecting vegetation would 

continue. There would be no change in how 

quickly various areas of the National Mall would 

be able to sustain continued high levels of use 

and recover from the impacts of large demonstrations and events. Some locations would be 

more affected than others because of near 

nonstop use from spring through fall. 

The growth and health of trees, shrubs, and 

turfgrass would continue to be adversely 

affected by poor soil quality on heavily used 

portions of the Mall. Severely compacted soils 

have inhibited the health and vitality of vegetation because pore space water capacity is 

reduced and the physical hardness of the soil 

often forces shrub and tree roots out of the 

ground. The continuing lack of a functioning 

irrigation system in the center grass panels (due 

to damage from tent stakes and other factors) 

contributes to the inability to maintain healthy 

turf areas. 

Even though the National Park Service has 

installed some post-and-chain fencing to 

confine use to walkways, trampling of exposed 

tree roots (especially elms and cherry trees) 

would continue on the Mall and around the 

Tidal Basin. Of the approximately 600 American 

elm trees lining the Mall, approximately 40% 

(246–261) are potentially subject to adverse 

effects caused by facilities and visitor use during 

the Smithsonian Folklife Festival in July. The 

impacts would continue to be long-term, major, 

and adverse because of the large number of 

American elm and cherry trees and the large 

areas of turf affected. 

402
Natural Resources: Vegetation — Impacts of the Preferred Alternative 

Events like the annual spring Public Employees 

Roundtable (which displays large vehicles such 

as mobile laboratories and military equipment) 

and the biennial autumn Solar Decathlon (with 

displays of solar houses) have disproportionate 

impacts because of the weight of delivery vehicles and heavy displays that cover extensive 

areas of turf for several days. Large crowds and 

special events would continue to have shortterm, moderate to major, adverse impacts on 

turfgrass due to trampling and destruction of 

grass in concentrated use areas. 

Cumulative Impacts 

Vegetation in and around the National Mall has 

been highly manipulated for over 200 years, so 

there is no resemblance to the native vegetation 

patterns of the Atlantic Coastal Plain and Piedmont provinces. Nonetheless, the current urban 

forest possesses important ecological and social 

values (see the “Affected Environment,” page 

298). 

Turfgrass conditions throughout large parts of 

the planning area are poor because of adverse 

impacts from heavy daily foot traffic, recreational activities, large crowds, and special events. 

Concentrated use along certain routes has 

created social trails and jogging paths that have 

destroyed vegetation. 

Severe soil compaction has resulted in longterm, moderate, adverse impacts to all types of 

vegetation: turfgrass cannot reseed correctly, 

weeds proliferate, and water does not percolate 

enough to encourage proper root growth; 

shrubs and trees become rootbound because the 

surrounding soil is too hard to penetrate; tree 

roots are forced to the surface where they 

become subject to abrasion and trampling. All 

these conditions can result in the premature 

death of trees and other vegetation. 

Moderate adverse impacts from regular inundation of turf and cherry trees along the southern 

side of the Tidal Basin have occurred due to 

subsidence of the seawall in that area. 

New paved walkways constructed near the 

Lincoln Reflecting Pool would add to the 

amount of hardened surfaces but would reduce 

the level of impacts to adjacent vegetation, 

resulting in long-term, minor, beneficial and 

adverse impacts. 

The construction of the National Museum of 

African American History and Culture, the 

Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial, and the 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial Center would 

cause short- and long-term adverse effects on 

vegetation in those areas. Site-specific impacts 

would be addressed in subsequent environmental analysis for these projects. 

Under the no-action alternative these adverse 

actions and impacts would continue, although 

they would be reduced somewhat by implementing mitigation and sustainability practices. 

The overall cumulative effects would be longterm, moderate to major, and adverse, with a 

large contribution from this alternative. 

Conclusion 

The no-action alternative would result in the 

continuation of short- and long-term, major, 

adverse impacts on the National Mall’s vegetation. The overall cumulative impacts would be 

long-term, moderate to major, and adverse. The 

impacts are considered severe enough to be 

unacceptable impacts because they would 

continue to impede the attainment of the park’s 

desired future resource conditions and diminish 

opportunities for current or future generations 

to enjoy or be inspired by park resources. The 

impacts could lead to impairment of a key park 

resource unless successful mitigating measures 

were employed. 

Impacts of the Preferred 

Alternative 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Actions taken under the preferred alternative 

would substantially improve the physical ability 

of areas on the National Mall to sustain high 

levels of use and to recover quickly. The improvements would be both highly visible and 

subtle, improving convenience and creating 

sustainable spaces for all. Measures would be 

taken to ensure that natural resources would be 

protected from injury during setup and takedown operations as well as during the events 

themselves. 

 403
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Turfgrass conditions would be substantially 

improved under the preferred alternative by 

replacing or augmenting soils and installing new 

irrigation systems on about 33 acres of heavily 

used areas. This would result in long-term, 

moderate, beneficial impacts to vegetation. 

Installing barriers (e.g., curbs, post-and-chain or 

other fencing) in tree panels would reduce the 

amount of vegetation trampling and social trails. 

Temporary facilities or staging areas for special 

events would no longer be allowed in the elm 

tree panels. These actions would result in longterm, moderate, beneficial impacts to vegetation 

in these areas. 

Under the preferred alternative new areas would 

be paved in Union Square, south of the National 

Sculpture Garden, and along 3rd, 4th, 7th, and 

14th streets; and some sidewalks would be 

widened in Constitution Gardens and at the 

Korean War Veterans and Vietnam Veterans 

memorials. These actions would reduce the area 

of vegetation by about 5 acres total, but some of 

these areas are or have been devoid of vegetation 

due to overuse. Impacts on existing vegetation 

would be long-term, minor, and adverse. 

Not allowing special events in the elm tree panels would avoid adverse impacts on the trees, 

especially because midsummer heat is the highest stress time for vegetation. The health of 

cherry trees and turf around the Tidal Basin 

would be improved under this alternative by 

rebuilding the basin’s seawalls to prevent 

overflowing and by widening the walkways and 

installing barriers to curtail root trampling by 

people straying off the walkways. These actions 

would result in long-term, moderate, beneficial 

impacts. 

Constitution Gardens Lake would become a 

self-sustaining wetland ecosystem capable of 

supporting aquatic vegetation. This would result 

in long-term, negligible, beneficial impacts. 

A wetland shoreline using native plant materials 

would be created to replace river walls in some 

areas along the Potomac River frontage, which 

would improve sustainability and restore 

ecological processes. This action would result in 

long-term, moderate, beneficial impacts. 

Constructing or replacing visitor amenities (e.g., 

restrooms, food service facilities, or retail space) 

near the Washington Monument, Union Square, 

Constitution Gardens, the Lincoln Memorial, 

near the Tidal Basin, and along the Mall would 

result in a temporary and permanent loss of 

vegetation. In most cases this ground is already 

trampled, occupied by facilities, and devoid of 

vegetation, so impacts would be short- and longterm and adverse but negligible in intensity. 

Cumulative Impacts 

The impacts of past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions would be the same as those 

described under the no-action alternative. In 

summary, vegetation has been affected by severe 

soil compaction, resulting in long-term, moderate, adverse impacts because of improper root 

growth and rootbound shrubs and trees. Future 

construction would cause short- and long-term, 

adverse, localized effects on the vegetation. New 

paved walkways near the Lincoln Reflecting 

Pool would add to the amount of hardened 

surfaces but would reduce the level of impacts to 

adjacent vegetation, resulting in long-term, 

minor, beneficial and adverse impacts. 

The impacts of the preferred alternative on 

vegetation, when considered with the impacts of 

other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable 

actions, would result in long-term, minor, adverse cumulative impacts. This alternative would 

make modest beneficial and adverse contributions to these effects. 

Conclusion 

Implementing the preferred alternative would 

result in long-term, minor, adverse impacts from 

new or widened sidewalks and long-term, moderate, beneficial impacts from actions to improve 

growing conditions for park vegetation. Cumulative impacts would be long-term, minor, and 

adverse, with a modest adverse and beneficial 

contribution from this alternative. Because there 

would be no major adverse impact to a key park 

resource, there would be no unacceptable 

impacts to or impairment of a key park resource. 

404
Natural Resources: Vegetation — Impacts of Alternative B 

Impacts of Alternative A 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Compared to the no-action alternative, natural 

resources on the National Mall would be able to 

recover more quickly as a result of improved 

conditions, but improvements would not be able 

to sustain current levels of use. 

Under alternative A fewer visitor facilities and 

amenities on the National Mall would likely 

reduce the rate of increase than under the other 

alternatives. This could allow more time for 

areas to recover from intensive use during 

demonstrations and special events. Turfgrass 

conditions would be substantially improved 

under this alternative by augmenting soils and 

installing new irrigation systems on about 33 

heavily used acres, similar to the preferred 

alternative. This would result in long-term, 

minor to moderate, beneficial impacts on 

vegetation. 

Installing barriers (e.g., curbs or fencing) in elm 

tree panels would reduce the amount of trampling and social trails. Temporary event facilities 

such as tents or stages would no longer be 

allowed in the elm tree panels. These actions 

would result in long-term, minor, beneficial 

impacts to vegetation in these areas. 

The health of cherry trees and turf around the 

Tidal Basin would be improved by rebuilding the 

seawalls to prevent overflowing and by installing 

barriers to stop root trampling by visitors. Impacts would be long-term, minor, and beneficial. 

However, the actions might be insufficient to 

control use levels, with long-term, moderate, 

adverse impacts. 

Replacing sidewalks would affect some areas of 

vegetation, but in most cases this ground is 

already trampled and devoid of vegetation, so 

impacts would be long-term and adverse but 

negligible in intensity. 

Constitution Gardens Lake would become a 

self-sustaining wetland ecosystem capable of 

supporting aquatic vegetation. This would result 

in long-term, negligible, beneficial impacts. 

Constructing or replacing visitor amenities (e.g., 

restrooms, food service facilities, or retail space) 

near the Washington Monument, Constitution 

Gardens, the Lincoln Memorial, and along the 

Mall would result in temporary and permanent 

losses of vegetation. Impacts would be shortand long-term and adverse but negligible in 

intensity because previously disturbed areas 

would be used. 

Cumulative Impacts 

The impacts of past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions would be the same as those 

described under the no-action alternative. In 

summary, vegetation has been affected by severe 

soil compaction, resulting in long-term, moderate, adverse impacts because of improper root 

growth and rootbound shrubs and trees. Future 

construction would cause short- and long-term, 

adverse, localized effects on the vegetation. New 

paved walkways near the Lincoln Reflecting 

Pool would add to the amount of hardened 

surfaces but would reduce the level of impacts to 

adjacent vegetation, resulting in long-term, 

minor, beneficial and adverse impacts. 

The impacts of alternative A on vegetation, when 

considered in conjunction with the impacts of 

other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable 

actions, would result in long-term, minor, 

adverse cumulative impacts. Alternative A would 

make a small beneficial contribution to these 

impacts from improved growing conditions. 

Conclusion 

Implementing alternative A would result in longterm, negligible, adverse impacts on park vegetation due to construction and in long-term, moderate, beneficial impacts. Cumulative impacts 

would be long-term, minor, and adverse, with a 

small beneficial contribution from this alternative from improved growing conditions. Because 

there would be no major adverse impact to a key 

park resource, there would be no unacceptable 

impacts to or impairment of a key park resource. 

Impacts of Alternative B 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Under alternative B the physical ability of the 

National Mall to sustain high levels of use and to 

recover quickly would be substantially improved 

for many areas compared to the no-action 

alternative. Turfgrass conditions would be 

substantially improved on about 33 heavily used 

 405
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

acres by replacing or augmenting soils and 

installing a new irrigation system, the same as the 

preferred alternative. In addition, under this 

alternative more frequent restoration of smaller 

areas would be undertaken. These actions would 

result in long-term, moderate, beneficial impacts 

to vegetation. 

Installing barriers (e.g., curbs or fencing) around 

or in elm tree panels on the Mall would reduce 

the amount of trampling and social trails. Within 

the elm tree panels an upgraded irrigation system and better soil conditions would improve 

post-event recovery. Use of the elm tree panels 

could continue if turf/root zones and soils were 

protected through an acceptable and authorized 

method. Resulting impacts to trees and other 

vegetation in these areas would be long-term, 

moderate, and beneficial. 

The health of cherry trees and turf around the 

Tidal Basin would be improved under this 

alternative by rebuilding the basin’s seawalls to 

prevent overflowing and by installing barriers to 

stop root trampling by visitors. Rebuilding the 

seawalls along the Potomac River frontage 

would prevent the loss of vegetation due to bank 

erosion. These actions would result in longterm, minor, beneficial impacts. 

Constructing new sidewalks and widening 

existing sidewalks would remove some areas of 

vegetation, but in most cases this ground is 

already heavily trampled and sparsely vegetated, 

so it is anticipated that impacts would be longterm and adverse but negligible in intensity. 

Constitution Gardens Lake would become a 

landscape feature that could be drained for use 

in public events. This would result in the loss of 

an artificial wetland habitat, a long-term, minor, 

adverse impact. 

Constructing or replacing visitor amenities (e.g., 

restrooms, food service facilities, or retail space) 

near the Washington Monument, Constitution 

Gardens, the Lincoln Memorial, and along the 

Mall would result in a temporary and permanent 

loss of some vegetation. Impacts would be shortand long-term and adverse but negligible 

because most construction would replace 

existing facilities. 

If an underground parking garage was determined to be feasible by engineering, security, 

geotechnical, and economic studies, any impacts 

on vegetation as a result of garage construction 

would be assessed during the subsequent environmental analysis for this project. 

Cumulative Impacts 

The impacts of past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions would be the same as those 

described under the no-action alternative. In 

summary, vegetation has been affected by severe 

soil compaction, resulting in long-term, moderate, adverse impacts because of improper root 

growth and rootbound shrubs and trees. Future 

construction would cause short- and long-term, 

adverse, localized effects on the vegetation. New 

paved walkways near the Lincoln Reflecting 

Pool would add to the amount of hardened 

surfaces but would reduce the level of impacts to 

adjacent vegetation, resulting in long-term, 

minor, beneficial and adverse impacts. 

The impacts on vegetation of alternative B, when 

considered with the impacts of other past, 

present, and reasonably foreseeable actions, 

would result in long-term, minor, adverse cumulative impacts. Alternative B would have a slight 

beneficial contribution to these impacts. 

Conclusion 

Implementing alternative B would result in longterm, negligible, adverse impacts from new and 

widened sidewalks. The continued use of the 

Mall elm tree panels could result in long-term, 

major, adverse impacts if turf/root zones and 

soils were not properly protected through an 

acceptable and authorized method. Overall, 

long-term impacts would be moderate and beneficial because of improved growing conditions 

for park vegetation. Cumulative impacts would 

be long-term, minor, and adverse, with a slight 

beneficial contribution form this alternative. 

Because there would be no major adverse impact 

to a key park resource, there would be no 

unacceptable impacts to or impairment of a key 

park resource. 

406
Natural Resources: Fish and Wildlife — Methodology for Impact Analysis 

Impacts of Alternative C 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Under alternative C the physical ability of 

National Mall resources to sustain high levels of 

use and to recover quickly would be substantially improved. Turfgrass conditions would be 

substantially improved by replacing or augmenting soils and installing new irrigation systems on 

about 33 acres of heavily used areas, similar to 

the preferred alternative. This would result in 

long-term, minor to moderate, beneficial 

impacts to vegetation. 

Installing barriers (e.g., curbs or fencing) in elm 

tree panels would reduce the amount of 

trampling and social trails. Temporary event 

facilities such as tents or stages would no longer 

be allowed in the tree panels. These actions 

would result in long-term, moderate, beneficial 

impacts to vegetation in these areas. 

The health of cherry trees and turf around the 

Tidal Basin would be improved by rebuilding the 

seawalls to prevent overflowing and by installing 

barriers to curtail root trampling by people 

walking off the paved walkways. A selfsustaining wetland shoreline would be created 

to replace seawalls in some areas along the 

Potomac River. These actions would improve 

sustainability and natural ecological processes, 

resulting in long-term, moderate, beneficial 

impacts. 

Constructing new sidewalks and widening 

existing sidewalks would remove some areas of 

vegetation, but in most cases this ground is 

already trampled and devoid of vegetation, so 

impacts are anticipated to be long-term and 

adverse but negligible in intensity. 

Constitution Gardens Lake would become a 

self-sustaining wetland ecosystem capable of 

supporting aquatic vegetation. This would be a 

long-term, negligible, beneficial impact. 

Constructing or replacing visitor amenities (e.g., 

restrooms, food service facilities, or retail space) 

near the Washington Monument, the Lincoln 

Memorial, and along the Mall would result in a 

temporary and permanent loss of vegetation. 

Impacts would be short- and long-term and 

adverse but negligible because most of the 

actions would occur in previously disturbed 

areas. 

Cumulative Impacts 

The impacts of past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions would be the same as those 

described under the no-action alternative. In 

summary, vegetation has been affected by severe 

soil compaction, resulting in long-term, moderate, adverse impacts because of improper root 

growth and rootbound shrubs and trees. Future 

construction would cause short- and long-term, 

adverse, localized effects on the vegetation. New 

paved walkways near the Lincoln Reflecting 

Pool would add to the amount of hardened 

surfaces but would reduce the level of impacts to 

adjacent vegetation, resulting in long-term, 

minor, beneficial and adverse impacts. 

The impacts of this alternative on vegetation, in 

combination with the impacts of other past, 

present, and reasonably foreseeable actions, 

would result in long-term, minor, adverse 

cumulative effects. Alternative C would have a 

small beneficial contribution to these effects. 

Conclusion 

Implementing alternative C would result in longterm, negligible, adverse impacts from new and 

widened sidewalks and long-term, moderate, 

beneficial impacts from improved growing 

conditions for park vegetation. Cumulative impacts would be long-term, minor, and adverse, 

with a small beneficial contribution from this 

alternative. Because there would be no major 

adverse impact to a key park resource, there 

would be no unacceptable impacts to or impairment of a key park resource. 

FISH AND WILDLIFE

Methodology for Impact Analysis 

Impacts on fish and wildlife are closely related to 

impacts on habitat. The analysis considered 

whether actions would be likely to displace 

some or all individuals of a species in the park or 

would result in loss or creation of habitat conditions needed for the viability of local or regional 

populations. 

 407
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Impact Intensity Levels 

The following impact thresholds were defined: 

• Negligible — Impacts would not be measurable on the abundance or distribution of 

native, naturalized, or introduced populations or the viability of regional populations 

and their habitats. 

• Minor — Impacts would be slight but measurable on the abundance or distribution of 

native, naturalized, or introduced populations but would not affect the viability of 

local or regional populations and their 

habitats. 

• Moderate — Impacts would be measurable 

on the abundance or distribution of native, 

naturalized, or introduced populations and 

could affect a documentable change in the 

abundance of local populations and their 

habitats. 

• Major — Impacts would be measurable on 

the abundance or distribution of native, 

naturalized, or introduced populations and 

could affect a visible change in the abundance and viability of local populations and 

their habitats. 

Type of Impact 

Impacts associated with fish and wildlife might 

include any change in habitat quality, food 

supply, protective cover, or distribution or 

abundance of species. Beneficial impacts would 

improve conditions or the viability of native 

populations whether locally or regionally or 

reduce the abundance and viability of nonnative 

populations. Adverse impacts are those that 

reduce the abundance or viability of native 

populations. 

Duration of Impacts 

Impacts could be temporary, short- or longterm. 

• Temporary — The impact would last for a 

few hours or a few days, such as the displacement of animals while construction 

was being undertaken. 

• Short-term — The impact would generally 

last up to one year or the life of a construction project. 

• Long-term — The impact would last longer 

than one year or for the life of the plan (up 

to 50 years). 

NPS Policies 

NPS Management Policies 2006 state that the 

National Park Service will maintain as parts of 

the natural ecosystems of parks all plants and 

animals native to park ecosystems (NPS 2006e, 

sec. 4.4.1). Whenever possible, natural processes 

will be relied upon to maintain native plant and 

animal species and influence natural fluctuations 

in populations of these species (sec. 4.4.2). 

Whenever the Park Service identifies a possible 

need for reducing the size of a park plant or 

animal population, scientifically valid resource 

information obtained through consultation with 

technical experts, literature review, inventory, 

monitoring, or research will be used to evaluate 

the identified need for population management; 

this information will be documented in the 

appropriate park management plan (sec. 4.4.2.1). 

The National Park Service will pursue opportunities to improve natural resource management within parks and across administrative 

boundaries by pursuing cooperative conservation with public agencies (NPS 2006e, sec. 4.1.2). 

Cooperation may involve coordinating management activities in two or more separate areas, 

integrating management practices to reduce 

conflicts, coordinating research, and sharing 

data and expertise. 

The Management Policies 2006 (sec. 4.4.4.2) state 

that all exotic plant and animal species that are 

not maintained to meet an identified park 

purpose will be managed if control is prudent 

and feasible, and if the exotic species 

• interferes with natural processes and the 

perpetuation of natural features, native 

species or natural habitats, or 

• disrupts the genetic integrity of native 

species, or 

• disrupts the accurate presentation of a 

cultural landscape, or 

• damages cultural resources, or 

• significantly hampers the management of 

park or adjacent lands, or 

408
Natural Resources: Fish and Wildlife — Impacts of the Preferred Alternative 

• poses a public health hazard as advised by 

the U. S. Public Health Service (which 

includes the Centers for Disease Control 

and the NPS public health program), or 

• creates a hazard to public safety. 

Impacts of the No-Action 

Alternative 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Existing conditions and situations affecting 

wildlife would continue under the no-action 

alternative. Some existing artificial waters, such 

as Constitution Gardens Lake and the Tidal 

Basin, would continue to be available to aquatic 

species and waterfowl. 

Fish would continue to get stranded during 

spawning season on walks or turf areas along the 

south side of the Tidal Basin, a long-term, minor, 

adverse impact on native and some naturalized, 

nonnative species. 

Urban wildlife would continue to rely on humans for some or all of their food, whether from 

garbage or direct feeding by some visitors. Nonnative bird species that became less migratory in 

nature and stayed in the area year-round could 

affect on the viability of native populations. 

Long-term, minor, adverse impacts to other 

wildlife and aesthetics caused by unnaturally 

large congregations of these birds would 

continue. The park has a goal of reducing the 

ever expanding numbers of Canada geese. 

Regional and local approaches to controlling 

populations of Canada geese would result in 

long-term, moderate, beneficial impacts on 

native wildlife. 

Cumulative Impacts 

Most of the metropolitan area has been disturbed by development, and open space are 

being converted to maintained landscapes over 

the last 200 years or more. This loss of undisturbed habitat and the almost continuous 

presence of human activity have resulted in the 

near total displacement of many native species, a 

long-term, moderate, adverse impact. Ideal conditions (low turf) for nonnative populations of 

Canada geese have been perpetuated as the area 

was increasingly cultivated. Species such as 

nonmigratory Canada geese and mallard ducks 

have adapted to human presence and are 

becoming year-round (nonmigratory) residents, 

which is an unnatural behavior and results in 

long-term, moderate, adverse impacts on the 

viability of waterfowl populations as large areas 

are taken over by these unnatural populations. 

The construction of the National Museum of 

African American History and Culture, the 

Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial, and the 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial Center would 

cause short- and long-term, negligible to minor, 

adverse effects on urban habitat in these areas. 

The no-action alternative would result in the 

continuation of long-term, minor, adverse 

impacts on fish and wildlife. When combined 

with the impacts of other past, present, and 

reasonably foreseeable actions, cumulative 

impacts would be long-term, moderate, and 

adverse. This alternative would make a modest 

contribution to these impacts. 

Conclusion 

The no-action alternative would result in the 

continuation of long-term, moderate, adverse 

impacts to native and naturalized populations of 

fish and wildlife. Cumulative impacts would be 

long-term, moderate, and adverse. There would 

be no unacceptable impacts to or impairment of 

a key park resource under this alternative. 

Impacts of the Preferred 

Alternative 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Public stewardship messages about not feeding 

wildlife and proper trash disposal would reduce 

the dependence of urban wildlife on humanrelated food sources. This would have a longterm, negligible to minor, beneficial impact on 

urban wildlife species. 

Constitution Gardens Lake would become a 

self-sustaining pond/wetland ecosystem capable 

of supporting introduced and naturalized fish 

populations. This would be a long-term, negligible, beneficial impact to fish and waterfowl. 

Removing the present Capitol Reflecting Pool 

and adding some ornamental water features 

would have a long-term, negligible, adverse 

 409
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

impact because this pool provides only small 

habitat for some waterfowl. 

Constructing or replacing visitor amenities (e.g., 

restrooms, food service facilities, or retail space) 

near the Washington Monument, Union Square, 

Constitution Gardens, the Lincoln Memorial, 

near the Tidal Basin, and along the Mall in 

previously disturbed areas, along with adding or 

widening sidewalks, would temporarily disrupt 

habitat and displace individual animals from 

construction areas. Resulting impacts from the 

loss of some urban habitat used by terrestrial 

species and bats would be long-term, negligible, 

and adverse. These impacts would be negligible 

due to the relatively small area of habitat 

affected. 

Rebuilding the Tidal Basin seawalls and widening the walkways would have temporary impacts 

during construction, but long-term impacts during fish spawning would be beneficial and minor 

because rebuilt walls would be higher and would 

prevent fish from being stranded. Widening the 

walkways could require moving the basin wall 

into the basin, resulting in the loss of about 5 

acres of warm and shallow water habitat used by 

fish and other aquatic organisms. Short-term, 

moderate, adverse impacts from habitat 

disturbance and sedimentation would occur 

during construction. However, since the Tidal 

basin is artificial, long-term impacts would be 

adverse but negligible. 

Portions of the wall along Potomac River frontage would be replaced with a more natural 

wetland using native materials. This would cause 

short-term, minor, adverse impacts from habitat 

disturbance and sedimentation during construction but long-term, minor, beneficial impacts on 

fish and wildlife. 

Cumulative Impacts 

Impacts of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions would be the same as those 

described for the no-action alternative. In 

summary, impacts have been long-term, 

moderate, and adverse because of nearly total 

displacement of many native species by habitat 

loss and human activity and increased nonnative 

populations, such as year-round Canada geese, 

that adversely affect the viability of native 

populations. Regional or local approaches to 

controlling introduced nonnative species and 

nonnative populations of Canada geese would 

result in long-term, moderate, beneficial 

impacts. The construction of future projects 

would cause short- and long-term, negligible to 

minor, adverse impacts on the urban habitat in 

those areas. 

The preferred alternative would have both beneficial and adverse impacts on wildlife. Adding 

these impacts to the effects of past, present, and 

reasonably foreseeable actions would result in 

long-term, moderate, adverse cumulative effects 

on fish and wildlife. This alternative’s contribution would be slight but adverse overall. 

Conclusion 

Implementing the preferred alternative would 

result in long-term, minor, beneficial impacts to 

fish and wildlife from stewardship messages to 

visitors, a self-sustaining pond/wetland ecosystem at Constitution Gardens Lake, higher 

seawalls along the Tidal Basin, and a naturalized 

Potomac River shoreline. There would also be 

short- and long-term, negligible to moderate, 

adverse impacts to fish and wildlife from various 

projects throughout the National Mall. Cumulative impacts would be long-term, moderate, and 

adverse, with a slight but adverse contribution 

from this alternative. This alternative would not 

result in unacceptable impacts to or impairment 

of a key park resource. 

Impacts of Alternative A 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Constitution Gardens Lake would become a 

self-sustaining wetland capable of supporting 

aquatic plants, but all fish would be removed. 

This would be a long-term, negligible, adverse 

impact to the artificially maintained fish population and a long-term, negligible, beneficial impact to ducks and other plant-eating waterfowl. 

The construction or replacement of visitor 

amenities (e.g., restrooms, food service facilities, 

and retail space) near the Washington Monument, Constitution Gardens, the Lincoln 

Memorial, and along the Mall would occur in 

previously disturbed areas. Impacts from this 

construction would be temporary, minor, and 

adverse because urban habitat would be dis410
Natural Resources: Fish and Wildlife — Impacts of Alternative B 

rupted and individual animals displaced. Longterm, negligible, adverse impacts would occur 

from the loss of some urban habitat used by 

terrestrial species and bats. 

Rebuilding the failing Tidal Basin seawalls in 

place would result in short-term, minor, adverse 

impacts because of physical habitat disturbance 

and sedimentation during construction, with no 

long-term effects to fish or wildlife after construction. Impacts during fish spawning would 

be long-term, minor, and beneficial because rebuilt walls would be higher and would prevent 

fish from being stranded. 

Cumulative Impacts 

Impacts of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions would be the same as those 

described for the no-action alternative. In 

summary, impacts have been long-term, 

moderate, and adverse because of nearly total 

displacement of many native species by habitat 

loss and human activity and increased nonnative 

populations, such as Canada geese, that adversely affect the viability of native populations. 

Regional or local approaches to controlling 

nonnative populations of Canada geese would 

result in long-term, moderate, beneficial 

impacts. The construction of future projects 

would cause short- and long-term, negligible to 

minor, adverse impacts on the urban habitat in 

those areas. 

Alternative A would have beneficial and adverse 

impacts on wildlife. Adding these impacts to the 

effects of other past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions would result in long-term, 

moderate, adverse cumulative impacts on fish 

and wildlife. This alternative’s contribution 

would be slight but adverse overall. 

Conclusion 

Implementing alternative A would result in longterm, negligible to minor, beneficial impacts 

from actions at Constitution Gardens Lake and 

along the Tidal Basin, and in short- and longterm, negligible to minor, adverse impacts from 

construction projects at other sites. Cumulative 

impacts on fish and wildlife would be long-term, 

moderate, and adverse, with a slight but adverse 

contribution from alternative A. This alternative 

would not result in unacceptable impacts to or 

impairment of a key park resource. 

Impacts of Alternative B 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Under alternative B the Capitol Reflecting Pool 

would be removed. This pool provides only a 

very small habitat need for some waterfowl, so 

the impact would be negligible. 

Constitution Gardens Lake would become a 

landscape feature that could be drained for use 

in public events. This would result in the loss of 

an artificial wetland habitat currently used by 

fish and waterfowl, a long-term, negligible, 

adverse impact. 

Constructing or replacing visitor amenities (e.g., 

restrooms, food service facilities, or retail space) 

near the Washington Monument, Constitution 

Gardens, the Lincoln Memorial, and along the 

Mall, along with adding some paved sidewalks, 

would occur in previously disturbed areas. Temporary, minor, adverse impacts during construction would occur from the disruption of urban 

habitat and the displacement of individual animals. Long-term, negligible, adverse impacts 

would occur from the loss of some urban habitat 

used by terrestrial species and bats. 

Under this alternative the failing Tidal Basin seawalls would be rebuilt and the walkways atop 

the walls would be widened. Widening the 

walkways could require moving the basin walls 

into the basin. This would result in the loss of 

about 5 acres of warm and shallow water habitat 

used by fish and other aquatic organisms. Shortterm, minor, adverse impacts would occur from 

the physical disturbance of habitat and sedimentation during construction. However, since the 

Tidal Basin is artificial, the long-term impacts 

would be adverse but negligible. Impacts during 

fish spawning would be long-term, minor, and 

beneficial because the rebuilt walls would be 

higher and would prevent fish from being 

stranded. 

If underground parking garages were determined to be feasible by engineering, security, 

geotechnical, and economic studies, any impacts 

on fish and wildlife as a result of garage construction would be assessed during the 

 411
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

subsequent environmental analysis for this 

project. 

Cumulative Impacts 

Impacts of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions would be the same as those 

described for the no-action alternative. In 

summary, impacts have been long-term, 

moderate, and adverse because of nearly total 

displacement of many native species by habitat 

loss and human activity and increased nonnative 

populations, such as Canada geese, that adversely affect the viability of native populations. 

Regional or local approaches to controlling 

nonnative populations of Canada geese would 

result in long-term, moderate, beneficial 

impacts. The construction of future projects 

would cause short- and long-term, negligible to 

minor, adverse impacts on the urban habitat in 

those areas. 

Alternative B would have short- and long-term, 

negligible to minor, adverse impacts on wildlife. 

When added to the impacts of other past, 

present, and reasonably foreseeable actions, the 

cumulative impacts on fish and wildlife would be 

long-term, moderate, and adverse. This 

alternative’s contribution would be small. 

Conclusion 

Implementing alternative B would result in 

short- and long-term, negligible to minor, 

adverse impacts to fish and wildlife from a 

drainable lake at Constitution Gardens, 

modifications of the Tidal Basin, and various 

construction projects, along with long-term, 

minor, beneficial impacts from a more natural 

Potomac River shoreline in some areas. 

Cumulative impacts would be long-term, 

moderate, and adverse, with a small contribution 

from this alternative. This alternative would not 

result in unacceptable impacts to or impairment 

of a key park resource. 

Impacts of Alternative C 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Stewardship messages about not feeding wildlife 

and proper trash disposal would have long-term, 

negligible to minor, beneficial impacts on urban 

wildlife species. 

The Capitol Reflecting Pool could be drained for 

events or frozen for ice skating, This pool provides only a very small habitat need for some 

waterfowl (mostly year-round nonnative populations), so the impact on wildlife would be 

negligible. 

Constitution Gardens Lake would become a 

self-sustaining pond/wetland ecosystem capable 

of supporting fish populations. This would result 

in long-term, negligible, beneficial impacts to 

fish and waterfowl. 

Constructing or replacing visitor amenities (e.g., 

restrooms, food service facilities, or retail space) 

near the Washington Monument, the Lincoln 

Memorial, and along the Mall in previously 

disturbed areas, along with adding some paved 

sidewalks, would result in temporary, negligible, 

adverse impacts during construction due to 

habitat disruption and displacement of individual animals. Long-term, negligible, adverse 

impacts would occur from the loss of some 

urban habitat used by terrestrial species and 

bats. 

Under this alternative the Tidal Basin seawalls 

would be rebuilt and the walkways widened, 

which could require moving the basin wall into 

the basin. In addition, the small bay north of the 

Kutz Bridge would be eliminated (walled off and 

filled in). These actions would result in the loss 

of about 15 acres (14%) of the Tidal Basin’s 

warm and shallow water habitat used by fish and 

other aquatic organisms. Short-term, minor, 

adverse impacts would result from habitat disturbance and sedimentation during construction. Since the Tidal Basin is artificial, the longterm impacts of these actions would be adverse 

but negligible. Impacts during fish spawning 

would be long-term, minor, and beneficial 

because the rebuilt walls would be higher and 

would prevent fish from being stranded. 

Cumulative Impacts 

Impacts of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions would be the same as those described for the no-action alternative. In 

summary, impacts have been long-term, 

moderate, and adverse because of nearly total 

displacement of many native species by habitat 

loss and human activity and increased nonnative 

populations, such as Canada geese, that ad412
Natural Resources: Fish and Wildlife — Impacts of Alternative C 

versely affect the viability of native populations. 

Regional or local approaches to controlling 

nonnative populations of Canada geese would 

result in long-term, moderate, beneficial 

impacts. The construction of future projects 

would cause short- and long-term, negligible to 

minor, adverse impacts on the urban habitat in 

those areas. 

Alternative C would have beneficial and adverse 

impacts on wildlife. These impacts, in combination with the impacts of other past, present, 

and reasonably future actions, would result in 

long-term, moderate, adverse cumulative 

impacts on fish and wildlife. This alternative’s 

contribution would be slight but adverse overall. 

Conclusion 

Implementing alternative C would result in longterm, negligible to minor, beneficial impacts 

from stewardship messages to visitors, a selfsustaining pond/wetland ecosystem at Constitution Gardens Lake, and work around the Tidal 

Basin. There would also be short- and longterm, negligible to moderate, adverse impacts to 

fish and wildlife from various projects 

throughout the National Mall. Cumulative 

impacts would be long-term, moderate, and 

adverse, with a slight but adverse overall contribution from this alternative. This alternative 

would not result in unacceptable impacts to or 

impairment of a key park resource.

 413
DEMONSTRATIONS, SPECIAL EVENTS, AND 

NATIONAL CELEBRATIONS

METHODOLOGY FOR ANALYZING 

IMPACTS

The analysis looks at how the alternatives would 

affect demonstrations, national celebrations, and 

special events in the following areas: 

• Impacts on demonstration and event

participants — This topic analyzes the 

beneficial and adverse impacts on the 

numbers of people who can participate in 

demonstrations, national celebrations, and 

special events as a result of the physical 

capacity of the National Mall and specific 

sites, as well as ease of access. 

An essential purpose of the National Mall is 

to provide space for the expression of First 

Amendment rights, and in accordance with 

in the U.S. Constitution the courts have 

determined that no limits may be placed on 

the number of people who can participate 

in First Amendment activities, regardless of 

any impacts that might otherwise be 

considered unacceptable. 

 This impact topic considers how varying 

degrees of crowding would affect participants. The following assumptions were 

made, based on input from the U.S. Park 

Police and George Mason University: 

◦ Space of 3 square feet per person would 

constitute a high level of crowding, such 

as during a concentrated demonstration 

or on pleasant days during the peak of 

the National Cherry Blossom Festival or 

during the 2009 inauguration. 

◦ Space of 7–10 square feet per person 

would be equivalent to a seated or 

standing audience at an event 

performance. 

• Impacts on demonstration and event 

organizers — The topic analyzes how 

organizers would be affected by permitting, 

scheduling, and managing processes, by the 

type and range of venues for 

demonstrations, national celebrations, and 

special events; by measures to protect the 

historical context, vistas, and symbolic 

character of the National Mall; by the 

convenience of access; and by any changes 

in management processes. 

Impact Intensity Levels 

The following impact thresholds were defined 

for demonstrations, national celebrations, and 

special events: 

• Negligible — The impact would not be 

detectable or would be barely detectable to 

most participants and organizers, and there 

would be no discernible effect on the 

sustainability of park resources and the 

ability of the National Park Service to 

support demonstrations, national celebrations, or special events. 

• Minor — The impact would be detectable 

to some participants or organizers, or it 

would have a limited effect, either adversely 

or beneficially, on the sustainability of park 

resources and the ability of the National 

Park Service to support demonstrations, 

national celebrations, or special events. 

• Moderate — The impact would be readily 

apparent; it would have an appreciable 

impact on many participants and organizers; and it would clearly affect, either 

adversely or beneficially, the sustainability 

of park resources and the ability of the 

National Park Service to support demonstrations, national celebrations, or special 

events. 

• Major — The impact would be severely adverse or exceptionally beneficial and apparent to most participants and organizers, and 

it would dramatically affect the sustainability of park resources and the ability of 

the National Park Service to support 

demonstrations, national celebrations, or 

special events. 

 

414
Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations: Methodology for Analyzing Impacts 

Type of Impacts 

Impacts can be beneficial or adverse. Beneficial 

impacts would enhance the management of and 

participation in demonstrations, national celebrations, and special events. Adverse impacts 

would have the opposite effect. 

Duration of Impacts 

Impacts could be temporary, short-term, longterm, or permanent. 

• Temporary — The impact would usually 

last for a few hours or up to two days, such 

as a road closure for a day or less or limited 

access to an area during a demonstration. 

• Short-term — The impact would generally 

last up to one year and could include setup / 

takedown times for large special events or 

national celebrations, seasonal closures for 

restoration, or limited access to an area to 

facilitate park operations or construction. 

• Long-term — The impact would last longer 

than one year or for the life of the plan (up 

to 50 years). 

• Permanent — The impact would last 

beyond the life of the plan (or longer than 

50 years). 

User Capacity Estimates 

User capacity estimates do not include capacity 

estimates for NPS and D.C. roadways, which 

may be closed during major events (such as the 

Fourth of July or a presidential inauguration). 

Maximum capacities of venues for demonstrations and special events were decreased by a 

certain percentage to allow for safe circulation, 

with more circulation needed at higher capacity 

levels 

• Union Square — A 15% allowance for 

circulation at 3 sq. ft. / person with a 

reflecting pool, and a 10% allowance 

without a pool. 

• Mall center panels — A 25% circulation 

allowance at 3 sq. ft. / person. 

• Mall tree panels — A 30% circulation 

allowance at 7 sq. ft. / person due to trees. 

• General open areas — A 10% circulation 

allowance at 7–10 sq. ft. / person. 

• Lincoln Memorial elm walks and reflecting pool area — A 30% circulation allowance at 3 sq. ft. / person because of grade 

changes, the reflecting pool, and trees. 

Regulations and Policies 

Federal Regulations 

Federal regulations that could affect the management of demonstrations, national celebrations, and special events are discussed in chapter 

1. As previously stated, the superintendent may 

limit public use or close areas to use; designate 

areas for specific uses; and terminate restrictions, limits, closure or visitor hours to protect 

public health and safety, environmental or 

scenic values, or natural or cultural resources; or 

to implement management responsibilities, 

equitable allocation and use of facilities, or the 

avoidance of conflict among visitor use activities 

(36 CFR 1.5; 36 CFR 7.96). 

Furthermore, permitted activities are to be 

consistent with legislation, administrative 

policies, and based on a determination that 

public health and safety, environmental or 

scenic values, natural or cultural resources, 

scientific research, implementation of management responsibilities, proper allocation and use 

of facilities, or the avoidance of conflict among 

visitor use activities will not be adversely 

affected (36 CFR 1.6; 36 CFR 7.96). A permit 

may be denied if the capacity of the area or 

facility would be exceeded by one or more of 

these factors. 

An essential purpose of the National Mall is to 

provide space for the expression of First 

Amendment rights. This purpose, anchored in 

the U.S. Constitution, does not include limits on 

the number of people who can participate in 

First Amendment activities on the National 

Mall, regardless of any impacts that might 

otherwise be considered unacceptable. 

Regulations at 36 CFR 7.96 specifically relate to 

the National Capital Region and define permit 

requirements for demonstrations and special 

events, as well as limitations, for park areas 

managed by the National Mall and Memorial 

 415 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Parks, including the National Mall. The 

determination whether to approve permits for 

special events will be based on the following 

criteria (36 CFR 7.96(g)(5)(vi): 

(A) Whether the objectives and purposes of 

the proposed special event relate to and 

are within the basic mission and responsibilities of the National Capital Region, 

National Park Service. 

(B) Whether the park area requested is 

reasonably suited in terms of accessibility, 

size, and nature of the proposed special 

event. 

(C) Whether the proposed special event can 

be permitted within a reasonable budgetary allocation of National Park Service 

funds considering the event’s public appeal, and the anticipated participation of 

the general public therein. 

(D) Whether the proposed event is duplicative of events previously offered in 

National Capital Region or elsewhere in 

or about Washington, D.C. 

(E) Whether the activities contemplated for 

the proposed special event are in conformity with all applicable laws and 

regulations. 

NPS Management Policies 2006 

First Amendment Rights 

The NPS Management Policies 2006 affirm the 

use of park land for public assemblies, meetings, 

demonstrations, religious activities, and other 

public expressions of views protected under the 

First Amendment of the U. S. Constitution, in 

accordance with 36 CFR 2.51 or 36 CFR 7.96. 

There must be equal opportunities for differing 

sides of an issue to be heard, and NPS staff must 

remain neutral toward the activity while remaining responsible for the protection of participants, spectators, private property, public property, and park resources. 

Special Events 

Special events may be permitted when there is a 

meaningful association between the park area 

and the event, and when the event will contribute to visitor understanding of the park area 

(NPS 2006e, sec. 8.6.2.1). An event will not be 

permitted when it is conducted for the material 

or financial benefit of a for-profit entity, it 

awards participants an appearance fee or prizes, 

it requires in-park advertising or publicity, or it 

charges a separate public admission fee (NPS 

2006e, sec. 8.6.2.1). 

Special events will not be permitted if they 

would result in unacceptable impacts, such as 

impeding the ability to achieve desired natural 

and cultural resource conditions; diminishing 

opportunities for current or future generations 

to enjoy, learn about, or be inspired by park 

resources or values; or unreasonably interfere 

with park programs or activities, appropriate 

uses, the atmosphere of peace and tranquility, or 

NPS concessioner or contractor operations 

(NPS 2006e, sec. 8.2 and 1.4.7.1). 

Recreational use permits are required for use of 

designated fields and areas (DC Recreation 

Board 1972). 

Filming and Photography Policy 

Filming and photography, whether commercial 

or non-commercial, are allowed provided the 

activity does not cause unacceptable impacts 

(NPS 2006e, sec. 8.6.6). Commercial filming 

requires a permit (NPS 2006e, sec. 8.6.6.2). 

IMPACTS COMMON TO ALL 

ALTERNATIVES

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Impacts on Demonstration and Event 

Participants 

Public transportation access varies by location, 

with many sites having excellent transit access, 

such as Union Square (two subway stations 

within a five-minute walk), the Mall (the Smithsonian Metro entrance is on the Mall and four 

other subway stations are within a five-minute 

walk), and the Washington Monument (two 

subway stations are within a five-minute walk). 

Some sites such as Constitution Gardens, the 

Lincoln Memorial, the Thomas Jefferson 

Memorial, and the Tidal Basin are farther from 

public transit, and most athletic fields are a 15–

25 minute or more walk from the nearest Metro 

station. Activities at sites farther from public 

416
Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations: Impacts Common to All Alternatives 

transportation could result in additional parking 

demand or participants having to use supplemental transportation. Access impacts on 

demonstration and special event participants 

would continue to be short- and long-term, 

minor to moderate, and beneficial depending on 

the location of the activity. 

The following examples are typical of use capacities and experiences that could be expected on 

the National Mall. The physical capacity of 

different types of spaces is based on ranges of 

how much space (in square feet) is needed for 

each person in different types of situations, and 

the expected social experience that level of use 

would entail. 

• Maximum Daily Capacity (Union Square 

to the Lincoln Memorial) — An estimated 

2.1 million people could be accommodated 

on the National Mall from east end to the 

west end, including Constitution Gardens. 

This capacity is based on 3 square feet per 

person in high-use areas and 7–50 square 

feet per person in multipurpose areas. Experiences would be highly crowded, with 

minimal opportunities for more contemplative experiences. 

• Fourth of July Celebration — An estimated 

750,000 people could be accommodated on 

the National Mall at 10–50 square feet per 

person, which is the average level of use and 

accommodates informal picnicking. (Note: 

An additional 100,000 people could view 

fireworks from the Capitol grounds, and 

thousands more from George Washington 

Memorial Park in Virginia.) Since the 

Fourth of July is a major national celebration, visitors could expect many other 

people. 

• National Cherry Blossom Festival — The 

National Cherry Blossom Festival largely 

takes place around the Tidal Basin, and estimates assume an 8-hour day, with people 

spending about two hours walking around 

the basin. At a maximum capacity of 3 

square feet per person on walks, 25,000 

people could be accommodated on the 

walks at any one time, plus 15,000 at the 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial plaza, the 

Tidal Basin parking lot, and related areas, 

with a maximum daily capacity of 200,000 

people. Visitor experiences would be highly 

social, with opportunities for less crowded 

conditions only in the early morning or 

evening. 

• Smithsonian Folklife Festival — Assuming 

that only the center panels on the Mall 

would be used, the capacity of the festival at 

any one time would be around 44,000. This 

assumes 10 square feet per person on the 

Mall, 50 square feet per person on walks, 

and 200–1,000 square feet per person in 

adjacent areas. 

Impacts on Demonstration and Event 

Organizers 

Demonstrations and special events would continue to be scheduled on a space available basis 

12 months in advance, so there would be no new 

impacts on organizers. Cost reimbursement for 

damages would continue to be required in the 

permitting process for special events. 

Demonstrations would continue to be managed 

in accordance with federal regulations at 36 CFR 

7.96 and NPS Management Policies 2006 under 

all alternatives. Permits would continue to be 

required generally for all demonstrations with 

more than 25 people. Demonstration periods 

could be extended unless a previously permitted 

use would preclude double occupancy. For 

example, a limited number of demonstrations 

related to the Vietnam Veterans Memorial have 

continued for many years. Typically demonstrations are temporary, lasting a very short time, 

with setup and takedown occurring within one 

or two days. For some demonstrations and 

events stages and sound systems are used, and 

facilities such as restrooms and temporary trash 

containers are provided by the organizers. 

Annually it is likely there would continue to be 

fewer than a dozen very large demonstrations 

that would limit the ability of other event or 

demonstration organizers to find space available. There would be no new impacts. 

Some demonstrations and events would continue to use stages, sound systems, and large 

video screens to simulcast events or to locally 

improve visibility of events. There would be no 

new impacts. 

 417 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Permits for special events and commercial filming would continue to be required. 

Different areas of the National Mall would continue to be closed for construction, restoration, 

or maintenance projects, making them unavailable for demonstrations, national celebrations, 

special events, or other permitted activities. This 

could result in short- to long-term, minor, adverse impacts on event organizers because some 

venues might not be available. During these 

times, such as when the Martin Luther King, Jr. 

Memorial is constructed, the National Park 

Service would make every effort to ensure that 

public access to other sites would remain in 

order to minimize the impact. 

Conclusion 

There would be no change in permit regulations 

for demonstrations and special events under any 

alternative. Impacts common to all alternatives 

related to public access would be short- and 

long-term, minor to moderate, and beneficial or 

adverse depending on the distance of an activity 

from public transportation. Infrastructure 

improvements at the Lincoln Memorial would 

improve the ability to host performances and 

demonstrations, as well as facilitate setup and 

takedown operations, resulting in long-term, 

moderate, beneficial impacts. Closing different 

areas of the National Mall for construction, 

restoration, or maintenance projects could result 

in short- to long-term, minor, adverse impacts 

on event organizers because some venues might 

not be available. Cumulative impacts of past, 

present, and reasonably foreseeable actions 

could be long-term, major, beneficial impact if 

some events were relocated from the National 

Mall, thus reducing impacts. There would be 

long-term, major, beneficial impacts on event 

organizers and participants if a new subway stop 

was provided near the Thomas Jefferson 

Memorial. 

IMPACTS OF THE NO-ACTION 

ALTERNATIVE

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

The National Mall was never designed for the 

current high levels of use that occur during some 

demonstrations and national celebrations. The 

number of special events on the National Mall 

has increased dramatically, at least in part 

because of the prestige and status that comes 

from being at the heart of the nation’s capital. 

However, this degree of use, along with longer 

than necessary setup and takedown times, has 

caused damage to resources and infrastructure, 

resulting in undesirable landscape conditions 

and appearance. Locations of existing venues for 

demonstrations and special events are shown on 

the Civic Stages plan map. 

Impacts on Demonstration and Event 

Participants 

Under the no-action alternative there would be 

no change in the ability to participate in demonstrations, national celebrations, or special 

events. The user capacities of individual venues 

for demonstrations and special events, allowing 

for circulation space, would be as follows: 

• Union Square —100,000 (3 sq. ft. / person) 

• Mall center panels (between 3rd and 14th 

streets) — 500,000 (3 sq. ft. / person), plus 

80,000 in the elm tree panels (7 sq. ft. / 

person) 

• Washington Monument grounds —

700,000 (3 sq. ft. / person) 

• Lincoln Memorial — 7,000 on the steps 

and plaza (7 sq. ft. / person), and 90,000 

along the reflecting pool (3 sq. ft. / person) 

• JFK hockey fields — 60,000 (7 sq. ft. / 

person) 

• West Potomac Park ballfields / polo 

grounds (west of the Franklin Delano 

Roosevelt Memorial) — 220,000 (7 sq. ft. / 

person) 

• D.C. War Memorial area — 425 (10 sq. ft. 

/ person) 

• Tidal Basin — Parking area: 5,000 (10 sq. ft. 

/ person), walks: 25,000 (3 sq. ft. / person) 

• Jefferson Memorial steps and plaza —

4,000 (10 sq. ft. / person) 

There would be no change to public access to 

the National Mall. No sites have sufficient public 

restrooms to accommodate the needs of 

demonstrations, national celebrations, or special 

events, and all venues necessitate the use of 

418
Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations: Impacts of the No-Action Alternative 

Civic Stage — No-Action Alternative 

sponsor-provided portable restrooms. There 

would be no change in short- or long-term 

impacts on demonstration or event participants. 

Conditions in some venues would continue to be 

less than desirable for some participants. Dust, 

resulting in breathing and vision problems, 

would continue to affect some participants on 

the Mall. During hot and humid weather 

participants would find most venues 

uncomfortable and would seek shade and 

seating, as well as require water. 

Many event stages have been relocated so that 

they do not block important views, thus enhancing the experience for participants, and 

preserving historic views from and to various 

monuments or memorials, as well as the U.S. 

Capitol and the White House. 

Impacts on Demonstration and Event 

Organizers 

Permitting, Scheduling, and Management 

Processes 

Under the no-action alternative the permitting 

process for special events would continue to 

require application in person; no on-line process 

would be available. The limited number of 

program staff would continue to preclude consistent support for and monitoring of events. 

Planning information about event venues could 

remain limited. Very few events would be turned 

down except when venues had been previously 

scheduled; however, organizers would not know 

that in advance. There would be no change in 

impacts on demonstration and event organizers. 

Venues 

Organizers of demonstrations, national celebrations, and special events would continue to have 

a wide variety of venues with views of national 

symbols as their backdrop. As described in the 

 419 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

“Affected Environment,” the National Mall 

contains a number of venues of varying sizes that 

are attractive to demonstration and event organizers. Some of these venues would be temporarily closed during future construction, 

restoration, or maintenance projects, resulting in 

temporary to short-term, minor to moderate, 

adverse impact on organizers because of the 

availability of specific venues. Other sites would 

remain available and could be used. The 

National Park Service would make every effort 

to ensure that public access remained to the 

greatest degree possible and that the size of the 

impact would be minimized. 

Impacts at specific venues are discussed below. 

Union Square. Union Square would continue to 

be used periodically as a highly visible venue for 

demonstrations and events up to 100,000 people 

due to its proximity to the U.S. Capitol and 

views of Washington Monument. However, its 

desirability as a venue would continue to be 

limited by the stepped level changes, logistical 

and access challenges, lack of visitor facilities, 

and the line of bollards running through the 

center of the site. The very large Capitol Reflecting Pool would continue to make circulation 

and the placement of support facilities awkward, 

and the occasional malodorous conditions from 

the uncirculated water would continue. Portable 

restrooms would have to continue to be brought 

into the site for demonstrations and special 

events. There would be no change in impacts on 

event organizers. 

The Mall. Under the no-action alternative the 

Mall would continue to host demonstrations, 

national celebrations, and special events, and use 

would continue nearly nonstop from spring to 

fall. The large open turf areas in the center 

provide flexible space for event layout. This 

highly visible location, with superb background 

views of the U.S. Capitol to the east and the 

Washington Monument to the west, along with 

the historic landscape, make this a very desirable 

venue. 

Organizers of larger demonstrations or events 

are required to use temporary flooring to reduce 

impacts and to provide restrooms. Refreshment 

stand owners would continue to coordinate with 

event organizers to provide additional food 

items. Organizers would have to safely provide 

for utilities and to cover power and water lines 

so they are not tripping hazards; stringing power 

and communication lines through tree canopies 

is not allowed. Both the 12th Street side panels 

and north side panels near 9th and 8th streets 

are gaps in the regularly spaced elm trees, and 

these gaps would continue to be used for event 

logistics, storage, and construction staging. 

Unattractive visual impacts of fenced construction storage sites and the presence of large 

trucks for long periods of time would continue. 

Portable restrooms would continue to be lined 

up along Madison and Jefferson drives, creating 

a temporary wall and blocking visual access to 

adjacent areas. Dust generated by the gravel 

walkways would continue to create adverse 

effects for organizers, as well as participants. 

The elm tree panels along the Mall may be used 

during First Amendment demonstrations that 

require this additional space because of size. In 

accordance with federal regulations, the Smithsonian Folklife Festival is authorized for a twoweek period in late June or early July between 

7th and 14th streets on the Mall (36 CFR 7.96 

(g)(4) (D)); a recent rule change designates an 

eight-week period for setup and takedown. The 

elm tree panels are used as a shady location 

(where it can be 10 degrees cooler) for temporary event facilities during the festival. NPS concession food service providers also use nearby 

turf areas under the elm trees during events such 

as the Library of Congress Book Festival, the 

Smithsonian Folklife Festival, and the Black 

Family Reunion. Other event organizers are not 

allowed to use the elm tree panels for these purposes, creating a perception of dual standards 

and unequal treatment. This policy would 

continue to result in long-term, moderate, 

adverse impacts on other event organizers. 

Washington Monument Grounds. Under the 

no-action alternative the Washington Monument 

grounds would continue to host a wide variety of 

demonstrations, national celebrations, and special events since the grounds are conveniently 

accessible to two Metro stations and provide 

large open turf areas that can be flexibly used. 

One of the Independence Day concerts would 

continue to be presented on the grounds, as authorized by federal regulation. Temporary facilities such as portable restrooms, stages and related 

420
Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations: Impacts of the No-Action Alternative 

backstage areas, and first-aid stations are 

provided. 

The Sylvan Theater would continue to be used 

for all sizes of events despite the awkward 

orientation of the theater area to circulation 

patterns and hillside seating. The theater stage 

would continue to lack many of the amenities 

desired by organizers, who may need to provide 

temporary upgrades for sound and lighting 

systems. 

The northeast, northwest, and southwest corners of the north portion of the main grounds 

would continue to be used as venues for stages 

and event facilities, with temporary utility 

connections provided by organizers. Temporary 

events facilities would still occasionally block 

the planned historic view between the White 

House and the Thomas Jefferson Memorial. 

There would be no change in impacts on demonstration or event organizers under the noaction alternative. 

Constitution Gardens. Constitution Gardens 

would continue to be a desirable location for a 

few small to moderate size activities, traditionally related to Veterans Day and Memorial 

Day. Tents would continue to be placed along 

walkways, and the open turf area west of the 

lake would provide a larger area for demonstrations and events. A perceived lack of transit 

access makes the location less attractive to some 

organizers. There would be no change in impacts on demonstration or event organizers 

under the no-action alternative. 

Lincoln Memorial. Under the no-action alternative the east plaza and lower approachway of 

the Lincoln Memorial would continue to be a 

desirable venue for small to large demonstrations and events because of its iconic status and 

historic role in hosting activities related to civil 

rights and liberties, as well as the spectacular 

vista toward the Washington Monument and the 

U.S. Capitol. Demonstrations and special events 

would continue to be managed according to the 

2009 Guidelines for Special Events and Demonstrations to protect cultural resources. 

Activities would continue to be primarily located 

on paved surfaces, with the memorial stairs and 

lower approachway providing informal seating. 

Turf areas alongside the reflecting pool would 

also continue to be used. Because subway access 

is 0.75 mile away, occasionally organizers have 

provided bus transportation to the memorial. 

West Potomac Park Riverfront. The West Potomac Park riverfront and athletic fields under 

the no-action alternative would continue to see 

regular use spring through fall for special events, 

especially walks, runs, and races, which may use 

Ohio Drive and West Basin Drive or the athletic 

fields as staging areas. Because the riverfront 

area is within a short walk from parking lots, 

participants may arrive by bicycle or cross the 

bridge from Virginia, and organizers do not have 

to provide access. There would be no change in 

impacts on demonstration or event organizers 

under the no-action alternative. 

Tidal Basin. The Tidal Basin would remain the 

center of the highly attended annual National 

Cherry Blossom Festival, and it would continue 

to be available for other activities. It is a desirable location for special events because of the 

concentration of spring flowering trees, the 

relationship to nearby memorials, and the 

visibility of the Washington Monument in the 

background. An untapped seasonal opportunity 

is the vibrant fall color of cherry trees around 

the Tidal Basin. 

Management changes that were made in 2008 

for the festival would continue, including closing 

the parking lot and using it for temporary 

facilities. Free shuttles would be provided from 

parking areas in East Potomac Park. The lack of 

pedestrian lighting around the Tidal Basin may 

continue to make the venue less attractive for 

nighttime use, and lantern-led tours are provided. There would be no change in impacts on 

demonstration or event organizers under the noaction alternative. 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial. Under the noaction alternative the Thomas Jefferson Memorial steps and plaza would continue to be an 

attractive location for demonstrations and 

special events because of opportunities for 

informal seating, with the plaza functioning as a 

performance area. Vistas to the White House 

and the U.S. Capitol from areas on the plaza and 

steps are an important part of the memorial’s 

appeal to organizers. Utility connections on the 

plaza would continue to be available to organizers. The large paved plaza and wide walks near 

 421 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

the memorial would continue to provide flexible 

space for temporary facilities, and these areas 

can support the weight of delivery vehicles. As a 

result of changes in 2008, organizers are encouraged to locate stages so they do not block views 

between the memorial and the White House. 

There is parking for 300 vehicles within a 5-

minute walk, but the 15- to 20-minute walk from 

the nearest Metro station would mean that event 

organizers might want to provide shuttle transportation. Until a permanent security perimeter 

is completed, the presence of temporary concrete barriers would remain unattractive, and 

controlled access would continue to be inconvenient. There would be no change in impacts 

on demonstration or event organizers under the 

no-action alternative. 

Cumulative Impacts 

Past Actions 

The number of requests for permitted events 

annually has substantially increased over the last 

thirty years. Past court decisions have reaffirmed 

First Amendment rights, and there would be no 

change in the ability of First Amendment demonstrators to use available and allowable venues, 

including the Mall elm tree panels. 

Current Actions 

Other federal park areas in Washington, D.C., 

where demonstrations may be held include 

Franklin Park, McPherson Square, U.S. Reservation 31 (west of 18th Street and south of H 

Street NW), Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway 

(west of 23rd Street and south of P Street NW), 

and U.S. Reservation 46 (north of Pennsylvania 

Avenue, west of 8th Street, and south of D Street 

SE). However, none of these areas is able to 

accommodate the scale of demonstrations that 

have been accommodated on the National Mall 

just because of the physical space. The ability of 

a group to host an event or demonstration on 

the National Mall has become increasingly 

prestigious. 

As areas around the National Mall have been or 

are being developed, such as the construction of 

the National Museum of the American Indian 

and the National Museum of African American 

History and Culture, space available for demonstrations and events has become more concentrated onto the Mall, particularly between 3rd 

and 14th streets. The volume of events has increased dramatically in the last 30 years, although the number has been fairly stable since 

the mid 1990s. Also, locations and seasons for 

events have become traditional, and more special events have become annual events, adding to 

the pressure on park resources as multiple demonstrations and events are accommodated. 

Improvements under all alternatives funded by 

the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 

2009 would improve infrastructure at the Lincoln Memorial for hosting performances and 

demonstrations. Wider paved areas along the 

reflecting pool would also improve pedestrian 

access, and utility and communication connections would be provided. These improvements 

would facilitate setup and takedown operations 

for organizers, resulting in long-term, moderate, 

beneficial impacts. 

Reasonably Foreseeable Actions 

In the future some traditional event locations 

could change because of a strong meaningful 

connection to future facilities and locations. For 

example, the Library of Congress Book Festival 

could move to the paved areas around the Capitol Visitor Center east plaza and 1st Street, 

which would provide an excellent, highly visible, 

accessible, and sustainable location adjacent to 

the Library of Congress. The Black Family Reunion might choose to relocate to outdoor 

spaces at the future National Museum of African 

American History and Culture or near the future 

Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial. The relocation of some events to other sites could have a 

long-term, major, beneficial impact on the ability 

of the entire National Mall to accommodate 

events and for resources to recover. 

The NCPC Monumental Core Framework Plan 

has identified an opportunity to create a new 

event venue of approximately 30 acres south of 

the Thomas Jefferson Memorial, which could 

host events from 100 to 200,000 people. The 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial and Washington 

Monument would be visible from this venue. 

This venue, however, would more likely appeal 

to special events rather than demonstrations 

since neither the U.S. Capitol nor the White 

House is visible from this location. Other future 

422
Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations: Impacts of the Preferred Alternative 

projects include consolidating the 14th Street / I395 and railroad bridges and developing a new 

subway stop within a five-minute walk of the 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial. This would result 

in long-term, major, beneficial impacts for participants and organizers of demonstrations, 

national celebrations, and special events held at 

that location. 

Cumulative Impact Summary 

Present rehabilitation projects for the Lincoln 

Memorial lower approachway and reflecting 

pool, the Thomas Jefferson Memorial plaza, and 

the D.C. War Memorial would have long-term, 

minor, beneficial impacts on organizers and 

negligible to minor beneficial impacts on participants because of improved infrastructure. It is 

also possible that some event organizers could 

select other venues in the future, resulting in 

long-term, minor to moderate, beneficial impacts because events would be better dispersed, 

thus taking pressure off high-demand locations 

on the National Mall. It is also possible that a 

large event and recreation venue could be developed south of the Thomas Jefferson Memorial, 

as proposed in the Monumental Core Framework 

Plan, with access from a new Metro station. This 

action could have long-term, moderate, 

beneficial impacts on both event organizers and 

participants. 

The impacts of these past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions on event organizers 

would be long-term, moderate, and beneficial 

because of rehabilitated and new event venues. 

However, taken together with the impacts of the 

no-action alternative, cumulative impacts would 

be long-term, moderate to major, and adverse, 

with an appreciable contribution from the noaction alternative because venues and visitor 

services and amenities would become 

increasingly inadequate. 

Conclusion 

Present impacts on participants and organizers 

would continue, with the National Mall continuing to host a large number of events and demonstrations at current venues, including the Mall 

elm tree panels, with growing demand for space 

(particularly the Mall, the Washington Monument grounds, and the Lincoln Memorial) 

because of the status and visibility conferred on 

events due to the presence of national icons in 

the background. Over the life of this plan impacts would become moderate to major and 

adverse because of inadequate venues and the 

lack of visitor facilities and amenities. These impacts, together with the impacts of past, present, 

and reasonably foreseeable actions, would result 

in long-term, moderate to major, adverse 

cumulative impacts because venues, as well as 

visitor services and amenities, would become 

increasingly inadequate. 

IMPACTS OF THE PREFERRED 

ALTERNATIVE

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Existing and proposed venues under the preferred alternative for demonstrations and special 

events are shown on the Civic Stage plan map. 

Impact on Demonstration and Event 

Participants 

The preferred alternative recognizes that the 

National Mall will continue to see high levels of 

use because of its symbolism and its location in 

the core of the nation’s capital. Under the preferred alternative the National Mall could accommodate more participants in demonstrations and events. The National Mall could 

accommodate about 230,000 more people 

compared to the no-action alternative because 

of increased capacities at the following venues: 

• Union Square — 290,000 people (3 sq. ft. / 

person) with a smaller reflecting pool that 

could be drained for special events; this is 

nearly triple the current capacity of 

100,000. 

• Constitution Gardens — 4,000 (200 sq. ft. / 

person). 

• Tidal Basin walks — 50,000 (3 sq. ft. / 

person), an increase of 25,000 over the noaction alternative due to wider walks 

• Thomas Jefferson Memorial south plaza 

— 10,000 (10 sq. ft. / person) 

Maximum capacities at the following venues 

would be the same as the no-action alternative, 

 423 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Civic Stage — Preferred Alternative 

except that the Mall elm tree panels could not be 

used during special events: 

• Mall center panels — 500,000 (3 sq. ft. / 

person), plus an additional 80,000 (7 sq. ft. / 

person) in the elm tree panels during First 

Amendment demonstrations only 

• Washington Monument grounds —

700,000 (3 sq. ft. / person) 

• Lincoln Memorial — 7,000 (7 sq. ft. / person) with an additional 90,000 along the 

reflecting pool (3 sq. ft. / person) 

• JFK hockey fields — 60,000 (7 sq. ft. / 

person) 

• West Potomac Park ballfields / polo 

grounds — 220,000 (7 sq. ft. / person) 

• Tidal Basin parking area — 5,000 (3 sq. ft. 

/ person) 

• D.C. War Memorial area — 425 (10 sq. ft. 

/ person) 

• Jefferson Memorial steps and plaza —

4,000 (50 sq. ft. / person) 

The impact of more people being able to participate in a wide range of demonstrations, celebrations, and special events would be long-term, 

major, and beneficial. This would primarily be as 

a result of redesigning Union Square so it could 

accommodate many more people. 

There would be no change in terms of access to 

various venues around the National Mall. 

Impacts on Demonstration and Event 

Organizers 

Permitting, Scheduling, and Management 

Processes 

Event permitting processes under the preferred 

alternative would be revamped. The public and 

organizers would be able to go on-line and 

check venue availability and capacity, as well as 

explore venue facilities, requirements, and 

general information. Event standards for each 

venue (such as temporary surfacing materials 

424
Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations: Impacts of the Preferred Alternative 

and acceptable locations for event staging and 

restrooms) would ensure the protection of park 

resources and facilitate setup and takedown 

operations for organizers. 

Additional NPS staff would be dedicated to 

provide consistent advance planning information for every venue, along with support and 

monitoring that would be useful to event organizers. Event organizers would be encouraged to 

use venues that have a meaningful association 

with their group and that would be suited to 

their needs and goals. Event setup and takedown 

times would be included in permit applications. 

Additional staff would oversee events to prevent 

adverse resource impacts. Intense recovery procedures would be required following events. 

Compared to the no-action alternative, changes 

in the permitting, scheduling, and management 

process for demonstrations and special events 

under the preferred alternative would result in 

long-term, major, beneficial impacts to 

organizers. 

Venues 

Under the preferred alternative several venues 

on the National Mall used for civic activities, 

national celebrations, and special events would 

be redesigned to better sustain high levels of use. 

These venues would be able to accommodate 

more people; utilities, communications, and 

facilities would be provided to reduce setup and 

takedown times; information about daily activities and wayfinding to venues would be provided; and spaces that could accommodate 

temporary facilities such as portable restrooms 

or event offices and staging facilities would be 

designated to minimize the visual impact on 

planned vistas and the historic landscape. These 

actions would affect the majority of organizers 

and would result in long-term, major, beneficial 

impacts on organizers’ ability to stage demonstrations, national celebrations, and special 

events on the National Mall. 

To preserve the character and symbolism of the 

National Mall, limited onsite space would be 

available in some locations for storage and construction supplies for event setup and takedown. 

This would have a temporary, moderate, adverse 

impact on organizers who may in the past have 

used larger areas for longer periods of time. 

Like the no-action alternative, technology would 

continue to be used to increase the capacity of 

various venues and to extend venue areas. 

Under the preferred alternative technology 

could also be used to provide opportunities for 

people to vicariously participate in offsite 

demonstrations through simulcasts or to take 

part in events at multiple venues. This action 

would be consistent with NPS policies to use 

websites to reach a broader audience. 

The following discussion analyzes the impacts of 

demonstrations and special events in high-use 

areas on the National Mall. 

Union Square. Under the preferred alternative

Union Square would be developed into a desirable National Mall destination that could be 

easily transformed to accommodate or support a 

demonstration, national celebration, or special 

event. The site would also be able to support a 

variety of entertainment that could accompany 

some of these permitted activities and help take 

pressure off venues on the Mall. 

A context-sensitive redesign would highlight the 

Grant Memorial and respect the historic landscape, witness trees, and the area’s history, and it 

would nearly triple the square’s physical capacity. Actions that would support the needs of 

organizers and make this venue more desirable 

for demonstrations and events include 

redesigning the reflecting pool and water 

features; providing hard surfaces to accommodate temporary facilities, as well as setup and 

takedown operations; developing utilities and 

communication system connections; improving 

pedestrian access and wayfinding; eliminating 

grade changes; and developing permanent 

visitor facilities. Providing restrooms that could 

be opened in sections to meet higher use demands as needed would make the site more convenient for organizers and would reduce the 

need to provide portable restrooms. If additional portable restrooms were needed, they 

could be grouped on paved surfaces in locations 

that could be easily serviced but outside historic 

viewsheds. Compared to the no-action alternative, actions at Union Square under the preferred alternative would result in long-term, 

major, beneficial impacts for organizers. 

The Mall. The intent of actions on the Mall 

under the preferred alternative would be to 

 425 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

accommodate very high levels of use at areas 

that would be designed to respect the historic 

design and character of the National Mall and to 

recover quickly after demonstrations or events. 

Circulation would be improved, gravel pathways 

replaced, off-Mall pedestrian connections improved, and orientation and wayfinding enhanced. Areas would be designed to accommodate operational and logistical needs of organizers, such as staging space in the air rights over 

the 12th Street tunnel and flexible office space 

that could be used by event organizers, and 

onsite NPS staff for event support, monitoring, 

emergency services, or first aid. This would reduce the need for trailers and trucks to be placed 

on the site for long periods of time. Permanent 

utility and communication connections would 

be provided in convenient locations to support 

all demonstrations, national celebrations, and 

special events. This would facilitate setup and 

takedown times, along with reducing tripping 

hazards from covered power and telephone 

lines. 

Two new large, permanent restrooms would be 

conveniently located in the 12th Street corridor. 

The northside restroom would be designed so 

that stalls could be opened in sections as needed, 

and the southside restroom would be located 

near the Metro station entry. A small self-cleaning restroom would be located near the refreshment stand by the National Air and Space Museum. Required placement areas for additional 

portable restrooms would be conveniently dispersed on the Mall, and areas would be designed 

so that restrooms could be grouped to be easily 

serviced, to limit odors, and to minimize visual 

clutter. 

Areas adjacent to roadways that are regularly 

used for portable stages or screens would be 

paved and easy access developed. Areas adjacent 

to refreshment stands would be renovated to be 

pleasant locations for more seating and more 

efficient food service during special events. 

Additional site furnishings would enhance the 

pedestrian experience, such as permanent seating (including group seating and shaded seating) 

along the north-south walks in the elm panels, 

cooling water features, and potted plants. Turfgrass would be installed along the tree-lined 

boulevards along Madison and Jefferson drives. 

New paving and facilities would be compatible 

with the character of the Mall, and new irrigation systems would improve the appearance of 

the turf. 

The elm tree panels along the Mall would continue to be available for demonstrations that 

require all available space, and they would also 

be available to general visitors for relaxation and 

recreation. However, under the preferred 

alternative the elm tree panels could no longer 

be used during special events for activities or 

temporary event facilities, such as tents and 

stages. This would result in long-term, moderate, beneficial impacts on organizers of 

demonstrations because general conditions on 

the Mall would be improved and all organizers 

would be treated equitably. 

However, the impact on a few event organizers 

would be long-term, adverse, and major because 

the elm tree panels could no longer be used for 

temporary event facilities, such as tents and 

stages. Under this alternative all facilities for the 

Smithsonian Folklife Festival and one other 

special event would have to be located on the 

center grass panels, where there is sufficient 

space for their needs. Event organizers would 

benefit from other actions under the preferred 

alternative, such as permanent restrooms and 

flexible office space, as well as paved spaces to 

temporarily store events supplies and 

equipment. Under the preferred alternative 

event organizers would need to reorganize their 

layout plans. 

Best practices, as well as visitor health concerns, 

indicate that major special events are better 

scheduled during off-peak seasons, and in the 

past events have been held at different times of 

year and in differing locations. Offering improved venues would enhance their desirability 

for demonstrations and events, resulting in longterm, major, beneficial impacts for most demonstration and event organizers compared to the 

no-action alternative because paved areas would 

provide convenient flexible venues that could be 

used more frequently and stay in desired 

condition. 

Washington Monument Grounds. Under the 

preferred alternative the Washington Monument grounds would continue to host a wide 

variety of demonstrations, national celebrations, 

and special events, including one of the Inde426
Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations: Impacts of the Preferred Alternative 

pendence Day concerts. Improving infrastructure for events and replacing the Sylvan 

Theater with a multipurpose performance venue 

would continue the historic function of the 

theater along with reinvigorating this space as a 

desirable event venue. High-capacity restrooms 

and food service would further meet organizers’ 

needs. Utility and communication connections 

would be developed on the southwest side of 

15thand Constitution Avenue NW, southeast of 

17th and Constitution Avenue NW, and northwest of Survey Lodge, making these venues 

more attractive to organizers. Compared to the 

no-action alternative, the preferred alternative 

would result in long-term, major, beneficial 

impacts to demonstration and event organizers 

because of a new, flexible multipurpose facility 

better oriented for participant enjoyment and 

visibility as well as convenient infrastructure. 

Constitution Gardens. Under the preferred 

alternative Constitution Gardens would be a 

new special events venue with a unique informal 

garden character and outdoor performance 

space that could be appealing to moderate sized 

events and programs. Improved circulation, 

space for small special events or demonstrations, 

and support infrastructure would make venues 

at this site more desirable. Compared to the noaction alternative, impacts on demonstration 

and event organizers would be long-term, 

moderate, and beneficial for event organizers of 

smaller events. 

Lincoln Memorial. The Lincoln Memorial 

would continue to be a desirable venue for small 

to large activities under the preferred alternative 

because it is readily recognized throughout the 

country and it provides spectacular views 

toward the Washington Monument and the U.S. 

Capitol. Demonstrations and special events 

would continue to be managed according to the 

2009 guidelines to protect the cultural resources. 

Because Metro access would be 0.75 mile away, 

organizers of some events could have to provide 

shuttle transportation. Resulting impacts on the 

Lincoln Memorial as an event and demonstration venue would be long-term, negligible, and 

beneficial compared to the no-action alternative. 

West Potomac Park Riverfront. The West 

Potomac Park riverfront would continue to 

attract a number of special events, many of 

which are athletic in nature. Charity walks, runs, 

and races would still be able to use roads in the 

area or the athletic fields as staging areas. Compared to the no-action alternative, the preferred 

alternative would result in long-term, minor to 

moderate, beneficial impacts on the attractiveness of venues in this area to organizers, primarily as the result of the improved appearance,

separate bicycle routes or lanes, and reconfigured parking along Ohio Drive, and if warranted 

by demand, food service near Ohio Drive and 

West Basin Drive. 

Tidal Basin. The Tidal Basin would continue to 

be available for a variety of activities because of 

the concentration of spring flowering trees, the 

relationship to nearby memorials, and the 

visibility of the Washington Monument in the 

background. It would remain the center of the 

highly attended annual National Cherry Blossom Festival. The Tidal Basin area would be 

more desirable to demonstration and event organizers under the preferred alternative because 

of widened walks, separate bicycle lanes, improved pedestrian connections, revised parking, 

upgraded visitor facilities (permanent restrooms, 

food service), and pedestrian lighting. Management changes made during the 2008 Cherry 

Blossom Festival would continue, including 

closing the parking lot to accommodate 

temporary facilities and providing shuttles to 

parking areas in East Potomac Park. The impact 

of changes under the preferred alternative, as 

compared to the no-action alternative, would be 

long-term, major, and beneficial because of 

numerous improvements, such as wider walkways and additional permanent visitor facilities 

that would make the National Cherry Blossom 

Festival and other special events much easier to 

host. 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial. Under the preferred alternative the Thomas Jefferson Memorial plaza would be a more desirable venue 

for organizers of demonstrations, national 

celebrations, and special events because of 

improved infrastructure and use of the south 

side of the memorial for special events, as well as 

continued opportunities for informal seating 

and performance areas, with vistas to the White 

House and the U.S. Capitol. Utility connections 

on the plaza would continue to be available to 

organizers. 

 427 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

The large paved plaza and wide walks near the 

memorial would still provide flexible space for 

locating temporary event facilities. As described 

for the no-action alternative, organizers would 

be encouraged to locate stages so they do not 

block views between the memorial and the 

White House. Nearby parking for 300 vehicles 

would remain, while Metro access would be a 

15- to 20-minute walk, requiring some event 

organizers to consider providing shuttle access. 

Compared to the no-action alternative, the 

preferred alternative would have long-term, 

moderate to major, beneficial impacts, primarily 

as a result of improved conditions and a large 

flexible venue using space south of the 

memorial. 

Cumulative Impacts 

Cumulative impacts would be long-term, moderate, and beneficial, the same as those described 

under the no-action alternative, because of 

rehabilitated and new venues. The impacts of 

the preferred alternative would be long-term, 

major, and beneficial because of new venues on 

the National Mall, improved infrastructure that 

would facilitate event operations, and improved 

visitor facilities and amenities. These impacts, in 

combination with the impacts of past, present, 

and reasonably foreseeable actions, would result 

in long-term, major, beneficial cumulative impacts, with a substantial beneficial contribution 

from the preferred alternative. 

Conclusion 

The overall impacts of the preferred alternative 

on participants and organizers for demonstrations, national celebrations, and special 

events would be long-term, major, and beneficial 

because of changes in the permitting, scheduling, and management process, additional and 

more sustainable venues in highly desirable 

locations; equitable requirements for organizers; 

conveniently located civic infrastructure to 

facilitate event operations; permanent visitor 

facilities such as restrooms; a redesigned Union 

Square that could accommodate larger crowds; a 

flexible multipurpose space at the Sylvan 

Theater location; and a new venue at Constitution Gardens. However, impacts on the few 

organizers who could no longer use the elm tree 

panels on the Mall for temporary event facilities 

(such as tents and stages) would be long-term, 

major, and adverse. The impacts of past, present, 

and reasonably foreseeable actions combined 

with the impacts of the preferred alternative 

would result in long-term, major, beneficial 

cumulative impacts for all event organizers and 

participants, with a substantial beneficial contribution from the preferred alternative. 

IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE A 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Existing and proposed venues under alternative 

A for demonstrations and special events are 

shown on the Civic Stage plan map. 

Impacts on Demonstration and Event 

Participants 

Alternative A would be similar to the no-action 

alternative except that the use of the Mall elm 

tree panels would not be allowed during special 

events. The maximum capacities of individual 

venues would be as follows: 

• Union Square — 100,000 (3 sq. ft. / person) 

• Mall center panels — 500,000 (3 sq. ft. / 

person), plus an additional 80,000 (7 sq. ft. / 

person) in the elm tree panels during First 

Amendment demonstrations only 

• Washington Monument grounds —

700,000 (3 sq. ft. / person) 

• Lincoln Memorial — 7,000 on the steps 

and plaza (7 sq. ft. / person), and 90,000 

along the reflecting pool (3 sq. ft. / person) 

• JFK hockey fields — 60,000 (7 sq. ft. / 

person) 

• West Potomac Park ballfields / polo 

grounds — 220,000 (7 sq. ft. / person) 

• D.C. War Memorial area — 425 (10 sq. ft. 

/ person) 

• Tidal Basin — parking area: 5,000 (10 sq. ft. 

/ person); walks: 25,000 (3 sq. ft. / person) 

• Jefferson Memorial steps and plaza —

4,000 (10 sq. ft. / person) 

Under alternative A events would be required to 

have a meaningful association with the National 

Mall venues (36 CFR 7.96(g)(5)(vi)(A)). As a 

428
Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations: Impacts of Alternative A 

Civic Stage — Alternative A 

result, some special events would no longer be 

permitted on the National Mall, resulting in a 

long-term, moderate, adverse impact on 

participants. 

Impacts on Demonstration and Event 

Organizers 

Permitting, Scheduling, and Management 

Processes 

Under alternative A the permitting process for 

special events would be revised similar to the 

preferred alternative, with on-line access for 

permit applications, a dedicated staff to provide 

consistent support and monitoring, and improved advance planning information useful to 

event organizers. The public and organizers 

would be able to go on-line and check venue 

availability and capacity as well as explore venue 

facilities, requirements, and general information. 

Event standards would be defined for each 

venue, including temporary surfacing materials, 

tent and facility installation methods, generator 

decibel levels, and acceptable locations for 

temporary facilities (e.g., portable restrooms, 

incident command centers, and event staging). 

These standards would ensure the protection of 

park resources and facilitate setup and takedown operations for organizers. 

Setup and takedown times would be included in 

permits. Special events would have to relate to 

and be within the basic mission and responsibilities of the NPS National Capital Region (36 CFR 

7.96(g)(5) (vi)(A)). This would result in somewhat fewer special events being permitted on the 

National Mall, with long-term, moderate, 

adverse impacts on event organizers. Intense 

recovery procedures would follow events, with 

better cost recovery procedures to reduce 

expenses to the federal government. 

Compared to the no-action alternative, alternative A would result in long-term, major, beneficial impacts on demonstration and most event 

organizers because of improvements in permitting, scheduling, and management processes. 

 429 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Venues 

Under alternative A the renovation of some venues would help organizers in the staging of demonstrations, national celebrations, and events, 

resulting in long-term, minor, beneficial impacts 

compared to the no-action alternative. However, because alternative A would require a 

meaningful association to sites in accordance 

with 36 CFR 7.96(g)(5)(vi)(A) and NPS Management Policies 2006, the number of events 

would be reduced; this requirement would not 

apply to demonstrations, which would continue 

to be fully accommodated. Alternative A would 

not increase the capacity of sites to accommodate more people, and additional limitations 

would be placed on where temporary facilities 

could be located in order to protect historic 

vistas. These actions would result in temporary, 

moderate to major, adverse impacts on the use 

of venues compared to the no-action alternative. 

At the same time these actions would protect the 

character of the venues that make them popular 

to organizers, a long-term, moderate to major, 

beneficial impact. Technology would continue 

to be frequently used to increase the capacity of 

venues or extend them. Impacts at specific 

venues are discussed below. 

Union Square. Under alternative A Union 

Square would be redesigned as an attractive civic 

square, emphasizing the site’s history. Further 

restrictions would be placed on where temporary facilities could be located in order to keep 

planned historic vistas free of visual intrusions. 

The pool would be redesigned to facilitate 

pedestrian circulation, paving and access would 

be improved, and walks would be widened. Like 

the no-action alternative, no permanent visitor 

facilities (such as restrooms) would be provided. 

Despite the square’s redesign as a more attractive destination, it would not be able to accommodate more people, and the maximum capacity 

would remain about 100,000 people. Compared 

to the no-action alternative, alternative A would 

result in long-term, minor to moderate, beneficial impacts for event organizers from improved 

circulation and paving while at the same time 

further restricting the placement of temporary 

facilities, resulting in long-term, moderate, 

adverse impacts on the ability of organizers to 

stage events. 

The Mall. The Mall would be preserved primarily as a historic space that would accommodate less use than the no-action alternative 

because fewer special events would be permitted 

since a meaningful association to venues would 

be required. However the health and appearance 

of the Mall would improve and that could make 

venues more attractive for organizers. Stages and 

screens for special events would have to be 

relocated in order to protect the eye-level eastwest vista in the center of the grass panels. These 

facilities could be angled or placed off to the side 

as they were for the 2009 inauguration to take 

advantage of iconic backdrops. While this action 

would probably not make the Mall a less desirable venue, it would cause organizers to rethink 

event layout. Gravel walks would remain, and 

small restrooms would be provided near existing 

refreshment stands. Utility and communications 

infrastructure for events would be provided. 

As described for the preferred alternative, no 

temporary facilities for events would be allowed 

in the elm tree panels, and the impacts would be 

similar — long-term, moderate, beneficial 

impacts for organizers of demonstrations because of a general improvement in the resources 

and appearance of the Mall, while impacts on 

event organizers would be long-term, major, and 

adverse on a few organizers. As described under 

the preferred alternative, some event organizers 

would have to reorganize their layout plans. 

Compared to the no-action alternative, the Mall 

would likely be less attractive to event organizers 

under alternative A because of restrictions on 

the placement of temporary facilities to protect 

views and the requirement for a meaningful 

association with the park, even though better 

infrastructure, an improved appearance, and 

small permanent restrooms would be provided. 

The resulting impacts would be long-term, 

moderate, and adverse. Restrictions on the use 

of the side elm tree panels for temporary event 

facilities and tents would result in a long-term, 

moderate, adverse impact on a few event 

organizers. 

Washington Monument Grounds. Use of the 

Washington Monument grounds would be 

similar to that described under the no-action 

alternative. The grounds would continue to host 

a wide variety of demonstrations, national 

430
Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations: Impacts of Alternative A 

celebrations, and special events, including one of 

the Independence Day concerts. Temporary 

facilities such as portable restrooms, stages, and 

related backstage areas, first-aid stations would 

continue to be provided. 

The Sylvan Theater would continue to be used 

for all sizes of events despite the awkward orientation of the theater area to circulation patterns 

and hillside seating. Organizers might need to 

provide temporary upgrades for sound and 

lighting systems in the theater. 

The northeast, northwest, and southwest corners of the north portion of the main grounds 

would continue to be used as venues for stages 

and event facilities, with temporary utility 

connections provided by organizers. Under 

alternative A no temporary event facilities, such 

as tents or vehicles, would be allowed to block 

the planned historic view between the White 

House and the Thomas Jefferson Memorial. 

Impacts would be long-term, minor to moderate, and beneficial for organizers because viewshed protection requirements would retain a 

strong visual connection with national symbols. 

Constitution Gardens. Constitution Gardens 

would continue to provide several small venues 

for a variety of demonstrations and events. 

These venues would provide paved walks and 

adjacent areas for small demonstrations and 

events, as well as a larger turf area west of the 

lake that could accommodate larger demonstrations and events. Facility improvements 

would include replacing the existing restroom 

and refreshment stand and adaptively reusing 

the Lockkeepers House as a staffed visitor contact station. Compared to the no-action alternative, impacts under alternative A would be 

long-term, minor, and beneficial, primarily as a 

result of improved visitor facilities making the 

area more attractive and visible to organizers of 

small to mid-size demonstrations and special 

events.

Lincoln Memorial. Under alternative A the east 

plaza and the lower approachway of the Lincoln 

Memorial would continue to be a desirable 

venue for small to large demonstrations and 

events. Demonstrations and special events 

would continue to be managed according to 

updated Guidelines for Special Events and 

Demonstrations to protect cultural resources. 

Activities would continue to be primarily located 

on paved surfaces, with the memorial stairs and 

lower approachway providing informal seating. 

Turf areas along the reflecting pool would also 

continue to be used. Because Metro access is 

0.75 mile away, organizers might have to provide 

shuttle transportation. Impacts would be longterm, negligible, and beneficial, the same as the 

no-action alternative. 

West Potomac Park Riverfront. Under alternative A, like the no-action alternative, the West 

Potomac Park riverfront and athletic fields 

would continue to see regular use spring 

through fall for special events. Walks, runs, and 

races would still use Ohio Drive or the athletic 

fields as staging areas. Because the riverfront 

area is within a short walk of parking lots, and 

participants may arrive by bicycle or cross the 

bridge from Virginia, organizers do not have to 

provide access. Compared to the no-action 

alternative, impacts would be long-term, negligible, and beneficial, primarily because of the 

improved appearance of natural resources. 

Tidal Basin. As described under the no-action 

alternative, the Tidal Basin would continue to be 

a desirable venue for special events, primarily 

the National Cherry Blossom Festival. The Tidal 

Basin parking lot would continue to be closed 

during the Cherry Blossom Festival to provide 

ample paved surfaces for temporary facilities, 

but narrow walks would continue to limit 

movement. Shuttles would be provided from 

parking areas in East Potomac Park. The lack of 

pedestrian lighting around the Tidal Basin could 

continue to make the venue less attractive for 

nighttime use, and lantern-led tours would 

continue to be provided. Increasing educational 

programs by means of roving ambassadors 

during the Cherry Blossom Festival would help 

improve overall conditions for special events. An 

untapped opportunity for events at the Tidal 

Basin is during the vibrant fall color season. 

Compared to the no-action alternative, impacts 

would be long-term, negligible, and beneficial. 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial. Under alternative 

A the Thomas Jefferson Memorial plaza would 

continue to be attractive for demonstrations and 

special events because of opportunities for 

informal seating and performance areas, with 

vistas to the White House and the U.S. Capitol 

 431 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

from areas on the plaza and steps. Utility connections on the plaza would continue to be 

available to organizers. The large paved plaza 

and wide walks near the memorial would continue to provide flexible space for temporary 

event facilities. As described for the no-action 

alternative, since 2008 organizers are encouraged to locate stages so that they do not block 

views between the memorial and the White 

House. Nearby parking would remain for 300 

vehicles, while a 15- to 20-minute walk to the 

nearest Metro station would prompt some event 

organizers to provide shuttle access. Controlled 

access would continue to be inconvenient. Compared to the no-action alternative, improved 

conditions under alternative A would have longterm, minor, beneficial impacts on the attractiveness of this area as a venue for special events. 

Cumulative Impacts 

Cumulative impacts would be long-term, moderate, and beneficial, the same as those described 

under the no-action alternative, because of rehabilitated and new venues. Alternative A would 

result in long-term, minor, beneficial impacts. 

These impacts, in combination with the impacts 

of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable 

actions, would result in long-term, moderate, 

beneficial cumulative impacts, with a small 

beneficial contribution from alternative A. 

Conclusion 

The overall impacts of alternative A would be 

long-term, minor, and beneficial because of 

changes in the permitting, scheduling, and 

management process; somewhat improved 

venue conditions; and permanent small visitor 

facilities such as restrooms. However, the user 

capacity of desirable venues would remain the 

same, and mandated recovery time between 

events would mean fewer events could take 

place in high visibility venues such as the Mall 

and the Washington Monument grounds. 

However, impacts on the few organizers who 

could no longer use the elm tree panels on the 

Mall for temporary event facilities (such as tents 

and stages) would be long-term, major, and 

adverse. The impacts of past, present, and 

reasonably foreseeable actions, combined with 

the impacts of alternative A, would result in 

long-term, moderate, beneficial cumulative 

impacts, with a small beneficial contribution 

from this alternative. 

IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE B 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Existing and proposed venues under alternative 

B for demonstrations and special events are 

shown on the Civic Stage plan map. 

Impacts on Demonstration and Event 

Participants 

The National Mall will continue to see high 

levels of use because of its symbolism and its 

location in the core of the nation’s capital. 

Under alternative B about 240,000 more people 

than under the no-action alternative could be 

accommodated at demonstration, national celebrations, and special events because capacities 

would be increased at the following venues: 

• Union Square — 290,000 (3 sq. ft. / person) 

without a reflecting pool; this is nearly 

triple the current capacity of 100,000. 

• Constitution Gardens — 4,000 (200 sq. ft. / 

person); if the lake was drainable for an 

event, a maximum of 20,000 people at 10 

square feet per person could be accommodated. Constitution Gardens is less likely to 

see maximum use capacity because the 

visual backdrop is not readily identified as 

being in the national capital, even though 

the Washington Monument is highly 

visible. 

• Tidal Basin walks — 50,000 (3 sq. ft. / person), double the current capacity due to 

wider walks. 

Maximum capacities at the following venues 

would be the same as the no-action alternative, 

except that the Mall elm tree panels could not be 

used during special events: 

• Mall center panels — 500,000 (3 sq. ft. / 

person), plus an additional 80,000 (7 sq. ft. / 

person) in the elm tree panels if turf/root 

zones and soils were protected through an 

acceptable and authorized method 

• The Washington Monument grounds —

700,000 (3 sq. ft. / person) 

432
Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations: Impacts of Alternative B 

Civic Stage — Alternative B 

• The Lincoln Memorial — 7,000 (7 sq. ft. / 

person) with an additional 90,000 along the 

reflecting pool (3 sq. ft. / person) 

• JFK hockey fields — 60,000 (7 sq. ft. / person) 

• West Potomac Park ballfields / polo 

grounds — 220,000 (7 sq. ft. / person) 

• Tidal Basin parking area — 5,000 (3 sq. ft. 

/ person) 

• D.C. War Memorial area — 425 (10 sq. ft. 

/ person) 

• Jefferson Memorial steps and plaza —

4,000 (50 sq. ft. / person) 

The impact on the ability to participate in a wide 

range of demonstrations, celebrations, and 

events would be long-term, major, and beneficial, primarily as a result of redesigning Union 

Square so it could accommodate many more 

people. 

Impacts on Demonstration and Event 

Organizers 

Permitting, Scheduling, and Management 

Processes 

Under alternative B the permit process would be 

revamped so that organizers could apply for 

permits on-line. Staff would be dedicated to 

provide consistent support and monitoring, and 

advance planning information useful to event 

organizers would be improved. The public and 

organizers would be able to go online and check 

venue availability and capacity as well as explore 

the venue facilities, requirements, and general 

information, such as standards for specific 

venues, including temporary surfacing materials, 

tent installation methods, generator decibel 

levels, and acceptable locations for temporary 

facilities (e.g., portable restrooms, incident command centers, and event staging). These standards would ensure the protection of park resources and facilitate setup/takedown opera-

 433 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

tions for organizers. Event organizers would be 

encouraged to use venues that would have a 

meaningful association to their group and that 

would be suited to their needs. 

Additional staff would oversee events to prevent 

adverse resource impacts. Intense recovery 

procedures would follow events, and setup and 

takedown times would be built into permits. 

Compared to the no-action alternative, alternative B would make considerable changes in the 

processes for permitting, scheduling, and managing events, resulting in long-term, major, 

beneficial impacts. 

Venues 

Under alternative B several venues would be 

redesigned to sustain high levels of use for civic 

activities, national celebrations, and special 

events. Venues would accommodate more 

people; provide utilities, communications, and 

facilities that would reduce setup and takedown 

times; improve information about daily activities 

and wayfinding to venues; and provide paved or 

identified spaces that could flexibly accommodate temporary facilities such as portable restrooms, event offices, and staging facilities while 

minimizing the visual impact on planned vistas 

and the historic landscape. Some of the actions 

would be similar to the preferred alternative, 

which would also seek to accommodate a very 

high level of use. Like the preferred alternative, 

alternative B would affect the majority of organizers, resulting in long-term, major, beneficial 

impacts on the ability to stage, demonstrations, 

national celebrations, and events on the National Mall. Actions at specific sites are described below. 

Union Square. Under alternative B Union 

Square would be redesigned as a desirable civic 

square that could be transformed to a demonstration or event site or to support national 

celebrations. The site would also be able to 

support a variety of entertainment that might 

accompany some of these permitted activities. 

The redesign would highlight the Grant 

Memorial and respect the historic landscape, 

witness trees, and site history. The physical 

capacity of the space would be nearly doubled. A 

context-sensitive redesign would accommodate 

more people by removing the reflecting pool, 

developing utilities and communications connections to facilitate flexible use, improving 

pedestrian access and wayfinding, adding 

pavement to facilitate setup and takedown, and 

providing permanent multipurpose facilities 

such as restrooms and food service that could 

support the needs of organizers. Restrooms 

could be incrementally opened as needed to 

meet higher use demands, providing convenience for organizers and reducing the need to 

provide portable restrooms. Compared to the 

no-action, alternative B would result in longterm, major, beneficial, impacts for organizers. 

The Mall. Under alternative B the Mall would 

be recognized as a venue that must accommodate very high levels of use and yet be able to 

recover quickly. Like the preferred alternative, 

the Mall’s improved appearance and facilities 

would enhance its desirability for use by demonstration and event organizers. Additional actions 

under alternative B would include closing 

Madison and Jefferson drives to allow them to 

be used more frequently for event facilities and 

constructing an underground parking garage to 

provide onsite public parking. These changes 

would result in long-term, major, beneficial 

impacts for organizers compared to the noaction alternative. 

Under alternative B some temporary facilities for 

events could be placed in the side elm tree panels only if turf and root zones could be protected 

through effective, authorized methods. This 

difference would primarily affect the organizers 

of the Smithsonian Folklife Festival, with a longterm, negligible to minor, beneficial impact. 

However, dual standards and unequal treatment 

of organizers, as described under the no-action 

alternative, would result in a long-term, moderate, adverse impact on other event organizers. 

Washington Monument Grounds. As described for the no-action alternative, the Washington Monument grounds would continue to 

host a wide variety of demonstrations, national 

celebrations, and special events under alternative B. Changes would be similar to those described for the preferred alternative and would 

include improved infrastructure to support 

events and a multipurpose performance venue 

to replace the Sylvan Theater, which would continue the historic function of the theater and 

434
Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations: Impacts of Alternative B 

would reinvigorate this space as a desirable 

venue for events. High-capacity restrooms and 

food service would meet organizers’ needs. 

Utility and communication connections would 

be developed on the southwest side of 15thand 

Constitution Avenue NW, the southeast side of 

17th and Constitution Avenue NW, and northwest of Survey Lodge, making these venues 

more useful to organizers. If an underground 

parking garage was developed south of Independence Avenue, the site would be more desirable 

for demonstrations and special events because 

of improved parking. Compared to the noaction alternative, alternative B would result in 

long-term, major, beneficial impacts on event 

organizers because of infrastructure improvements and a new multipurpose venue.

Constitution Gardens. Under alternative B 

Constitution Gardens would be developed as a 

visitor destination with nearby performance 

space that has infrastructure, as well as improved 

circulation routes to accommodate small special 

events and demonstrations. In addition, Constitution Gardens Lake would be redesigned so 

that it could be drained to provide a large paved 

venue for demonstrations and special events. As 

a result of these actions, alternative B would 

have long-term, major, beneficial impacts. 

Lincoln Memorial. The Lincoln Memorial 

would continue to be a desirable venue for small 

to large activities, similar to the preferred alternative. Well-attended events and demonstrations would also continue to use the turf areas 

along the reflecting pool. Activities would continue to be primarily located on paved surfaces, 

with the memorial stairs and lower approachway 

providing informal seating. Demonstrations and 

special events would continue to be managed 

according to updated guidelines to protect the 

cultural resources. Because Metro access would 

remain 0.75 mile away, occasionally organizers 

would have to provide shuttle access. Impacts 

would be long-term, negligible, and beneficial, 

the same as the no-action alternative. 

West Potomac Park Riverfront. Under alternative B, like the no-action alternative, the West 

Potomac Park riverfront area would continue to 

attract numerous special events, many of which 

are athletic in nature. Charity walks, runs, and 

races would continue to use roads in the area or 

the athletic fields as staging areas. Developing a 

small staging area for demonstrations and events 

(grass pavement and utilities) south of 23rd 

Street and Independence Avenue would make 

this area more useful for organizers. Compared 

to the no-action alternative, alternative B would 

result in long-term, negligible to minor, beneficial impacts, primarily because the venues would 

be more attractive to organizers as a result of 

better infrastructure and the improved appearance of natural resources. 

Tidal Basin. As described under the no-action 

alternative, the Tidal Basin would continue to be 

an attractive venue for special events, including 

the National Cherry Blossom Festival, because 

of the concentration of spring flowering trees, 

the relationship to nearby memorials, and the 

visibility of the Washington Monument in the 

background. Under alternative B the Tidal Basin 

would be more desirable as a venue because of 

widened walks, improved pedestrian connections, a nearby underground parking garage, improved visitor facilities (permanent restrooms 

and food service), pedestrian lighting, and more 

choice in recreation equipment rentals. 

Management changes that were made in 2008 

for the Cherry Blossom Festival would continue, 

including closing the Tidal Basin parking lot and 

using it for temporary facilities, and providing 

shuttle transportation from parking areas in East 

Potomac Park. The impact of alternative B on 

the attractiveness of the Tidal Basin for events 

and demonstrations, compared to the no-action 

alternative, would be long-term, major, and 

beneficial, primarily as a result of the numerous 

improvements to visitor facilities. 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial. Under alternative 

B the Thomas Jefferson Memorial plaza would 

continue to be a desirable venue for organizers 

of demonstrations, national celebrations, and 

special events because of opportunities for 

informal seating and performance areas, with 

vistas to the White House and the U.S. Capitol 

from areas on the plaza and steps. Utility connections on the plaza would continue to be 

available to organizers, and the large paved plaza 

and wide walks would continue to provide space 

for temporary facilities. As a result of management changes made in 2008, organizers are 

encouraged to locate stages so they do not block 

 435 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

views between the memorial and the White 

House. Parking for 300 vehicles within a fiveminute walk would remain, but a longer walk 

from the nearest Metro station (15–20 minutes) 

would prompt some event organizers to provide 

a shuttle service. Controlled access would 

continue to be inconvenient. Compared to the 

no-action alternative, impacts under alternative 

B would be long-term, minor, and beneficial, 

primarily as a result of improved conditions. 

Cumulative Impacts 

Cumulative impacts, which would be the same as 

those described under the no-action alternative, 

would be long-term, moderate. and beneficial 

because of three rehabilitated venues and a new 

venue south of the Thomas Jefferson Memorial. 

The impacts of alternative B would be longterm, major, and beneficial. These impacts, in 

combination with the impacts of past, present, 

and reasonably foreseeable actions, would result 

in long-term, major, beneficial cumulative 

impacts, with a substantial beneficial contribution from alternative B. 

Conclusion 

Taken as a whole, alternative B would result in 

long-term, major, beneficial impacts because of 

changes in the permitting, scheduling, and management process; more sustainable venues in 

highly desirable locations; conveniently located 

civic infrastructure to facilitate event operations; 

permanent visitor facilities such as restrooms; a 

redesigned Union Square that could accommodate larger crowds; a flexible multipurpose space 

at the Sylvan Theater location; and a new venue 

at Constitution Gardens. The impacts of past, 

present, and reasonably foreseeable actions 

combined with the impacts of the preferred 

alternative would result in long-term, major, 

beneficial cumulative impacts, with a substantial 

beneficial contribution from alternative B. 

IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE C 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Existing and proposed venues under alternative 

C for demonstrations and special events are 

shown on the Civic Stage plan map. 

Impacts on Demonstration and Event 

Participants 

Under alternative C the National Mall could 

accommodate about 215,000 more people than 

under the no-action alternative because capacities would be increased at the following venue: 

• Union Square — 290,000 people (3 sq. ft. / 

person) with a smaller reflecting pool that 

could be drained for special events; this is 

nearly triple the current capacity of 

100,000. 

• Tidal Basin walks — 50,000 (3 sq. ft. / 

person), double the current capacity due to 

wider walks. 

Maximum capacities at the following venues 

would be the same as the no-action alternative, 

except that the Mall elm tree panels could not be 

used during special events: 

• Mall center panels — 500,000 (3 sq. ft. / 

person), plus an additional 80,000 (7 sq. ft. / 

person) in the elm tree panels during First 

Amendment demonstrations only 

• Washington Monument grounds — 

700,000 (3 sq. ft. / person) 

• Lincoln Memorial — 7,000 (7 sq. ft. / person) with an additional 90,000 along the 

reflecting pool (3 sq. ft. / person) 

• JFK hockey fields — 60,000 (7 sq. ft. / person) 

• West Potomac Park ballfields / polo 

grounds — 220,000 (7 sq. ft. / person) 

• Tidal Basin parking area — 5,000 (3 sq. ft. 

/ person) 

• D.C. War Memorial area — 425 (10 sq. ft. 

/ person) 

• Jefferson Memorial steps and plaza —

4,000 (50 sq. ft. / person) 

Impact on demonstration and event participants 

participate would be long-term, major, and 

beneficial, primarily as a result of redesigning 

Union Square so it could accommodate many 

more people. 

436
Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations: Impacts of Alternative C 

Civic Stage — Alternative C 

Impacts on Demonstration and Event 

Organizers 

Permitting, Scheduling, and Management 

Processes 

Under alternative C, similar to the other action 

alternatives, the event permitting process would 

be revamped with on-line access to apply for a 

permit. The public and organizers would be able 

to go on-line and check venue availability and 

capacity, as well as explore venue facilities, 

requirements, and general information. Event 

standards would be defined for each venue, 

helping ensure the protection of park resources 

and facilitating setup/takedown operations for 

organizers. Under alternative C event scheduling 

(not First Amendment demonstrations) would 

ensure that part of the Mall’s grass panels would 

be open for public recreation at all times, part 

available for events, and part available for 

landscape recovery/restoration. 

Staff would be dedicated to providing consistent 

support and monitoring. Organizers would be 

encouraged to use venues with a meaningful 

association with their group and that would be 

suited to their needs. Compared to the no-action 

alternative, impacts under alternative C on event 

permitting, scheduling, and management would 

be long-term, major, and beneficial. 

Venues 

Under alternative C, similar to the preferred 

alternative and alternative B, the venues for 

demonstrations and special events would be 

improved, with long-term, moderate to major, 

beneficial impacts. As described in the preferred 

alternative, sustainable venues would be 

attractive to organizers, and more frequent but 

smaller scale restoration projects would mean 

that venues would stay in better shape and that 

more space would be available to organizers. 

To maximize sustainability, organizers would be 

encouraged to pursue nontraditional approaches to expand participation. For example, 

 437 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

demonstrations of unity could be simulcast from 

several locations, rather than having all participants onsite, similar to the 2007 Live Earth concerts that took place around the world. The 

Kennedy Center periodically simulcasts performances taking place in their auditoriums to 

audiences on the National Mall. These special 

events have been very popular. 

Organizers would be encouraged to provide 

transportation to venues and would be required 

to provide bicycle parking for events of more 

than 2,000 people. Similar to alternative A, no 

eye-level obstructions of planned historic vistas 

would be allowed, requiring changes to event 

facility locations, a long-term, minor to moderate, adverse impact on organizers. Compared to 

the no-action alternative, overall alternative C 

would result in long-term, major, beneficial 

impacts to organizers. Impacts at specific sites 

are discussed below. 

Union Square. Under alternative C Union 

Square would provide an attractive, sustainable 

destination with flexible event and demonstration space that would maximize sustainable 

building practices. Context-sensitive design 

would include more paved surfaces and the 

elimination of grade changes to make the space 

more flexible and accessible to all people; a yearround water feature that could be drained for 

additional event space or that could be frozen 

for winter ice-skating; event utility infrastructure 

and connections, with the ability to view simulcasts or broadcasts of demonstrations and 

events occurring elsewhere, or to broadcast freespeech or civic activities from here; and a convenient refreshment stand for use by organizers. 

Self-cleaning public restrooms would be provided, but organizers would still have to provide 

additional portable restrooms for large events. 

As a result, Union Square would provide a venue 

that would almost double the number of potential participants. Impacts under alternative C 

would be long-term, major, and beneficial 

compared to the no-action alternative. 

The Mall. Under alternative C the Mall would 

be recognized as a venue that must accommodate very high levels of use and yet be able to 

recover quickly, similar to the preferred alternative. Actions would include improved circulation and off-Mall pedestrian connections, replacement of gravel pathways, better orientation 

and wayfinding, areas to accommodate operational and logistical needs, permanent utility and 

communication connections, and two large 

permanent restrooms plus designated areas for 

additional portable restrooms. The Mall’s improved appearance and facilities would enhance 

its desirability for organizers. These changes 

would result in long-term, major, beneficial 

impacts for organizers compared to the noaction alternative. 

Like the preferred alternative and alternative A, 

no events would be allowed to use areas within 

the elm tree panels for activities or temporary 

event facilities such as tents and stages. The tree 

panels would continue to be available for demonstrations that require all available space and 

by general visitors for relaxation and recreation. 

The impact on the event organizers that use 

these areas would be long-term, major, and 

adverse. However, the resulting improvement in 

the appearance of the Mall for other event 

organizers would be long-term, moderate, and 

beneficial. Alternative C would require some 

event organizers to reorganize their layout plans. 

Washington Monument Grounds. As described for the no-action alternative, the Washington Monument grounds would continue to 

host a wide variety of demonstrations, national 

celebrations, and special events because of the 

large open turf areas that can be flexibly used. 

Temporary facilities such as portable restrooms, 

stages and related backstage areas, and first-aid 

stations would be provided. 

The Sylvan Theater would continue to see high 

levels of use for all sizes of events despite the 

awkward orientation of the theater to circulation patterns and hillside seating. Because the 

theater stage does not provide many of the 

desired amenities, organizers might need to 

provide temporary upgrades for sound and 

lighting systems. 

The northeast, northwest, and southwest corners of the north portion of the main grounds 

would continue to be used as venues for stages 

and event facilities, and temporary utility connections would continue to be provided by 

organizers. Temporary event facilities, such as 

tents, would continue to occasionally block the 

planned historic view between the White House 

438
Demonstrations, Special Events, and National Celebrations: Impacts of Alternative C 

and the Thomas Jefferson Memorial. Impacts 

under alternative C would be long-term, minor 

to moderate, and adverse because no changes 

would be made to event infrastructure. 

Constitution Gardens. Constitution Gardens 

would be developed as a visitor destination with 

nearby performance space under alternative C, 

similar to the preferred alternative and alternative B. Circulation would be improved in a way 

to provide space for small special events or 

demonstrations, and infrastructure would be 

provided, making the area more desirable for 

organizers of small events. Compared to the noaction alternative, impacts would be long-term, 

moderate, and beneficial. 

Lincoln Memorial. Under alternative C the east 

plaza and lower approachway to the Lincoln 

Memorial would continue to be a desirable 

venue for small to large demonstrations and 

events. Demonstrations and special events 

would continue to be managed according to 

updated Guidelines for Special Events and 

Demonstrations to protect cultural resources. 

As described for the no-action alternative, 

activities would continue to be primarily located 

on paved surfaces, with the memorial stairs and 

lower approachway providing informal seating. 

Turf areas along the reflecting pool would also 

continue to be used. Organizers would have to 

consider providing shuttle transportation 

because the nearest Metro station is 0.75 mile 

away. Impacts would be long-term, negligible, 

and beneficial, the same as the no-action 

alternative. 

West Potomac Park Riverfront. Under alternative C the West Potomac Park riverfront area 

would continue to attract a number of special 

events, many of which are athletic in nature. 

Charity walks, runs, and races would continue to 

use roads in the area or the athletic fields as staging areas. Parking would be improved along 

Ohio Drive, and separate bicycle lanes or routes 

would be provided to enhance access. Compared to the no-action alternative, alternative C 

would result in long-term, minor to moderate, 

beneficial impacts on the attractiveness of 

venues to organizers, primarily as the result of 

the improved appearance of natural resources, 

separate bicycle routes or lanes, and revised 

parking along Ohio Drive. 

Tidal Basin. The Tidal Basin would continue to 

be an attractive location for special events. It 

would remain the center of the highly attended 

annual National Cherry Blossom Festival, but 

would also continue to be available for other 

activities. The Tidal Basin would be more desirable as an event venue under alternative C, 

similar to the preferred alternative, because of 

widened walks, separate bicycle lanes, improved 

pedestrian connections, revised parking, better 

visitor facilities (permanent restrooms, food service), pedestrian lighting, and more choice in 

recreation equipment rentals. Management 

changes made for the 2008 Cherry Blossom 

Festival would continue, including closing the 

parking lot to accommodate temporary facilities 

and providing shuttles to parking areas in East 

Potomac Park. The impacts to the attractiveness 

of the Tidal Basin as a venue under alternative C, 

compared to the no-action alternative, would be 

long-term, major, and beneficial because of 

numerous improvements to visitor facilities. 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial. Under alternative C the Thomas Jefferson Memorial plaza 

would continue to be a desirable venue for 

organizers of demonstrations, national celebrations, and special events because of opportunities for informal seating and performance areas, 

with vistas to the White House and the U.S. 

Capitol from areas on the plaza and steps. Utility 

connections on the plaza would continue to be 

available to organizers. The large paved plaza 

and wide walks near the memorial would still 

provide flexible space for temporary event 

facilities. As a result of operation changes made 

in 2008, organizers are encouraged to locate 

stages so they do not block views between the 

memorial and the White House. Nearby parking 

for 300 vehicles within a five-minute walk would 

remain, but the 15- to 20-minute walk from the 

nearest Metro station would mean that event 

organizers might want to provide shuttle transportation. The continued need to control access 

would be inconvenient. Compared to the noaction alternative, impacts under alternative C 

would be long-term, minor, and beneficial 

because of improved conditions. 

Cumulative Impacts 

Cumulative impacts would be the same as those 

described under the no-action alternative. The 

 439 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

impacts of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions would be long-term, moderate, and 

beneficial because of three rehabilitated existing 

venues and a new venue south of the Thomas 

Jefferson Memorial. These impacts, in combination with the long-term, major, beneficial 

impacts of alternative C, would result in longterm, major, beneficial cumulative impacts, with 

a substantial beneficial contribution from 

alternative C. 

Conclusion 

The overall impacts of alternative C on participants and organizers for demonstrations, 

national celebrations, and special events would 

be long-term, major, and beneficial because of 

changes in the permitting, scheduling, and 

management process, additional and more 

sustainable venues in highly desirable locations; 

conveniently located civic infrastructure to 

facilitate event operations; permanent visitor 

facilities such as restrooms; a redesigned Union 

Square that could accommodate larger crowds; a 

reoriented Sylvan Theater to improve viewing 

from the hillside; and a new venue at Constitution Gardens. However, impacts on the few 

organizers who could no longer use the elm tree 

panels on the Mall for temporary event facilities 

(such as tents and stages) would be long-term, 

major, and adverse. The impacts of past, present, 

and reasonably foreseeable actions combined 

with the impacts of alternative C would result in 

long-term, major, beneficial cumulative impacts, 

with a substantial beneficial contribution from 

alternative C. 

440
ACCESS AND CIRCULATION

METHODOLOGY FOR IMPACT 

ANALYSIS

This section analyzes the impacts of the alternatives on public access to the National Mall and 

wayfinding. The analysis takes into consideration adopted goals of local and federal transportation plans, NPS policy, best practices, the 2003 

visitor survey and staff observations of visitor 

use patterns, and best professional judgment.

The following categories of impacts are analyzed: 

• Impacts on visitor access to the National 

Mall — The beneficial and adverse impacts 

of alternatives on convenient access to the 

National Mall are analyzed, including 

vehicle access, parking, and transit access 

(Metro system as well as taxis). 

• Impacts on the pedestrian environment — The beneficial and adverse impacts 

of the alternatives on pedestrian experiences on the National Mall and pedestrian 

connections to adjacent areas are analyzed. 

• Impacts on bicycle users — This topic 

analyzes the beneficial and adverse impacts 

of alternatives on bicycle users. 

• Impacts on motorized uses and the road 

system — The analysis looks at the degree 

to which the alternatives, in accordance 

with policy, either beneficially or adversely 

address the needs of motorists, whether 

they are visitors, through-travelers, or 

commuters. 

Impact Intensity Levels 

The following thresholds were established for 

impacts on circulation: 

• Negligible — The impact would not be 

detectable or would be barely detectable to 

most park pedestrians, bicycle users, 

motorists, or commuters. There would be a 

negligible effect on local transportation 

plans and policies. 

• Minor — The impact would be detectable 

to some park pedestrians, bicycle users, 

motorists, or commuters. There would be 

some consistency or inconsistency with 

local transportation plans and policies. 

• Moderate — The impact would be readily 

apparent and would have an appreciable 

impact, either beneficial or adverse, on 

many pedestrians, bicycle users, motorists, 

or commuters. Actions would be generally 

consistent or inconsistent with local 

transportation plans and policies. 

• Major — The impact would be severely 

adverse or exceptionally beneficial on most 

pedestrians, bicycle users, motorists, or 

commuters. Actions would be mostly 

consistent or inconsistent with local 

transportation plans and policies. 

Type of Impact 

Impacts could be either beneficial or adverse. 

Beneficial impacts would comply with federal 

regulations and NPS or local policies and plans; 

would incorporate appropriate best practices; 

would be convenient for users; and would improve circulation for all types of users. Adverse 

impacts would be inconsistent with federal regulations or with NPS or local policies and plans; 

would not address current challenges or obstacles to circulation; would be less convenient for 

some users of the system; or fail to incorporate 

relevant improvements from best practices. 

Duration of Impacts 

Impacts could be temporary, short-term, longterm, or permanent. 

• Temporary — The impact would usually 

last for a few hours or up to two days, such 

as a road closure for a day or less or limited 

access to an area during a demonstration. 

• Short-term — The impact would generally 

last up to one year or the life of a construction project. 

441
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

• Long-term — The impact would last longer 

than one year or for the life of the plan (up 

to 50 years). 

Regulations and Policies 

Transportation Goals and Policies for 

Washington, D.C. 

The National Capital Planning Commission 

adopted the Comprehensive Plan for the National 

Capital: Federal Elements on August 5, 2004. The 

plan discusses transportation under two elements — transportation and visitors. The goal 

for the transportation element is to develop and 

maintain a multi-modal regional transportation 

system that meets the travel needs of residents, 

workers, and visitors, while improving regional 

mobility and air quality through expanded 

transportation alternatives and transit-oriented 

development. The plan recommends placing 

parking structures below ground for efficient 

land use and good urban design; and it supports 

walking, bicycling, and bicycle lanes. 

Under the visitor element the plan supports 

increased information about transportation; 

encourages walking and bike riding; supports 

supplementary transit aimed at visitors, 

including shuttles to and from Metro stations; 

promotes increased awareness about long-term 

parking facilities; supports better tour bus 

management in the monumental core; and 

promotes a pedestrian friendly environment. 

The District of Columbia Bicycle Master Plan

(DDOT 2005a) discusses the benefits of bicycling, which include traffic relief, improved air 

quality, reduced need for motor vehicles, and 

improved health. Generally the plan recommends more and better bicycle facilities, including a bike route system with more bike facilities 

on roadways; more bicycle friendly policies; and 

more bicycle-related education, promotion, and 

enforcement. Additionally, it suggests upgrades 

of National Mall roadways and multi-use trails; 

improved bridge access; bike-friendly traffic 

calming (e.g., clearly marked intersections); 

exclusive bus and bicycle lanes; and intersection 

safety and visibility improvements to better 

accommodate bicycling. 

The draft District of Columbia Pedestrian Master 

Plan (DDOT 2008b) identifies pedestrian 

potential as well as deficiencies, such as barriers 

to walking. Benefits of walking include an 

additional transportation option, reduced congestion, improved health, quality of life, and 

reduced pollution. The plan recommends 

improved pedestrian access and safety at controlled crossings and intersections that would 

meet the needs of pedestrians of all ability levels, 

and programs that support pedestrian travel. 

The District of Columbia Tour Bus Management 

Initiative (US DOT 2003) examines the impact of 

tour buses; explores best practices; identifies 

potential strategies; recommends counting 

methods and locations to get a better sense of 

the demand; and recommends the completion 

and adoption of a comprehensive plan. The 

initiative identifies a shortage of parking and 

loading/unloading spaces; associated traffic and 

safety issues; adverse environmental impacts 

from buses; and obstruction of view corridors. 

The study also concluded that Mall areas do not 

have sufficient curbside loading/unloading 

space. Some potential strategies include 

increased peripheral parking outside the 

monumental core and downtown; centrally 

located parking facilities; encouraging walking 

among clustered destinations; pricing strategies 

for parking or permits/ licenses; defined routes 

and driver facilities/ shuttle between parking lots 

and hotels. 

As previously described, Planning Together for 

Central Washington (NCPC 2008a) identifies 

common objectives of visionary planning efforts 

being undertaken by the Architect of the 

Capitol, the Commission of Fine Arts, the DC 

Office of Planning, the National Capital 

Planning Commission, and the National Park 

Service. Objectives include distinguished, 

accessible, well-connected public spaces served 

by a comprehensive, flexible, convenient, and 

coordinated network of public and visitor transit 

options. Walking and bicycling would be encouraged, and various travel demand strategies 

would be used to reduce congestion, improve air 

quality, and address parking and tour bus issues. 

Plan priorities are walkable corridors and stateof-the-art transportation for visitors, workers, 

and residents. 

442
Access and Circulation: Impacts Common to All Alternatives 

NPS Management Policies 2006 

The NPS Management Policies 2006 recognize 

that transportation systems and alternative 

transportation systems all strongly influence the 

quality of the visitor experience. Where appropriate, alternative transportation systems (a mix 

of buses, trains, ferries, etc.) are to be emphasized and encouraged, and non-motorized 

modes of access are preferred for moving within 

parks (NPS 2006e, sec. 9.2). The National Park 

Service will work with the U.S. Department of 

Transportation in the construction of new roads 

or the expansion of existing roads that may 

impact park lands (sec. 9.2.1.2.2). 

Visitor facilities within park boundaries should 

be situated to stimulate the use of alternative 

transportation systems, bicycle routes, and 

pedestrian walkways (NPS 2006e, sec. 9.1.1.2). 

Park roads should be sensitive to natural and 

cultural resources, and they should provide for 

safe and efficient travel (sec. 9.2.1). The National 

Park Service will work with other governmental 

authorities to maintain non-NPS roads consistent with park goals (sec. 9.2.1.2). It will also 

work with other governments to minimize the 

impacts of traffic on park resources and values 

and to accommodate necessary commercial 

traffic (sec. 9.2.1.2.1). 

Walks and trails are to be sited to reduce conflicts with automobiles and incompatible uses, to 

allow for a satisfying experience, to allow 

accessibility by the greatest number of people, 

and to protect park resources. Heavily used 

walks will be surfaced for safety, accessibility for 

persons with disabilities, resource protection, 

and/or erosion control (sec. 9.2.2). 

Bicycle trails are to be considered an alternative 

to motor vehicle access. They can be integrated 

with roads when determined safe and feasible 

(sec. 9.2.2.4). 

Parking areas are to be located so that they do 

not unacceptably intrude (by sight, sound or 

other impact) on park resources or values. They 

should be limited to the smallest size and 

designed to accommodate other modes as well 

as parking motorized vehicles (sec. 9.2.4). 

IMPACTS COMMON TO ALL 

ALTERNATIVES

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Impacts on Visitor Access 

The National Park Service would work with the 

Washington Area Metropolitan Transportation 

Authority to add “National Mall” to the Smithsonian Metro station name to facilitate public 

access. The impact of this change would be longterm, major, and beneficial since it would affect 

the majority of visitors and improve their ability 

to identify and access the National Mall. 

Impacts on Motorized Uses and the Road 

System 

Continuing to redesign tour bus drop-off and 

pickup locations and to redesign the road system 

near the Thomas Jefferson Memorial to better 

accommodate tour buses, vehicular access, and 

pedestrian access for bus passengers would result in long-term, moderate, beneficial impacts 

because most tour buses would be affected. The 

National Park Service would work with tour bus 

companies to address the impacts of trash from 

tour bus passengers. Measures would include 

efforts to reduce the volume of waste and the 

provision of appropriate trash containers and a 

recycling program at tour bus drop-offs. Impacts 

would be long-term, moderate, and beneficial 

because better trash management would improve the appearance for the majority of visitors. 

The National Park Service would continue to 

work with the city and the local business community to provide an appropriate amount of 

convenient parking for tour buses and visitors. 

Parking would comply with policies of the 

National Park Service, the National Capital 

Planning Commission, and the District of Columbia. Parking would be designed so as not to 

intrude on park resources or values, and it 

would not result in an unacceptable level of 

noise or unpleasant odors. Any parking would 

be in areas capable of withstanding the impacts 

of parking. 

Because the monumental core is well served by 

public transportation, providing less parking 

would be consistent with transit-oriented transportation systems. Resulting impacts on tour bus 

 443 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

parking would be long-term, moderate to major, 

and adverse, affecting most tour buses until a 

citywide strategy was implemented. The impact 

on visitor parking would be long-term, minor to 

moderate, and beneficial because only 25% to 

30% of visitors are motorists. 

Conclusion 

The impacts of actions common to all alternatives would generally be long-term, moderate to 

major, and beneficial as a result of adding the 

National Mall name to the Smithsonian Metro 

station, continuing to redesign tour bus drop-off 

and pickup locations, addressing the impacts of 

trash from tour bus passengers, and working 

with the city and the local business community 

to provide an appropriate amount of convenient 

parking for tour buses and visitors. However, 

temporary to long-term, minor to major, adverse 

impacts would result from constructing previously approved projects, which could interrupt 

the local transportation system. 

IMPACTS OF THE NO-ACTION 

ALTERNATIVE

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Under the no-action alternative the National 

Park Service would continue present measures 

of responding to increased demand for personal 

vehicle access and parking. Since the 1960s the 

city has increasingly emphasized public transit to 

provide more convenient and energy-efficient 

access. Other less consumptive and healthy 

modes of circulation such as walking and 

bicycling have not been emphasized, so 

comparable amenities have not been provided. 

Impacts on Visitor Access to the National 

Mall 

Access to the National Mall by various public 

transportation systems (Metro system, premium 

circulator bus service, and public bus routes) 

would continue to meet the needs of two-thirds 

of visitors. Seven taxicab / pedicab pickup locations would continue to provide options for 

visitors who need some form of transportation 

and are not using a tour service or public transit. 

Parking for visitors with disabilities would 

continue to exceed the standards of the Americans with Disabilities Act, but would remain 

insufficient in areas such as the World War II 

Memorial, which attracts large numbers of 

elderly people who may have difficulty walking. 

Wheelchairs would remain available at five 

locations, providing access to six memorials; but 

limiting use to these areas would not be convenient for people who may want to visit multiple locations or walk between them. 

In summary, visitor access would remain easy 

for the majority of visitors largely because of the 

convenient transportation system, but it would 

remain less convenient to motorists and tour 

buses. The long-term impacts on visitor access 

would be moderate and adverse because the 

demand for tour bus drop-off and pickup 

locations would continue to grow, resulting in 

more vehicle congestion as buses circulate or 

wait for pickup and drop-off spots. 

Impacts on the Pedestrian Environment 

Walking would continue to be the most popular 

way for visitors to move between the large number of attractions on and near the National Mall, 

but the pedestrian environment would remain 

dominated or interrupted by roads, traffic, and 

related noise. 

Many walks would continue to be too narrow 

for the level of use, resulting in social trails adjacent to many walks. In addition, the pedestrian 

environment offers less than optimum accessibility, safety, and surface conditions, and desired 

amenities such as shaded seating, drinking fountains, and restrooms are not always within a reasonable range of a 5- to 10-minute walk (or 

about 2,000 feet). 

Walking surface materials would remain uncoordinated and would distract from a coherent 

pedestrian circulation system and identity. 

Surface conditions have deteriorated in a 

number of areas, and walks may be uneven or 

patched. Gravel walks would continue to be 

difficult for people with disabilities and others, 

and the attendant dust would generally contribute to a less pleasant environment and could 

affect the breathing or health of visitors. 

444
Access and Circulation: Impacts of the No-Action Alternative 

Circulation — No-Action 

Alternative 

11x17 

 445 
This page has been left blank intentionally. 
Access and Circulation: Impacts of the No-Action Alternative 

Stop signs and stop lights would remain the 

primary methods to slow traffic and accommodate pedestrian crossings. Striped crosswalks are 

provided at designated crossing points and 

intersections. Crosswalk timing continues to be 

too short for many visitors, and visitors would 

continue to jaywalk or take shortcuts that could 

endanger them or degrade park resources by 

creating social trails. 

In summary, the long-term impacts on the 

pedestrian environment would become moderate to major and adverse because walkways 

and amenities were not designed to accommodate current high-use levels, walkways need to 

be repaired, and the pedestrian experience is 

overwhelmed by roadways and vehicle traffic. 

Present conditions do not achieve the desired 

conditions for pedestrians, and many common 

best practices and sustainable approaches are 

not taken advantage of. 

Impacts on Bicycle Users 

Bicycling would continue as a popular means of 

commuting as well as recreation. Bicycling frequently takes place on the National Mall on the 

same walks used by pedestrians, and generally 

the walks are not wide enough to accommodate 

both uses and pedestrians travel at much slower 

speeds. While most bicyclists have some form of 

bell, pedestrians distracted by sights may not 

react in time. 

The Washington Area Bicycle Association would 

continue to work to improve bicycling opportunities and safety. Bicycle parking during large 

events and national celebrations would continue 

to be staffed by local volunteers and NPS staff. 

The use of walkways by pedestrians and 

bicyclists does not facilitate safety or convenience for the large numbers of bicycle users, and 

bicycling as a green and nonpolluting mode of 

transportation would not be fully supported. 

Despite the recent addition of more bicycle 

racks, over the long term impacts would be 

moderate and adverse because of inadequate 

facilities and routes for bicyclists, unsafe riding 

conditions, and an increased potential for 

conflicts with pedestrians. 

Impacts on Motorists 

An estimated 300,000 vehicles or more would 

continue to traverse surface streets in the National Mall on a daily basis. The Tidal Basin area 

would remain cut off from the remainder of the 

National Mall by the commuter road system, as 

would the Watergate area and East Potomac 

Park. 

Awkward angled intersections on Independence 

and Maine avenues result in vehicles weaving 

between lanes to get into the desired lane. The 

road system would continue to be used by two 

distinctly different groups — commuters and 

visitors, which typically travel at different 

speeds. Commuters are very familiar with the 

roads and generally exceed the posted speed 

limit. Visitors not familiar with the roads may be 

distracted by sights or the desire to find parking. 

In summary, roads and motorists would continue to dominate the circulation system. 

Impacts over the life of the plan would be longterm, moderate to major, and adverse because 

traffic congestion around the National Mall 

would continue to increase and no actions 

would be taken to improve traffic flow and to 

create safer conditions for pedestrians and 

bicyclists. 

Cumulative Impacts 

Past Actions 

Circulation on the National Mall is an integral 

component of the city’s circulation system. 

Circulator and other public buses, tour buses, 

sightseeing buses, and taxis operate on roads 

within the National Mall. The Metrorail subway 

system crossed under the National Mall and 

nearby, and several Metro stations provide 

convenient access. 

Circulation on the National Mall was affected by 

the 1973 “Washington Mall Plan: Circulation 

Systems” (Skidmore, Owings and Merrill 1973), 

which closed Washington and Adams drives on 

the Mall and converted them to gravel walks. 

Also, 2nd, 9th, and 12th streets were tunneled 

under the Mall. The plan proposed a visitor 

transportation system, Tourmobile, which was 

begun by the National Park Service in 1969, but 

the proposal for a pedestrian- and bicycleoriented National Mall free of surface parking 

 447 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

was not achieved. Dedicated Tourmobile roadways were to have been shared with bicyclists, 

but these roadways have since been removed. 

Additional pedestrian amenities were recommended. During this era the subway system was 

also developed. The cumulative impact has been 

long-term, moderate to major, and beneficial, 

primarily as a result of public and visitor transit 

improvements but long-term, moderate, and 

adverse because other circulation goals for the 

National Mall were not achieved. 

Present Actions 

Ongoing roadwork and circulation improvements are cyclic and include several roadway 

and resurfacing projects that were previously 

discussed, including 

• National Mall Road Improvements 

• Constitution Avenue 

• Lincoln Memorial Circle Roadway Project 

• Ohio Drive 

The cumulative impact of these projects would 

be long-term, minor to moderate, and beneficial, 

primarily as a result of general improvements 

that would be noticed by many users. 

Construction of previously approved projects 

(Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial, Vietnam 

Veterans Memorial Center, the National Museum of African American History and Culture) 

could interrupt the transportation system, as 

could the implementation of projects common 

to all alternatives, such as the Thomas Jefferson 

perimeter security, the Potomac Park levee, 

ongoing road projects, and future memorials 

outside the Reserve. Resulting impacts on 

transportation and circulation would be temporary to long-term, minor to major, and adverse. 

The National Park Service has begun updating 

and replacing its orientation maps and developing a better sign system to improve pedestrian 

wayfinding and information coordinated with 

NPS sign standards. The project will be completed in phases. The impact of installing a new 

system will be long-term, major, and beneficial 

since it will positively affect the experience of all 

visitors and greatly help them plan and find their 

way around the National Mall. Some potential 

variations or additions to the system, such as 

electronic daily interpretive program signs, are 

discussed under “Impacts on Opportunities for 

Information and Education” in the “Visitor 

Experience” section. 

As proposed in the 2006 Environmental Assessment for a Visitor Transportation Study, replacing the interpretive visitor transportation service 

would result in long-term, moderate to major, 

beneficial impacts on visitor experiences, 

primarily as a result of more convenient and 

frequent two-way transportation service around 

the National Mall that would be integrated into 

the public transportation system. The changes 

would be readily apparent to visitors, and would 

offer an exceptional level of convenience. 

The National Park Service, as a result of a donation, has recently instituted a bike-sharing program for staff. The bike stations (at park headquarters, the National Capital Region, the I 

Street office, and the Interior Building) are 

powered by solar power and use a card system. 

This action supports use of sustainable modes of 

transportation and supports local bicycle and 

transportation goals. The cumulative impacts on 

transportation would be long-term, negligible, 

and beneficial; however, the impact in terms of 

setting a precedent for the National Park Service 

as a leader in sustainable practices would be 

long-term, moderate, and beneficial. 

Reasonably Foreseeable Actions 

The expressway, bridge, and road network that 

was developed in the 1960s could be revised to 

dramatically improve access, not only for commuters and visitors but also for other modes of 

transportation. Projects that are being considered include the following: 

• The 14th Street Bridge Corridor — The 14th 

Street bridge corridor study area includes 

all the I-395 bridges, the 14th and 15th 

street corridors north to Constitution 

Avenue, the Thomas Jefferson and George 

Mason memorials, and the southern and 

eastern portions of the Tidal Basin from 

Raoul Wallenberg Place to Inlet Bridge. 

• 10th Street Overlook Transportation Facility 

— A multi-level parking and intermodal 

transportation facility below the 10th Street 

Overlook would provide approximately 

448
Access and Circulation: Impacts of the No-Action Alternative 

1,200 parking spaces and a terminal and 

parking facility for commuter and tour 

buses. The Monumental Core Framework 

Plan also proposes a multi-modal and 

transfer facility under 10th Street closer to 

the L’Enfant Metro station. Either location 

could address visitor parking and tour bus 

needs near the National Mall. 

• Maryland Avenue — Rail lines along the 

avenue could be realigned to improve road 

and pedestrian access.

• Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway — Rehabilitation of the parkway would be continued from Virginia Avenue to P Street Bridge

(NPS 2005e). Road, bicycle, and pedestrian 

access would be improved along the parkway. 

• I-66 / Potomac River Freeway — Proposals 

discuss decking the Potomac River Freeway 

and improving access to the Kennedy Center, with links to the Northwest Rectangle 

and the Lincoln Memorial. 

• Monumental Core Framework Plan — The 

NCPC Framework Plan proposes a new 

Metro station with entries in East Potomac 

Park convenient to the Thomas Jefferson 

Memorial, and additional Metro entries at 

the Federal Triangle and the Navy / Archives / Penn Quarter station. These actions 

would substantially improve convenient 

transit access to the National Mall. The 

plan also proposes decking over the Southeast and Southwest freeways, improving 

pedestrian access to the Federal Triangle, 

and restoring street grids in some areas. 

• Smithsonian Institution Mall-wide Perimeter 

Security Improvements — Perimeter security improvements would extend the curve 

of Jefferson Drive north of the Smithsonian 

Castle, farther into the Mall area. This 

would require revisions to pedestrian 

circulation in areas that are eroded by foot 

traffic, and it would affect several mature 

elm trees. The project would provide opportunities to improve pedestrian circulation, resulting in a long-term, major, beneficial impact, but at the same time road 

changes would bring vehicles and related 

sights, sounds, and smells closer to the center of the Mall, resulting in a long-term, 

moderate, adverse impact on the pedestrian 

environment. 

• Union Station — Private developers owning 

air rights at Union Station could provide 

additional tour bus parking facilities. 

Cumulative Impact Summary 

The National Mall and its road and pedestrian 

circulation system would continue to be an essential part of the urban circulation of Washington, D.C. As the result of past actions, the city 

has a well-developed multimodal transportation 

system (rail, subway, bus, visitor transit). Some 

past actions moved toward developing a more 

pedestrian-oriented environment by converting 

Washington and Adams drives to walks, with a 

long-term, moderate, beneficial impact on 

pedestrian circulation despite gravel surfacing 

that generates dust and is difficult for many 

people to navigate. Controlled access roads (I395 corridor, Potomac River Freeway) also 

brought a great deal of commuter traffic into the 

park on a daily basis, introducing potential 

conflicts between commuters and motorists 

visiting the park as well as pedestrians and 

bicycle riders. 

Several current projects would improve the 

condition of park roads and related walks or 

trails (Constitution Avenue, Madison Drive, 

Ohio Drive). Under an NPS Centennial initiative 

the park is currently replacing its sign system 

with a coordinated series of orientation maps, 

pedestrian guides, and other signs. Implementing travel demand recommendations from the 

2006 Visitor Transportation Study would help 

increase parking for visitors by metering NPS 

on-street parking, which tends to be used by 

local residents instead of visitors. 

Constructing future road improvements to 

consolidate and relocate the I-395 and 14th 

Street bridge corridors, along with a new subway 

station near the Thomas Jefferson Memorial, 

could better serve East Potomac Park and the 

southwest waterfront as well as local recreation 

users. Future actions also include an improved 

visitor transportation system; improved access 

to Maryland Avenue, the southwest waterfront, 

the Kennedy Center, and the Federal Triangle; 

additional parking for visitors and tour buses; 

simplified vehicular circulation; and fewer 

 449 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

barriers to circulation. Taken as whole, despite 

gravel walks and commuter routes through the 

National Mall, the impact of past, present and 

reasonably foreseeable projects on access and 

circulation would be long-term, major, and 

beneficial. 

Impacts under the no-action alternative would 

be long-term, moderate to major, and adverse 

because of more vehicle congestion on the National Mall as buses circulate or wait for pickup 

and drop-off spots, and inadequate facilities for 

pedestrians and bicyclists. These impacts, 

combined with the impacts of past, present, and 

reasonably foreseeable actions, would result in 

long-term, major, beneficial impacts that would 

affect a very large number of motorists who 

drive through the area, as well as bicyclists and 

pedestrians, offsetting the adverse impacts of the 

no-action alternative. 

Conclusion 

There would be no change to access and circulation under the no-action alternative, but over 

the long-term impacts would be moderate to 

major and adverse because visitor access would 

become more difficult as use increased; the 

pedestrian environment would become less 

desirable with inadequate walkway surfaces and 

amenities and more impacts from vehicle traffic; 

facilities would not be improved for bicyclists; 

and increased traffic congestion would affect 

both motorists and visitors. However, cumulative impacts would be long-term, major, and 

beneficial because of improved maps and wayfinding signs, an improved visitor transportation 

service, and easier access for motorists, Metro 

users, and bicyclists. These impacts would affect 

a very large number of motorists who drive 

through the area, as well as bicyclists and pedestrians, offsetting the adverse impacts of the noaction alternative. 

IMPACTS OF THE PREFERRED 

ALTERNATIVE

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

The preferred alternative would combine ideas 

from all the alternatives to provide a quality 

experience on the National Mall. It would protect the historic landscape, increase diverse 

education, create a welcoming atmosphere for 

all visitors, incorporate universal design to meet 

the needs of all visitors, and accommodate high 

levels of use. 

Impacts on Visitor Access to the National 

Mall 

As described for the no-action alternative, various modes of convenient public access (Metro 

system, premium circulator bus service, and 

public bus routes) would continue to meet the 

needs of two-thirds of visitors. Seven taxicab / 

pedicab pickup locations would continue to 

provide options for visitors who need some 

form of transportation and are not using a tour 

service or public transit. However, the preferred 

alternative would differ by undertaking actions 

to improve visitor convenience and providing 

supplementary services. 

The National Park Service would coordinate 

with local commercial parking garages to provide additional visitor parking, with visitor valet 

or shuttle service to and from designated 

locations on the National Mall. This program 

would make it easier for visitors to go to several 

destinations during the day and then get picked 

up at an identified spot to return to their vehicles. 

Adding parking for visitors with disabilities on 

the centrally located Washington Monument 

grounds, and making this site a one-stop location for all-day rental of equipment (such as 

wheelchairs and electric scooters) that could be 

used throughout the National Mall would 

increase convenience for visitors with disabilities. In addition, roving courtesy shuttles would 

provide transportation for those in need to the 

closest shuttle, transit, or visitor service locations. In cooperation with the U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, improving directions and the 

pedestrian access route to the Smithsonian 

Metro station’s accessible elevator entrance (on 

the north side of Independence Avenue at 12th 

Street) would improve convenience for families 

with strollers, people with disabilities, and 

others (nearly 25% of visitors have difficulty 

walking long distances because it is too tiring, 

they have young children, or they have a 

disability). 

 

450
Access and Circulation: Impacts of the Preferred Alternative 

Circulation — Preferred 

Alternative 

 451 
This page has been left blank intentionally. 
Access and Circulation: Impacts of the Preferred Alternative 

Redesigning the Tidal Basin parking lot would 

improve pedestrian access. 

Compared to the no-action alternative, the 

impacts of the preferred alternative on convenient visitor access would be long-term, 

major, and beneficial, far better meeting NPS 

policies and supporting local transportation 

plans and policies. Beneficial elements include 

providing a convenient shuttle to and from local 

garages or related valet parking with designated 

pickup spots; increasing onsite transportation 

options for visitors with courtesy shuttles; and 

increasing parking and transportation-related 

services for visitors with disabilities (wheelchair 

and scooter rentals). 

Impacts on the Pedestrian Environment 

Under the preferred alternative the pedestrian 

environment would be dramatically improved 

compared to the no-action alternative. Walking 

surfaces would be improved, walks would be 

widened, pedestrian lighting would be 

increased, more amenities would be provided, 

and crosswalks would be enhanced. While basic 

historic circulation patterns would remain, 

public access on the National Mall would 

emphasize pedestrian use; other circulation 

modes, such as driving and bicycling, would still 

be accommodated, but within a parklike setting. 

It is assumed that most people will choose to 

walk if a destination is within 5 to 10 minutes 

and if there is limited parking, traffic congestion, 

or parking fees. The National Capital Planning 

Commission defines a reasonable walking distance as 2,000 feet, or about 0.4 mile. Pedestrian 

speeds range from 3 mph for adults walking at a 

brisk pace to 2 mph or less for children, seniors, 

and people with disabilities. It will take an individual walking at a brisk pace about 10 minutes 

to traverse 0.4 mile, but it will take children or an 

individual who has difficulty walking up to 25–

30 minutes or longer to walk the same distance. 

A comfortable, walkable environment would 

include universally accessible walking surfaces 

to better meet the needs of all people, including 

those with disabilities. Using a coordinated 

hierarchy of paving materials would create a 

sense of place and identity, as well as help unify 

the National Mall. This action would make it 

easier for pedestrians to find their way around 

by creating an easy to follow system of recognizable walks and paths. The palette of paving 

materials would use quality materials commensurate with the importance of the National Mall 

and could include surfaces appropriate for 

runners and joggers. 

Entrances to the National Mall would provide 

clear, safe, and pleasant pedestrian transitions to 

and from adjacent areas and along a continuous 

riverfront walk and trail system. Walks in several 

areas, such as those along the Tidal Basin and 

entrances to the Korean War Veterans Memorial, would be widened to accommodate high 

levels of use, improving circulation flow and 

reducing crowding. Walks near some 

intersections would also be enlarged to safely 

accommodate more people. 

Developing a coordinated lighting plan would 

help pedestrians to more safely experience the 

evocative and emotional nighttime character of 

the National Mall with its lighted monuments 

and memorials. Walkway lighting would be 

emphasized to provide for greater nighttime 

enjoyment and safety, but would not intrude on 

the lighting of the major memorials. Lighting 

would be added to those areas where it is 

missing, such as the Tidal Basin, to encourage 

pleasant evening strolls. Temporary fixtures 

along the elm walkways flanking the Lincoln 

Reflecting Pool would be replaced, and more 

even lighting coverage would be provided along 

the Mall. All of these actions would make it 

easier for pedestrians to move between 

commemorative destinations during evening 

hours. 

Amenities for pedestrians, such as visitor facilities, drinking fountains, restrooms, shelters, 

seating, emergency call buttons, and wayside 

exhibits would further enhance the pedestrian 

experience. Many of these facilities would be 

grouped for convenience and to create pleasant 

resting points, and they would be within a 

reasonable walking distance so visitors could 

expect where to find the next facility grouping. 

To increase pedestrian enjoyment, amenities 

could include small-scale features, such as 

seasonal plantings or water elements where 

pedestrians could cool off. Additional seating 

would be provided for visitors to sit and relax, 

with both sunny and shaded seating. Seating 

 453 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

locations would take advantage of views or 

educational settings. Seating would also be 

provided near major entrances, such as the 

Metro or to meet the needs of groups. 

Crosswalk improvements would be part of the 

coordinated paving system and would emphasize safe road crossings, as well as connections to 

museums. Pedestrian and motorist crossing 

times at stoplights would be more equitable, and 

longer crossing times would allow more pedestrians or slower moving pedestrians to safely 

cross wide roads. Traffic-calming approaches, 

such as raised crosswalks or specialty paving, 

would help identify pedestrian-crossing zones. 

Compared to the no-action alternative, the 

preferred alternative would have long-term, 

major, beneficial impacts on the pedestrian 

environment because the experience of virtually 

every visitor would be improved and made safer. 

Quality and pedestrian circulation would be 

emphasized, walking surfaces improved and 

coordinated, walks widened, additional lighting 

provided, and crosswalk conditions enhanced, 

including longer crossing times. 

Impacts on Bicycle Users 

In terms of bicycle riding, the preferred alternative, compared to the no-action alternative, 

would support and encourage bicycling as a 

healthful form of recreation as well as an alternative transportation mode. Developing a system of bike lanes or routes separate from roads 

or pedestrian walkways, using traffic-calming 

measures, and giving bicyclists priority at intersections would all improve bicycling opportunities and safety. The bicycling experience would 

be further improved by enhancing connections 

to bicycle trails in East Potomac Park, Rock 

Creek Park, the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal, the 

George Washington Memorial Parkway, and the 

southwest Washington, D.C., area. The National 

Park Service would work with the city to implement compatible sections of its Bicycle Master 

Plan and bicycle rental program. 

The number and distribution of bicycle racks on 

the National Mall would be improved. More 

NPS-guided bicycling tours would be provided. 

The National Park Service would also work with 

others to better fulfill the goals of the D.C. 

Bicycle Master Plan, with access to bridges and 

an onsite coordinated bicycle rental program. 

Like the no-action alternative, the preferred 

alternative would continue to encourage bicycle 

parking for events and offsite bicycle rentals and 

guided bicycling tours to meet the needs of some 

visitors. 

Compared to the no-action alternative, the 

preferred alternative would have long-term, 

major, beneficial impacts on bicycle users 

because separate trails or routes would provide a 

safer, more enjoyable environment, encouraging 

this alternative circulation mode. Improved 

bicycling opportunities, including facilities, 

tours, and bicycle rentals, would also support 

local planning goals to reduce vehicle use. 

Impacts on Motorists 

The current road system would remain largely 

intact under the preferred alternative, but the 

park setting for roads would be emphasized, and 

pedestrians and bicycles would be given more 

priority and additional crossing times at intersections. Traffic-calming measures would be 

used to slow traffic to posted speed limits but 

still maintain free-flow traffic movements. As a 

result, the circulation network would be safer 

for all users. The vicinity of Maine Avenue and 

East Basin Drive would be redesigned to facilitate better traffic flow for both east- and westbound access to I-395, and to accommodate 

improvements for bicycles, NPS service vehicles, 

and pedestrians. Ohio Drive would also be 

redesigned to accommodate bicycle lanes and 

parking. A new vehicular entry would be developed to the U.S. Park Police stables, and the 

related intersection would be coordinated with 

that for the future Martin Luther King, Jr. 

Memorial. Construction on park roads under 

the preferred alternative, as well as access 

improvements to I-395 and Maine Avenue, 

would result in short-term, moderate, adverse 

impacts because of the number of people 

affected. Long-term impacts on motorized and 

nonmotorized users would be moderate and 

beneficial. 

Compared to the no-action alternative, the 

preferred alternative would have both beneficial 

and adverse impacts on motorized uses. Slowing 

traffic to current posted speeds, equalizing 

454
Access and Circulation: Impacts of Alternative A 

stoplight times for pedestrians and bicycles as 

well as vehicle traffic, and installing trafficcalming measures at crosswalks would result in 

some inconvenience to through-travelers and 

commuters. Based on average annual daily 

traffic counts from 2007, on a daily basis this 

would likely affect over 40,000 vehicles on 

Independence Avenue; over 25,000 on 17th 

Street; nearly 40,000 combined on 3rd, 4th, and 

7th streets; approximately 46,000 on 14th Street; 

and about 14,000 on 15th Street. Because of the 

number of people affected, impacts would be 

long-term, major, and adverse. Improvements to 

traffic circulation would result in long-term, 

moderate to major, beneficial impacts because of 

improved access and traffic flow near I-395 and 

Maine Avenue and East Basin Drive, which 

would affect approximately 56,000 vehicle 

drivers on a daily basis. 

Cumulative Impacts 

Past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions 

would be the same as those discussed for the noaction alternative and would be long-term, major, and beneficial. Actions under the preferred 

alternative would result in long-term, major, 

beneficial impacts because of a greater emphasis 

on a pedestrian-oriented environment, along 

with improved, safer, and more comfortable 

walking and bicycle environments. Altogether 

cumulative impacts would be long-term, major, 

and beneficial, with a substantial contribution 

from the preferred alternative. 

Conclusion 

The preferred alternative would result in longterm, major, beneficial impacts because of a 

greater emphasis on a pedestrian-oriented environment; improved, safer, and more comfortable walking and bicycle environments; separate 

bicycle routes or lanes; improved roadway 

access in the southeast area of the Tidal Basin; 

and more options and access for people with 

disabilities. These impacts, combined with the 

impacts of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions, would result in long-term, major, 

beneficial cumulative impacts because of better 

wayfinding aids, an improved visitor transportation system, future road improvements for 

motorists and Metro users, and more 

convenient access for pedestrians, bicyclists, 

families with children, and people with disabilities. The preferred alternative would make a 

substantial contribution to cumulative impacts. 

IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE A

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Alternative A is focused on preserving the 

historic landscape and providing education. 

Impacts on Visitor Access to the National 

Mall 

Under alternative A, like the no-action alternative, a variety of convenient public mass transit 

(subway system, premium circulator bus service, 

and public bus routes) would continue to meet 

the needs of two-thirds of visitors. Seven taxicab 

/ pedicab pickup locations would continue to 

provide options for visitors who need some 

form of transportation and are not using a 

tour/sightseeing service or public transit. 

Wheelchairs would remain available at five 

locations, providing access to six memorials. 

However, limiting use to these areas would not 

be convenient for people who may want to visit 

multiple locations or move between them. 

Impacts on the Pedestrian Environment 

Increasing pedestrian crossing times at intersections and providing more pedestrian amenities, such as seating, would improve the pedestrian experience, resulting in long-term, major, 

beneficial impacts. However, retaining existing 

paving materials would make access difficult for 

families pushing strollers or individuals in 

wheelchairs. As a result, the needs of some user 

groups would not be met, resulting in long-term, 

moderate, adverse impacts. The National Mall 

would continue to lack a cohesive and unified 

pedestrian environment that is convenient and 

easily understandable. Even though there would 

be beneficial impacts from longer pedestrian 

crossing times and increased pedestrian amenities such as seating, the overall impacts of alternative A on the pedestrian environment, 

compared to the no-action alternative, would be 

long-term, moderate, and beneficial. 

 455 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Impacts on Bicycle Users 

Bicycling would continue to be a popular 

commuter method as well as a recreational 

pursuit on the National Mall; however, no 

additional facilities would be provided. 

Bicyclists would share walks with pedestrians, 

resulting in conflicts because walks are not wide 

enough to accommodate both uses and pedestrians travel at much slower speeds. While most 

bicyclists have some form of bell, pedestrians 

distracted by sights may not react in time. 

The Washington Area Bicycle Association would 

continue to work to improve bicycling opportunities and safety. Bicycle parking during largescale events and national celebrations would 

continue to be staffed by local volunteers. 

Impacts on bicycle users would be similar to the 

no-action alternative and would be long-term, 

moderate, and adverse because of sharing walkways with pedestrians and riding in traffic on 

narrow roads. Also, local planning goals to 

increase nonmotorized uses would not be met. 

Impacts on Motorists 

Slowing through-traffic to posted speeds as a 

result of longer crossing times and traffic-calming measures at crosswalks would result in some 

inconvenience to through-travelers and commuters. Based on average annual daily traffic 

counts from 2007, on a daily basis this would 

likely affect over 40,000 vehicles on Independence Avenue; over 25,000 on 17th Street; nearly 

40,000 combined on 3rd, 4th, and 7th streets; 

approximately 46,000 on 14th Street; and about 

14,000 on 15th Street. 

Compared to the no-action alternative, the 

impacts of alternative A on motorized uses and 

the road system would be long-term, moderate 

to major, and adverse. 

Cumulative Impacts 

Impacts from past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions would be the same as those 

discussed under the no-action alternative and 

would be long-term, major, and beneficial. Actions under alternative A would increase 

crossing times for pedestrians, but overall 

facilities and amenities for pedestrians and 

bicyclists would not be improved. Taken 

altogether, cumulative impacts would be longterm, major, and beneficial, largely as a result of 

present and reasonably foreseeable actions 

related to the Visitor Transportation Study as 

well as actions occurring outside the National 

Mall. Alternative A would make a small beneficial contribution to cumulative impacts 

because of a somewhat improved pedestrian 

environment on the National Mall. 

Conclusion 

Alternative A would have long-term, moderate, 

beneficial impacts on visitor access to the Mall 

and the pedestrian environment resulting from 

increased crosswalk timing and additional pedestrian amenities; however, impacts on bicycle 

users would be long-term, moderate, and adverse because unsafe riding conditions would 

continue. These impacts, in combination with 

the impacts of past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions, would result in long-term, 

major, beneficial cumulative impacts, largely as a 

result of an improved visitor transportation 

service, as well as present and future projects 

occurring outside the National Mall. Alternative 

A would make a small beneficial contribution to 

cumulative impacts with a somewhat improved 

pedestrian environment on the National Mall. 

IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE B

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Alternative B would provide a welcoming and 

accessible atmosphere to accommodate very 

high levels of use. If it was determined that 

underground parking garages would be feasible 

based on engineering, security, geotechnical, 

and economic studies, transportation-related 

impacts, including those on the Metro system, 

tour bus needs, and vehicle circulation, would be 

conducted as part of a project-specific 

environmental analysis. 

Impacts on Visitor Access to the National 

Mall 

As described for the no-action alternative, a variety of convenient public mass transit (subway 

system, premium circulator bus service, and 

public bus routes) would continue to meet the 

456
Access and Circulation: Impacts of Alternative B 

Circulation — Alternative A 

 457 
This page has been left blank intentionally. 
Access and Circulation: Impacts of Alternative B 

Circulation — Alternative B 

 459 
This page has been left blank intentionally. 
Access and Circulation: Impacts of Alternative B 

needs of two-thirds of visitors. Seven taxicab / 

pedicab pickup locations would continue to 

provide options for visitors who need some 

form of transportation and are not using a tour 

service or public transit. 

Compared to the no-action alternative, alternative B would identify specific locations for additional visitor parking. If determined feasible by 

engineering, security, geotechnical, and economic studies, an underground facility for paid 

visitor parking would be constructed between 

12th and 15th streets, which would be entered 

from 15th Street. All surface parking on the Mall 

would be removed. Underground parking would 

also be provided on the south Washington 

Monument grounds, and a pedestrian tunnel 

would provide access under Independence Avenue. These actions would require redesigns of 

Independence and Maine avenues, and the Tidal 

Basin parking lot would be removed. Additional 

or underground parking would be consistent 

with NPS and local transportation policies to the 

extent that it would not be visible, but it would 

be inconsistent with local transportation policies 

that support the use of outlying parking areas 

and mass transit. Garage portals would need to 

be very carefully designed so as not to be visually 

and physically disruptive to visitors, especially 

since some could be visible from the east windows of the Washington Monument. The cost of 

constructing such facilities is extremely high 

($30,000–$50,000 per space; Parking Design 

Group 2008), which would be reflected in high 

visitor parking fees. 

The National Park Service would also add parking for visitors with disabilities on the centrally 

located Washington Monument grounds, as 

described for the preferred alternative. This site 

would offer a single accessible location for 

people with disabilities to rent equipment such 

as wheelchairs and scooters that could be used 

all day around the National Mall. These actions 

would make public access more convenient and 

improve access opportunities for those with 

disabilities, or the approximately 25% of visitors 

who have difficulty walking long distances. 

Compared to the no-action alternative, the 

impacts of alternative B on visitor access would 

be long-term, major, and beneficial because 

parking would potentially be doubled; however, 

these benefits would be offset by the high cost of 

constructing underground parking garages and 

high parking fees. The impacts of increased 

services for visitors with disabilities (additional 

parking, wheelchair and scooter rentals) would 

be long-term, minor, and beneficial since it 

would affect a smaller group of people. 

Impacts on the Pedestrian Environment 

Constructing pedestrian tunnels under Independence Avenue and 14th Street, which would also 

provide access to parking garages, and constructing pedestrian bridges at 15th Street instead of increasing crosswalk timing, would 

reduce potential conflicts with vehicle traffic. 

However, pedestrian tunnels and bridges could 

be less convenient for pedestrians and elevator 

access would be required for people in wheelchairs or using personal transportation vehicles. 

Visitors would still be able to cross streets at 

grade, and it is likely that they would continue to 

use these more convenient crossings. 

Other actions would be similar to those described for the preferred alternative. While the 

basic historic circulation patterns would be 

retained, the National Mall would be made more 

pedestrian friendly, and vehicular traffic would 

be accommodated within a parklike setting. A 

comfortable, walkable environment would 

include universally accessible walking surfaces, 

with a coordinated hierarchy of paving materials 

to create a sense of place and identity to help 

unify the National Mall. These actions would 

make it easier for pedestrians to find their way 

by creating a system of recognizable walks and 

paths. The palette of paving materials would use 

quality materials commensurate with the importance of the National Mall. Pedestrian entries 

would provide clear, safe and pleasant pedestrian transitions to and from areas adjacent to 

the National Mall. Walks along the Tidal Basin 

would be widened, improving the enjoyment 

and circulation flow of pedestrians. New eastside entrance walks to the Korean War Veterans 

Memorial would make access more convenient 

for pedestrians who would not have to enter 

only on the west side, but this would alter the 

designed approach to the memorial. 

Crosswalk improvements would be part of the 

coordinated paving system and would empha-

 461 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

size safe road crossings, as well as connections to 

museums. Walks near some intersections would 

be enlarged to safely accommodate more people. 

Stoplights would be timed to provide more equal 

time for pedestrians and motorists, allowing 

more people or those who are slower moving to 

safely cross wide roads. Traffic-calming approaches such as raised crosswalks or specialty 

paving would help identify pedestrian crossings. 

A coordinated lighting plan would be developed 

so pedestrians could safely experience the evocative and emotional nighttime character of the 

National Mall with its lighted monuments and 

memorials. Pedestrian lighting would emphasize 

walkway lighting to provide for greater nighttime enjoyment and safety. Lighting would be 

added to those areas where it is missing, such as 

the Tidal Basin, to encourage pleasant evening 

strolls. Temporary fixtures along the elm walkways flanking the Lincoln Reflecting Pool would 

be replaced, and more even lighting coverage 

would be provided along the Mall. All of these 

actions would make it easier for pedestrians to 

move between commemorative destinations 

during evening hours. 

Amenities for pedestrians, such as drinking 

fountains, restrooms, seating, and wayside 

exhibits, would be planned at reasonable walking distances, and they would be sited to provide 

pleasant interludes for people to relax. Pedestrian amenities could include small-scale features such as seasonal plantings or water elements where pedestrians could cool off during 

the summer. Additional seating would include 

both sunny and shady locations that would 

foster the enjoyment of views. Seating would be 

concentrated near major entrances such as the 

Metro station or to meet the needs of groups. 

Compared to the no-action alternative, the 

impacts of alternative B on the pedestrian 

environment would be long-term, major, and 

beneficial because the experience of virtually 

every visitor would be affected with improved 

pedestrian circulation, universally accessible 

paving surfaces, widened walks, additional 

lighting, pedestrian tunnels and bridges to 

separate pedestrians and vehicular traffic, and 

longer crosswalk times. 

Impacts on Bicycle Users 

Alternative B would have the same impacts on 

bicycle users as the no-action alternative, with 

facilities and amenities for bicycling having a 

lower priority than those for pedestrians or 

motorists. Existing bike racks would remain, and 

additional parking would continue to be encouraged at special events. This alternative, however, 

would not support local plans encouraging 

nonpolluting and healthy modes of travel and 

recreation, and it would continue bicyclists’ use 

of pedestrian walkways and motor vehicle roads, 

with resulting use conflicts and unsafe conditions for a large number of bicycle users. 

Impacts on bicycle users would be long-term 

moderate, and adverse, similar to the no-action 

alternative, because neither the needs of bicyclists nor local planning goals would be met. 

Impacts on Motorists 

Under alternative B the current road system 

would remain largely intact, but the fact that the 

roads are in a park setting would be emphasized 

by giving pedestrians more priority and additional crossing time at intersections. Trafficcalming measures would be used to slow traffic 

to posted speed limits but still maintain a free 

flow of traffic. As a result, the circulation network would be safer for all pedestrians and 

motorists. There would likely be slowing of 

traffic on 15th Street as well as Maine Avenue to 

accommodate entrances and exits to underground parking, affecting many thousands of 

commuters on a daily basis. 

The vicinity of Maine Avenue, Raoul Wallenberg 

Place, and East Basin Drive would be redesigned 

to facilitate better traffic flow and access to I395. A new vehicular service entry would be 

developed to the U.S. Park Police stables, with 

the new intersection coordinated with future 

access to the Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial. 

Traffic impacts from construction would be 

short-term, moderate, and adverse because of 

the high number of motorists affected. 

Compared to the no-action alternative, the 

impacts of alternative B on motorized uses 

would be both adverse and beneficial. Impacts 

would be long-term, moderate to major, and 

adverse because through-traffic would be 

462
Access and Circulation: Impacts of Alternative C 

slowed to posted speeds, resulting in some 

inconvenience to through-travelers and commuters. Based on average annual daily traffic 

counts from 2007, on a daily basis this would 

likely affect over 40,000 vehicles on Independence Avenue; over 25,000 on 17th Street; nearly 

40,000 combined on 3rd, 4th, and 7th streets; 

approximately 46,000 on 14th Street; and about 

14,000 on 15th Street. Changes near I-395 / 

Maine Avenue and East Basin Drive would affect 

approximately 56,000 vehicles on a daily basis. 

Cumulative Impacts 

Impacts from past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions would be the same as those 

discussed under the no-action alternative and 

would be long-term, major, and beneficial. 

Actions under alternative B would improve the 

pedestrian experience on the National Mall by 

providing more facilities for pedestrians and 

emphasizing a park experience, resulting in longterm, major, beneficial impacts. All of these 

impacts together would result in long-term, 

major, beneficial cumulative impacts because of 

quality improvements that would provide equity 

between nonmotorized and motorized uses, 

would better meet the needs of transit and tour 

buses, and would improve convenient transit access as well as the visitor transportation system. 

Alternative B would make a substantial beneficial 

contribution to these impacts, although underground parking garages would be inconsistent 

with local transportation planning policies. 

Conclusion 

Alternative B would result in long-term, major, 

beneficial impacts because of improved access, 

underground parking garages, a safer pedestrian 

environment (including crosswalks), and reduced conflicts with traffic. Impacts on bicyclists 

would be long-term, moderate, and adverse 

because neither the needs of bicyclists nor local 

planning goals would be met. These impacts, 

combined with the impacts of past, present, and 

reasonably foreseeable actions, would result in 

long-term, major, beneficial cumulative impacts 

because of improved wayfinding aids, an improved visitor transportation service, and future 

road improvements for motorists and Metro 

users. Alternative B would make a substantial 

beneficial contribution to cumulative impacts. 

IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE C 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Alternative C would focus on urban open space, 

urban ecology, recreation, and healthy lifestyles. 

Impacts on Visitor Access to the National 

Mall 

As described under the no-action alternative, 

various means of convenient public mass transportation (subway system, premium circulator 

bus service, and public bus routes) would continue to meet the needs of two-thirds of National Mall visitors under alternative C. Seven 

taxicab / pedicab pickup locations would 

continue to provide options for visitors who 

need some form of transportation and are not 

using a sightseeing service or public transit. 

Parking for visitors with disabilities would continue to exceed the standards of the Americans 

with Disabilities Act, but would remain insufficient in areas such as the World War II Memorial, which attracts large numbers of elderly 

people. Wheelchairs would remain available at 

five locations, with access to six memorials; but 

limiting use to these areas would not be convenient for people who might want to visit multiple 

locations or walk between them. Compared to 

the no-action alternative, the long-term impacts 

of alternative C on access would be moderate 

and beneficial because more parking would be 

available to visitors, but moderate and adverse 

because parking would no longer be free. 

Impacts on the Pedestrian Environment 

The pedestrian environment under alternative C 

would be considerably different than under the 

no-action alternative. Tunneling 14th Street 

under the Mall would create a larger pedestrianonly area and constructing pedestrian bridges 

over 15th Street would result in a more cohesive 

pedestrian environment. Additionally, portions 

of Maine Avenue would be covered or decked 

over to provide safer and more convenient 

pedestrian access to the Tidal Basin. 

While historic circulation patterns would be 

retained, separate routes would be provided for 

pedestrians and bicyclists, resulting in a safer 

experience for visitors to enjoy the parklike 

 463 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

setting without worrying about hazards from 

bicyclists and vehicle traffic. 

A walkable environment would be created using 

a coordinated hierarchy of paving materials to 

create a sense of place and identity that would 

also unify the National Mall. This would make it 

easier for pedestrians to find their way around 

by means of a system of recognizable walks and 

paths. The palette of paving materials would use 

quality materials commensurate with the 

importance of the National Mall and could 

include surfaces appropriate for runners and 

joggers. Pedestrian entries would provide clear, 

safe, and pleasant pedestrian transitions to and 

from areas adjacent to the National Mall. Walks 

in several areas, such as those along the Tidal 

Basin, would be widened, improving visitor 

enjoyment and pedestrian flow. 

Crosswalk improvements would be part of the 

coordinated paving system and would emphasize safe road crossings as well as connections to 

museums. Times at stoplights would be more 

equal for pedestrians and motorists, allowing 

more pedestrians or slower moving pedestrians 

to safely cross wide roads. 

New east-side entrances would be provided at 

the Korean War Veterans Memorial, as described for alternative B, making access more 

convenient for pedestrians but altering the 

designed approach to the memorial. 

As described for the preferred alternative, 

developing a coordinated lighting plan would 

create a safer pedestrian experience and would 

offer opportunities to experience the nighttime 

character of the National Mall. Pedestrian lighting would emphasize walkway lighting to provide for greater nighttime enjoyment and safety. 

Lighting would be added to those areas where it 

is missing, such as the Tidal Basin, to encourage 

pleasant evening strolls. Temporary fixtures 

along the elm walkways flanking the Lincoln 

Reflecting Pool would be replaced, and more 

even lighting coverage would be provided along 

the Mall. All of these actions would make it 

easier for pedestrians to move between destinations during evening hours. 

Amenities for pedestrians, such as drinking 

fountains, restrooms, seating, and wayside 

exhibits, would be planned at reasonable walking distances to provide pleasant locations to 

relax. Amenities could include small-scale 

features such as seasonal plantings or water 

elements where pedestrians could cool off in 

summer. Additional seating would include both 

sunny and shady locations and would foster 

enjoyment of views. Seating would be concentrated near major entrances such as the Metro 

station and to meet the needs of groups. 

Compared to the no-action alternative, the impacts of alternative C on the pedestrian environment would be long-term, major, and beneficial 

because the experience of virtually every visitor 

would be improved. This would be because of 

safer pedestrian circulation (including a tunneled 14th Street, pedestrian bridges over 15th 

Street, a pedestrian tunnel under Independence 

Avenue, and intersection improvements), 

improved and coordinated walking surfaces, 

widened walks, additional lighting, and more 

pedestrian space over a tunneled 14th Street. 

Impacts on Bicycle Users 

Impacts on bicycle users would be the same as 

the preferred alternative. Alternative C would 

continue to encourage bicycle parking for events 

and off-site bicycle rentals and guided bicycling 

tours would continue to meet the needs of some 

visitors. However, alternative C would support 

and encourage bicycling as a green and healthful 

activity as well as a transportation mode. Developing a system of bike lanes or routes separate 

from roads and pedestrian walkways, instituting 

traffic-calming measures, and giving bicycles 

priority at intersections would all substantially 

improve bicycling opportunities and safety. 

The number of bike racks on the National Mall 

would be increased and the distribution improved. More NPS guided bicycling tours would 

be provided. Connections to bicycling trails in 

East Potomac Park, Rock Creek Park, the 

Chesapeake and Ohio Canal, the George Washington Memorial Parkway, and the southwest 

Washington, D.C., area would be improved. 

The National Park Service would work with 

other agencies and organizations to better fulfill 

the goals of the D.C. Bicycle Master Plan, provide 

access to bridges, and accommodate a coordinated onsite bicycle rental program. 

464
Access and Circulation: Impacts of Alternative C 

Circulation — Alternative C 

 465 
This page has been left blank intentionally. 
Access and Circulation: Impacts of Alternative C 

Compared to the no-action alternative, the impacts of alternative C would be long-term, 

major, and beneficial because a separate bicycle 

route system would provide a safer, more equitable bicycling environment that would encourage this green and healthful circulation mode, 

would support local planning goals, and would 

provide improved facilities, tours, and bicycle 

rental opportunities. 

Impacts on Motorists 

Under alternative C 14th Street would be tunneled under the Mall, Independence Avenue 

would be redesigned in conjunction with filling 

the north bay of the Tidal Basin, and decks over 

portions of Maine Avenue would be constructed 

to improve pedestrian access. Pedestrians and 

bicyclists would be given more priority, and 

routes would be more separated from vehicular 

traffic, in addition to longer crossing times at 

intersections. As a result, the circulation network would be safer for all users. 

The vicinity of Maine Avenue and East Basin 

Drive would be redesigned to facilitate better 

traffic flow and access to I-395, as well as to 

accommodate improved access for bicycles, 

service vehicles, and pedestrians. There would 

also be some road changes along Ohio Drive to 

accommodate bicycle lanes and parking. A new 

service vehicle entry would be developed to the 

U.S. Park Police stables, and the related intersection would be coordinated with that for the 

future Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial. 

Construction of the 14th Street tunnel and 

decking over Maine Avenue, as well as access 

improvements to I-395 and Maine Avenue, 

would result in short-term, major, adverse 

impacts on traffic. 

Compared to the no-action alternative, the longterm impacts of alternative C on motorized uses 

would be both adverse and beneficial. Slowing 

through-traffic to posted speeds, providing 

traffic-calming measures at crosswalks, and 

increasing crossing times for pedestrians and 

bicycles at intersections would result in moderate to major, adverse impacts because of some 

inconvenience to through-travelers or commuters. Based on average annual daily traffic 

counts from 2007, on a daily basis this would 

likely affect over 40,000 vehicles on Independence Avenue; over 25,000 on 17th Street; nearly 

40,000 combined on 3rd, 4th, and 7th streets; 

approximately 46,000 on 14th Street; and about 

14,000 on 15th Street. However, impacts would 

be moderate to major and beneficial because of 

the improved traffic flows on 14th Street with 

the new tunnel (which would affect an estimated 

46,000 vehicles daily), on Independence Avenue 

(affecting 40,000 vehicles daily), and near I395/Maine Avenue and East Basin Drive (affecting approximately 56,000 vehicles). The number 

of motorists affected on 14th Street could be 

larger because the other tunnels see heavier 

traffic than the surface roads. 

Cumulative Impacts 

Impacts of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions would be the same as those discussed under the no-action alternative and 

would be long-term, major, and beneficial. 

Actions under alternative C would improve the 

experience for motorists; equitably treat pedestrians, bicyclists, and drivers; better meet the 

needs of transit and tour buses; improve convenient transit access along with the visitor transportation system, and enhance the appearance 

and function of the circulation systems. Considered altogether, the cumulative impacts of these 

actions would be long-term, major, and beneficial, with a substantial beneficial contribution 

from this alternative. 

Conclusion 

Alternative C would result in long-term, major, 

beneficial impacts because of improved access 

and parking, a greater emphasis on safer and 

pleasanter pedestrian and bicycling environments, and more options for families and people 

with disabilities. These impacts, along with the 

impacts of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions, would result in long-term, major, 

beneficial cumulative impacts because of better 

wayfinding aids for pedestrians, an improved 

visitor transportation service, future road improvements for motorists and Metro users, and 

more convenient access for pedestrians, bicyclists, families with children, and people with 

disabilities. Alternative C would make a substantial beneficial contribution to these impacts. 

 467 
VISITOR EXPERIENCE

METHODOLOGY FOR IMPACT 

ANALYSIS

The visitor experience section analyzes the 

impact of the management alternatives with 

respect to several evaluation topics affecting 

visitor experiences on the National Mall. The 

analysis considers how well the alternatives meet 

NPS policy and best practices. The no-action 

alternative provides the basis for comparing the 

alternatives, and it represents either no change 

or continuity with approved plans or 

management approaches. 

The following topics have been selected for 

analysis: 

• Impacts on a quality visitor experience — For 

the purposes of this document, a quality 

visitor experience is defined as one that 

would allow visitors (1) to understand and 

be able to contemplate core American 

values, government, and democracy as 

symbolized by the National Mall’s history 

and memorials, as well as the adjacent 

cultural institutions; (2) to enjoy a welcoming experience and the beauty of the 

National Mall, both during the day and at 

night; and (3) to make an emotional or 

intellectual connections to the National 

Mall and what it represents. The beneficial 

and adverse impacts of the alternatives are 

analyzed in terms of opportunities to visit 

monuments and memorials on the National 

Mall, the area’s visual appearance, to what 

degree visitors feel welcome, impacts of 

demonstrations and special events on the 

experience of general visitors, and opportunities to experience the nighttime character of the National Mall. 

• Impacts on opportunities for information and 

education — The analysis looks at the beneficial and adverse impacts on opportunities 

to get advance planning information and 

site information on the Internet, and to 

participate in a range of accessible, engaging, and relevant educational programs on 

the National Mall through methods such as 

wayside exhibits, ranger programs (onsite, 

interactive, and curriculum-based), guided 

and self-guided tours (pedestrian, bicycle, 

and cell phone), exhibits, and publications 

(including maps and brochures). 

• Impacts on opportunities for enjoyment, entertainment, and informal recreation — The 

beneficial and adverse impacts on opportunities for general relaxation and informal 

recreation pastimes, such as enjoying views, 

picnicking, reading, dog walking, walking, 

children’s play, and entertainment, are 

analyzed. It is assumed that all activities are 

in accordance with NPS policies.

• Impacts on opportunities for active recreation — The beneficial and adverse impacts 

on active recreational and play opportunities on the National Mall are analyzed, 

including recreation equipment rentals 

(including paddleboats and bicycles) and 

space for pickup games (Frisbee, kickball, 

soccer, football or softball, and kite flying), 

organized team sports (softball, volleyball, 

etc.), and jogging or running.

• Impacts of visitor facilities and amenities —

The degree to which the alternatives meet 

visitor needs (restrooms, food, rest, information) and wants (retail, bookstores, seating) in a manner that is convenient and 

pleasant is analyzed. 

• Impacts on public health and safety — The 

impact analysis evaluates how well the 

alternatives address the needs of people 

with disabilities, dealing with weather 

extremes (heat and humidity / cold), health 

concerns (dust), safe nighttime experiences, 

pedestrian and bicycle safety, and emergency information or care. 

• Impacts on user capacity — The beneficial 

and adverse impacts on the number of 

people who can visit the National Mall and 

locations within it, as well as the types of 

social experiences they can expect, are 

analyzed. This topic focuses on the desired 

general visitor capacity of various monuments and memorials on the National Mall, 

as well as specific areas (such as the Mall 

and the Washington Monument grounds). 

468
Visitor Experience: Methodology for Impact Analysis 

These numbers are different from capacities considered for demonstrations, national celebrations, or special events discussed in “Demonstrations, Special Events, 

and National Celebrations” (beginning on 

page 414), where far more people can be 

accommodated because the nature of the 

experience is different — people at a 

demonstration or a special event expect to 

be in a crowded situation. 

Impacts on participants at First Amendment 

demonstrations, national celebrations, and 

special events were previously analyzed (see 

page 414). 

Impact Intensity Levels 

The following thresholds were established for 

impacts on the visitor experience: 

• Negligible — The impact would not be 

detectable or would be barely detectable to 

most visitors and would not affect their 

experiences or opportunities in a perceptible manner. 

• Minor— The impact would be detectable 

to some visitors and might result in some 

effect on their experiences or opportunities. 

• Moderate — The impact would be readily 

apparent to many visitors and would be 

likely to affect the experiences or opportunities of many visitors. 

• Major — The impact would be obvious to 

most visitors and would affect the experiences or opportunities of most or all 

visitors. 

Type of Impacts 

Impacts can be beneficial or adverse. Beneficial 

impacts would support federal regulation, as 

well as NPS or local policies and plans, would 

incorporate acceptable best practices, and would 

improve the quality, convenience, and pleasure 

of experiences and opportunities for all types of 

users. Adverse impacts would be inconsistent 

with federal regulations or NPS or local policies 

and plans, would not address known visitor 

needs, would result in less convenient opportunities and facilities, or would fail to incorporate 

relevant improvements from best practices. 

Duration of Impacts 

The duration of the impact could be temporary, 

short-term, or long-term; no permanent impacts 

are expected under visitor experience. 

• Temporary — A temporary impact could 

last a few hours or up to several days. 

• Short-term — The impact would generally 

last up to one year or the life of a construction project. 

• Long-term — A long-term impact would be 

expected to last for more than a year up to 

the life of the plan. 

Laws, Regulations, and Policies 

The Commemorative Works Clarification and 

Revision Act of 2003 (40 USC 8901 et seq.) prohibits the construction of memorials and visitor 

centers within the Reserve, which comprises 

much of the National Mall. 

Special federal regulations govern the National 

Capital Region and visitor experiences on the 

National Mall (36 CFR 7.96). Permits are required for organized athletic games; wet grounds 

may not be used for play; bathing, swimming, or 

wading in any fountain or pool (including the 

Tidal Basin) is prohibited except where officially 

authorized; and skating is prohibited unless in 

areas and at times authorized by the park superintendent. Fishing is authorized under the 

applicable state authority. 

NCPC Visitor Planning 

The “Visitor Elements” of the 2004 Comprehensive Plan for the National Capital: Federal Elements propose accommodating visitors in a way 

that ensures an enjoyable and educational 

experience, showcases the institutions of American culture and democracy, and supports federal and regional planning goals. Goals include 

• protecting the monumental core (as described in the Legacy Plan and the Memorials and Museums Master Plan; NCPC 

1997, 2001) 

 469 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

• providing visitor services (indoor and outdoor food service, retail) at appropriate 

locations 

• providing visitor orientation centers in 

different areas 

• supporting broad dissemination of information at locations frequented by tourists, 

such as hotel and transportation centers, 

and encouraging multilingual information 

• balancing the needs of security and accessibility 

• encouraging specialized learning 

• encouraging visitor transportation, and 

increasing visitor transit access and walking 

• dispersing special events, promoting offpeak events, and coordinating events to 

minimize disruption

Planning Together for Central Washington is a 

collaborative effort to create a welcoming 

atmosphere with well-connected public spaces, 

and beautiful, distinguished places of enduring 

quality that are green and sustainable (NCPC 

2008a). 

NPS Management Policies 2006 

National park system areas belong to all Americans, and all visitors are welcome. Visitor enjoyment, education, and inspiration will receive 

special attention while the National Park Service 

fulfills its mission to conserve its resources and 

values for present and future generations. 

Visitor use is addressed in chapter 8 of the NPS 

Management Policies 2006 (NPS 2006e). 

• Visitor Use — Enjoyment of park resources 

and values by the people of the United 

States is part of the fundamental purpose of 

all parks. The National Park Service is 

committed to providing appropriate, highquality opportunities for visitors to enjoy 

the parks, and the Park Service will maintain within the parks an atmosphere that is 

open, inviting, and accessible to every 

segment of American society (NPS 2006e, 

sec. 8.2). 

 The National Park Service will afford visitors ample opportunities for inspiration, 

appreciation, and enjoyment through their 

own personalized experiences, without 

formality of programs or structures (NPS 

2006e, sec. 8.2) 

• Appropriate Use — The National Park Service will allow only uses that are (1) appropriate to the purpose for which the park 

was established, and (2) can be sustained 

without causing unacceptable impacts (NPS 

2006e, sec. 8.1.1). 

 To provide for enjoyment of the parks, the 

National Park Service will encourage visitor 

activities that 

◦ are appropriate to the purpose for which 

the park was established; and 

◦ are inspirational, educational, or healthful, and otherwise appropriate to the 

park environment; and 

◦ will foster an understanding of and appreciation for park resources and values, 

or will promote enjoyment through a 

direct association with, interaction with, 

or relation to park resources; and 

◦ can be sustained without causing unacceptable impacts to park resources or 

values (NPS 2006e, sec. 8.2). 

 Recreational uses and new or changing 

patterns of recreation will be assessed for 

appropriateness. Appropriate recreational 

uses will be defined and managed (NPS 

2006e, sec. 8.2). The National Park Service 

will mitigate the adverse effects of any 

legally mandated use. Superintendents will 

monitor park uses to ensure that unanticipated and unacceptable impacts do not 

occur (NPS 2006e, sec. 8.1.1 and 8.1.2). 

• Visitor Carrying Capacity — Parks will 

identify the type and level of visitor use that 

can be accommodated while sustaining desired resource and visitor experience conditions. These will include quality indicators and standards (NPS 2006e, sec. 8.2.1). 

Park facilities are discussed in chapter 9 of the 

NPS Management Policies 2006. Facilities should 

be necessary and appropriate, harmonious with 

park resources, and support sustainable practices to the extent practicable (NPS 2006e). (This 

topic was amplified in “Park Facilities Guidance” prepared for the National Mall plan; see 

appendix D.) 

470
Visitor Experience: Impacts Common to All Alternatives 

Interpretation and education are discussed in 

chapter 7 of the Management Policies 2006.

National parks are among the most remarkable 

places for recreation, learning, and inspiration. 

The National Park Service will use education to 

connect people to parks and will provide opportunities for all visitors to form their own intellectual, emotional, and physical connections 

with authentic experiences. Education will 

encourage a stewardship ethic and broaden 

support for the NPS mission. Curriculum-based 

programs will link to national and state standards. Technology should be used to maximize 

the visitor experience, and websites will allow 

parks to reach a worldwide audience (NPS 

2006e, sec. 7.3.3). The National Park Service will 

consider the special needs of children, senior 

citizens, non-English speakers, and the economically disadvantaged, and it will provide programs for visitors with disabilities in the most 

integrated setting appropriate. Additionally, the 

National Park Service will take all feasible steps 

to ensure effective communication with individuals with hearing, visual, and cognitive disabilities. These steps should include but not be 

limited to providing sign language interpreters, 

audio/visual presentations, Braille, and largeprint versions of printed materials (NPS 2006e, 

sec. 7.5.2). 

Volunteers in Parks will be used to increase interpretive and educational capacity (NPS 2006e, 

sec. 7.6.1.). Cooperating associations may provide publications and other items for sale that 

enhance the park’s story (NPS 2006e, sec. 7.6.2). 

User Capacity 

NPS Management Policies 2006 require park 

plans to include user capacities for all park areas 

(NPS 2006e, sec. 3.1.1). The National Park 

Service defines user capacity as the type and 

level of visitor use that can be accommodated 

while sustaining the quality of park resources 

and visitor opportunities consistent with the 

purposes of the park. It is not necessarily a set of 

numbers or limits, but rather a process involving 

monitoring, evaluation, actions (managing 

visitor use), and adjustments to ensure that park 

values are protected. The premise behind this 

process is that any use on public lands causes 

some level of impact that must be accepted; 

therefore, it is the responsibility of the National 

Park Service to decide what level of impact is 

acceptable and what actions are needed to keep 

impacts within acceptable limits. The capacities 

of park areas are addressed in the conservation 

zones. 

An essential purpose of the National Mall is to 

provide space for the expression of First 

Amendment rights. This purpose, anchored in 

the U.S. Constitution, does not include limits on 

the number of people who can participate in 

First Amendment activities on the National 

Mall, regardless of any impacts that might 

otherwise be considered unacceptable. 

There are three principal components that relate 

to determining the user capacity for a national 

park: (1) ecological or physical capacity, which 

includes the capabilities of the natural and 

cultural resources to sustain levels and types of 

use without unacceptable damage; (2) sociological capacity, which includes the ability of 

visitors to enjoy and appreciate these resources 

without undue interference by other visitors; 

and (3) NPS management, which includes the 

efforts that have been, or can be applied to the 

park to mitigate unwanted impacts. This 

component relates to the management of things 

such as roads, parking lots, buildings, trails, and 

visitor information. 

IMPACTS COMMON TO ALL 

ALTERNATIVES

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Impacts on a Quality Visitor Experience 

Memorials and the historic landscape with its 

planned vistas would continue to provide many 

opportunities for visitors to be inspired by the 

symbols of our nation, to make a patriotic 

connection to our nation or its history, and to 

understand American values and ideals. The 

experiences of day-to-day visitors may frequently be affected by demonstrations, national 

celebrations, and special events, even though 

visitors may not have been aware that a certain 

activity was happening. Almost all visitors are 

familiar with annual national celebrations such 

as the Fourth of July and the National Cherry 

Blossom Festival, as well as presidential inaugurations, which are well publicized by the Na-

 471 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

tional Park Service and the local media. Apart 

from these well-known events, however, visitors 

may not be aware that more than 3,000 permitted activities take place annually, so there is a 

high likelihood that some sort of event will be 

taking place during their visit. 

During large demonstrations or events, views to 

the memorials and buildings that are symbols of 

our nation may be blocked by signs, stages, displays, trucks, or tents. Visitors may not be able to 

capture the iconic photographic images free of 

visual evidence of these events. Visitors may be 

unable to easily cross streets or use the visitor 

transportation system. Larger events with tents 

and stages or road events such as Rolling Thunder will generally affect more National Mall 

visitors and generally have more intense impacts. 

Sounds associated with events are more evident 

the closer one is and depending on the size of 

the event. Sounds may be regarded as noise that 

interrupts desired experiences for contemplation, or they may be enjoyable or even inspirational. For example, the sounds of cannon 

during the annual 1812 Overture concert on the 

Washington Monument grounds may either be 

alarming or reassuringly familiar. Enjoyable or 

not, cannon sounds will be unavoidable to 

anyone present at the time. 

The impacts of demonstrations on park users 

would be similar to those occurring now, and 

there would be no change in the type of impacts 

under any alternative. The impacts on visitors 

who come unexpectedly on a demonstration or 

special event are generally temporary. Impacts 

would range from minor to major and would 

either be beneficial or adverse, depending on 

visitors’ attitudes. If visitors were inconvenienced and annoyed by sounds, crowds, and 

delays, impacts would be considered adverse. 

But if visitors felt they had special opportunities 

to witness or be part of a demonstration or special event that is uniquely American, then 

impacts would be considered beneficial. 

Impacts on Opportunities for Information 

and Education 

A wide variety of educational programs would 

continue to be provided. Park websites and 

information would be improved to make them 

more user friendly, and they would be continuously updated. Demonstrations provide an educational opportunity for visitors to understand 

the essential role of the U.S. Constitution and 

First Amendment speech in our country. They 

might also provide education and enjoyment 

through stirring speeches, music, or engaging 

entertainment. The impacts of these continued 

educational opportunities would be temporary, 

major, and beneficial for individual visitors at 

one specific time, but in the context of the 

importance of First Amendment rights to the 

history of the National Mall, the continuing 

impacts in terms of opportunities for a quality 

American visitor experience would be permanent, major, and beneficial. 

Ranger programs would include scheduled 

interactive experiences that could include, for 

example, audio clips of FDR speeches at the 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial or group 

recitations or other historic events. More 

multilingual speakers and publications would 

also be provided. Park brochures, maps, and the 

National Parks Passport stamping program 

would be more readily visible, with directional 

signs to information areas; and self-service areas 

would allow visitors to obtain maps and brochures at their convenience. Park websites 

would be user friendly and up-to-date. 

The National Park Service would continue to 

work with local tourist organizations and the 

tour bus industry to ensure the most factual 

information is available to visitors. Commercial 

tours would continue to be provided, primarily 

by tour bus companies, and schools would 

continue to provide student tours. Since tours 

may bring 20%–30% of National Mall visitors, 

this would result in long-term, negligible to 

moderate, beneficial impacts. 

Impacts on Opportunities for Active 

Recreation 

General recreational pursuits and recreational 

league play may be periodically superseded by 

permitted events. The construction of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Center would result in 

the relocation of ballfields, a long-term, minor, 

adverse impact on active recreational opportunities for some people, primarily local residents. 

472
Visitor Experience: Impacts of the No-Action Alternative 

Impacts on User Capacity 

The conservation zones that have been defined 

for the National Mall (see discussion beginning 

on page 56) establish general carrying capacities 

by zone and in specific areas. Applicable standards are also defined, along with indicators to 

show whether desired levels of quality or 

experiences were being achieved or if user 

carrying capacities were being exceeded. 

At most memorials 100–200 square feet per person would provide sufficient space for contemplation, reading quotations, or taking photos. At 

50–100 square feet per person the social experience could be congested for many visitors, 

indicating that the memorial’s capacity was 

being approached. A density of 50 square feet 

per person could be expected when high levels 

or pulses of visitation occur, such as when 

multiple tour buses arrive at the same time. 

In National Mall character protection zones, 

visitor densities of 200 to 1,000 square feet per 

person would offer acceptable experiences. At 

200 square feet per person many people could sit 

informally on the grass, but the sights and 

sounds of other people and groups would be 

very evident. This density is comparable to 

groups gathering informally for picnics, garden 

concerts, or small events. At 1,000 square feet 

per person the atmosphere would be more 

relaxed and enjoyable. On walks or at visitor 

facilities densities could be in the range of 10–50 

square feet per person. 

In multipurpose areas densities would range 

from 50 to 100 square feet per person. People 

would be very aware of the presence and sounds 

of others. In recreational areas a less dense 

experience of more than 1,000 square feet per 

person would be desirable. 

In high-use areas user densities would be in the 

range of 3–50 square feet per person. The higher 

densities (3–10 sq. ft. / person) would be likely 

during national celebrations, such as the 2009 

presidential inauguration, a large First Amendment demonstration, or a special event, and the 

impacts were previously discussed. The desired 

experiences for sightseeing and recreation in the 

high-use zone would be in the range of 100 

square feet or more per person; more space per 

person would allow for freedom of movement 

for active recreation or fewer people in vistas. 

Visiting during high-use seasons, during national 

celebrations or annual events, or even during 

afternoons in the peak season would result in a 

more social or crowded experience, with few 

opportunities for quiet contemplation. It would 

be possible to have quieter experiences during 

off-peak seasons, early in the morning, or late at 

night. The application of zones, area criteria, 

standards, and indicators would have long-term, 

major, beneficial impacts by ensuring that quality standards and visitor expectations would be 

consistently met. Additional issues affecting user 

capacity are addressed in the following analyses. 

Conclusion 

Impacts on the visitor experience that would be 

common to all alternatives would generally be 

long-term, moderate to major, and beneficial as 

a result of continued educational opportunities 

about First Amendment rights; cooperative 

efforts with local tourist organizations and the 

tour bus industry to ensure they have accurate 

information and to facilitate access to areas on 

the National Mall (affecting 20%–30% of visitors); and applying conservation zones and 

standards to ensure that visitor expectations are 

consistently met. 

IMPACTS OF THE NO-ACTION 

ALTERNATIVE

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Under the no-action alternative the National 

Park Service would continue present approaches 

to offering educational, recreational, and enjoyment opportunities for visitors by providing 

programs, visitor facilities, and addressing some 

public health and safety problems. User capacity 

would not be addressed. No additional visitor 

facilities would be provided. 

Impacts on a Quality Visitor Experience 

Existing opportunities to visit the monuments 

and memorials on the National Mall that convey 

our history and democratic values would remain, along with opportunities to visit adjacent 

facilities (primarily museums and government 

 473 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

facilities). Visitors would still be able to contemplate core American values and to enjoy visible 

symbols of our democratic government, primarily the executive branch (symbolized by the 

White House) and the legislative branch (the 

U.S. Capitol). However, the beauty of the National Mall would continue to be visibly affected 

by deteriorated landscape conditions (poor turf 

conditions, social trails) and the huge volume of 

deferred maintenance and outdated facilities in 

need of repair (seawalls, walks, restrooms). Recent efforts to remove and stop the creation of 

social trails would be overshadowed by overall 

conditions on the National Mall. This would 

result in long-term, moderate to major, adverse 

impacts on visitors’ abilities to appreciate the 

area’s beauty and to have quality visitor 

experiences. 

There would be no additional impacts on the 

experiences of visitors as a result of demonstrations, national celebrations, or special events. 

Impacts as described under “Impacts Common 

to All Alternatives” would continue. 

Opportunities to experience the nighttime character of the monumental core would remain 

focused on the lighting of the prominent symbols of our nation — the Lincoln and Thomas 

Jefferson memorials, the Washington Monument, the White House, and the Capitol. The 

lighting of other memorials and ornamental 

water features would continue to contribute to 

the very evocative nighttime experience on the 

National Mall. 

The National Mall and its memorials would 

continue to deeply inspire many visitors, and 

there would be no change in opportunities to 

experience the National Mall. Resulting longterm, major, beneficial impacts would continue. 

However, the enjoyment of the beauty of the 

National Mall and a sense of welcome would 

continue to be affected by the degraded conditions of natural resources (water features and 

vegetation), resulting in ongoing long-term, 

moderate, adverse impacts on many visitors. 

Impacts on Opportunities for Information 

and Education 

Existing educational opportunities would remain, with wayside exhibits, ranger programs, 

and a variety of park experiences. Classroom 

curriculum would continue to be updated. A 

variety of bicycling tours would continue to be 

provided, and cell phone tours would continue 

to be expanded. Outdated exhibits would be 

evaluated for accuracy, relevance, and condition, and then replaced or revised as needed. 

The number of visitors is much larger than the 

number of uniformed park rangers, guides, and 

volunteers. For example, at the Lincoln Memorial visitors may outnumber rangers by a ratio of 

9,000 to 1. The National Park Service would 

regularly analyze visitor circulation patterns by 

the time of day, month, and season to more 

strategically position uniformed staff to increase 

visitor contacts. 

Park brochures, maps, and the NPS visitor passport program would continue to be available, 

but visitors might not know where to get information, and there are no self-service areas where 

visitors can obtain maps and brochures. Park 

websites would remain somewhat difficult for 

some people to navigate, and advance planning 

websites would remain inadequate. 

Taken as a whole, the impact of the no-action 

alternative on opportunities for information and 

education would be long-term, negligible, and 

beneficial because educational opportunities 

would continue and the park would update its 

programs and offerings. Multiple, difficult-tonavigate websites would continue to make finding advance planning information inconvenient, 

with long-term, moderate, adverse impacts. 

Impacts on Opportunities for Enjoyment, 

Entertainment, and Informal Recreation 

The no-action alternative would continue to 

provide numerous sunny and shady open spaces 

on the National Mall for visitor enjoyment (including sightseeing and enjoying views), relaxation, and informal recreational pastimes (such as 

picnicking, reading, dog walking, and walking / 

strolling). The resulting impacts would continue 

to be long-term, moderate, and beneficial. 

Views of memorials and major federal buildings 

would continue to inspire most visitors. However, conditions in other parts of the National 

Mall would detract from these viewing experiences for many visitors who could feel that 

present conditions throughout much of the area 

474
Visitor Experience: Impacts of the No-Action Alternative 

are undesirable as a setting for the country’s 

most important monuments and memorials. 

This would continue to result in long-term, 

moderate, adverse impacts on visitor enjoyment. 

Present conditions for walking and strolling 

would continue in many areas. Walks around 

the Tidal Basin are too narrow for the level of 

use; many walking surfaces are in need of repair; 

and gravel surfaces are slippery and dusty, as 

well as inaccessible to many people. The 

resulting impacts would continue to be longterm, moderate to major, and adverse because 

most to all visitors would be affected. 

Informal children’s play would continue in open 

turf areas and within the shade of trees; no children’s playgrounds would be provided. The 

carousel would remain. Impacts would be longterm, negligible to minor, and beneficial. 

Entertainment such as musical and theatrical 

performances would continue primarily at larger 

activities, such as national celebrations (holiday 

concerts), annual events (National Cherry 

Blossom Festival, Smithsonian Folklife Festival), 

events such as twilight tattoos, and special events 

such as Kennedy Center simulcasts and Screen 

on the Green movies. With few exceptions, entertainment venues, other than open turf areas, 

would continue to be limited in their ability to 

conveniently host large or small performances 

on a regular basis. The Sylvan Theater would 

continue to be the primary venue designed for 

entertainment; however, its facilities are outdated, circulation changes have affected viewing 

and access to the stage, and its location is no 

longer desirable for major events like the Fourth 

of July. The D.C. War Memorial is the only other 

venue that was planned for small-scale entertainment. The Lincoln Memorial and Jefferson 

Memorial steps provide a natural seating area, 

and these hard surfaces areas can support regularly scheduled entertainment. Room Four in the 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial was designed for programs, lectures or appropriate 

performances but remains unused. 

Impacts of diverse open spaces on opportunities 

for visitor enjoyment and informal recreation 

would continue to be long-term, moderate to 

major, and beneficial. However, the continuing 

unattractive conditions on the National Mall, 

less than ideal walking experiences, and limited 

venues to facilitate various kinds of public entertainment would result in long-term, moderate to 

major, adverse impacts because virtually all 

visitors could be affected. 

Impacts on Opportunities for Active 

Recreation 

Under the no-action alternative existing recreational opportunities would remain. Recreation 

areas help meet recreation needs in the metropolitan area. Activities include open space for 

pickup games (Frisbee, kickball, soccer, football, 

softball, kite flying), fields for organized team 

sports (such as baseball, softball, and volleyball), 

and recreation equipment rentals (paddleboats). 

Boat rentals would remain limited to paddleboats. 

Jogging is a popular activity throughout the 

National Mall, but appropriate running surfaces 

are lacking, which has resulted in the creation of 

social trails adjacent to many walks and around 

the Lincoln Reflecting Pool. These social trails 

may be as hard as concrete and do not constitute 

an appropriate running surface, resulting in 

continuing long-term, minor, adverse impacts 

on runners. 

Bicycling would continue as both a means of 

circulation and a recreational activity. Impacts 

related to bicycling are addressed under the 

access and circulation section. 

While no actions would be taken under this 

alternative related to recreational activities, 

impacts would be long-term, minor, and beneficial because spaces would continue to be 

provided for informal recreation as well as 

organized sports. However, the continued lack 

of facilities for jogging and the limited choice in 

recreation equipment rentals would result in 

long-term, minor, adverse impacts.

Impacts of Visitor Facilities and 

Amenities 

Under the no-action alternative visitor facilities 

and amenities on the National Mall would continue to be insufficient to meet the needs of a 

large portion of present visitors. Visitor facilities 

are too small, inconveniently located, lack coordinated amenities, and are outdated. Most 

facilities are also too small for present levels of 

 475 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

use. For example, restrooms with six toilets and 

two urinals are located near parking for nine 

tour buses; pulses of high use when several tour 

buses arrive at the same time (up to 450 visitors 

at a time, assuming 50 passengers per bus) strain 

the capacity of facilities and result in visitor 

discomfort. Some facilities are inconveniently 

located or spaced; for example, there are no 

restrooms east of 15th Street, despite heavy use 

of the Mall area for all kinds of visitor activities 

and events. While it is common to locate 

restrooms and food service together, there are 

no restrooms near refreshment stands. Some 

outdated restrooms are unattractive and NPS 

staff receive many complaints. Older facilities 

are primarily utilitarian in nature, and do not 

provide the pleasant atmosphere visitors expect 

of facilities in the nation’s capital. 

Bench seating is provided in both shady and 

sunny locations, but shady locations may be in 

short supply in the summer. Seating is not always 

oriented so visitors can enjoy the vistas. Seating 

for groups is very limited and is usually not located where groups congregate. While outdoor 

seating is provided near refreshment stands, it is 

utilitarian and does not contribute to a pleasant 

location for people to relax as they tour the 

National Mall. No indoor seating is provided. 

Present retail facilities include small bookstores, 

food service, and locations where souvenirs are 

sold. Food choice is limited to seasonal and 

permanent refreshment stands and mobile carts. 

Visitor facilities (or the lack of facilities) would 

continue in the following areas: 

• Union Square — No visitor facilities are 

provided. 

• The Mall — There are four small refreshment stands, but no restrooms. 

• Washington Monument Grounds — 

Restrooms are provided in Monument 

Lodge, Survey Lodge, and near the Sylvan 

Theater; temporary food and retail facilities 

on the site of the future National Museum 

of African American History and Culture 

must be relocated. The Sylvan Theater 

location would remain outdated and inadequate because it is located both near tour 

bus parking and performance space. Monument Lodge restrooms are conveniently 

located near ticket queuing areas. 

• World War II Memorial — Restrooms, 

which are convenient to tour bus drop-offs, 

would remain. 

• Constitution Gardens — Facilities include 

a seasonal refreshment stand and restrooms 

that are scheduled to be remodeled but not 

replaced. 

• Lincoln Memorial — Restrooms inside the 

memorial also serve visitors to the Korean 

War Veterans and Vietnam Veterans 

memorials. No restrooms are provided near 

food service. The future Vietnam Veterans 

Memorial Center would replace the information station near the Lincoln Memorial 

and provide restrooms, a bookstore, and 

information. 

• Ash Woods — An outdated restroom is 

located near the World War II Memorial. 

• Tidal Basin area — An outdated seasonal 

refreshment stand is located near the parking lot, but no restrooms are provided. 

• Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial — 

There are restrooms and a bookstore. A 

bookstore and restrooms are planned at the 

future Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial. 

• Thomas Jefferson Memorial — Facilities 

include restrooms, a bookstore, and retail 

with a nearby outdated small refreshment 

stand. 

The lack of facilities in some areas places a 

burden on adjacent museums, art galleries, and 

the U.S. Botanic Garden. 

Under the no-action alternative visitor facilities 

would not be appropriately sized for the volume 

of users, conveniently located, or grouped to 

meet the needs of visitors. Primarily due to the 

lack and inadequacy of restrooms, and to a lesser 

degree the lack of pleasant food service, impacts 

on visitor experiences would continue to be 

long-term, major, and adverse because inadequate visitor facilities affect virtually every 

visitor. 

476
Visitor Experience: Impacts of the No-Action Alternative 

Impacts on Public Health and Safety 

Under the no-action alternative there would be 

no changes in the way that public health and 

safety are handled. Emergency care would 

continue to be provided by park rangers, and 

event organizers frequently provide first-aid 

tents during national celebrations and large 

special events. There are no emergency call 

boxes or public address system, and resulting 

impacts would continue to be long-term, minor 

to moderate, and adverse. 

Some locations would continue to be difficult to 

access for people with disabilities, such as gravel 

walkways on the Mall and grade level changes 

and steps at Union Square. Elevators would 

continue to be provided at the Lincoln Memorial, Thomas Jefferson Memorial, and the 

Washington Monument. 

Distances between destinations, drop-offs, and 

parking locations for people with disabilities 

would remain inconvenient, and the requirement to return borrowed wheelchairs to where 

they were picked up could make visiting multiple destinations difficult for those who need 

wheelchairs. Impacts would continue to be 

short- and long-term, moderate to major, and 

adverse for people with disabilities, as well as up 

to 25% of visitors who may have difficulty 

walking distances. Also, NPS policy goals for 

universal design and access for all segments of 

society would not be achieved. 

Visitors would continue to be affected by weather extremes, and during hot humid weather 

the National Park Service would continue to 

occasionally run sprinklers to allow people to 

cool down. Water would continue to be 

provided during some events. Emergency care is 

provided by park rangers. There are no emergency call boxes. Dust from wind and loose 

gravel walks would continue to affect the comfort and breathing of many visitors on the Mall. 

Pedestrian lighting would remain largely concentrated in the east-west corridor between the 

U.S. Capitol and the Lincoln Memorial. In some 

locations darker areas between light fixtures 

may make some visitors feel uncomfortable. The 

Tidal Basin would continue to have pedestrian 

lighting only at the memorials, leaving the walkway around the basin unlit. This would continue 

to limit pedestrian opportunities to safely visit 

the Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Thomas Jefferson, and George Mason memorials. Light from 

some fixtures shines into visitor’s eyes, making it 

difficult for them to perceive surface conditions 

or making it difficult to see other people in the 

area. This condition would continue. 

Roads would continue to be illuminated, resulting in higher levels of light near the highly developed edges of the National Mall. Most crosswalks would continue to be lit. The continued 

impact of existing road and pedestrian lighting 

on public health and safety would be long-term, 

moderate to major, and both beneficial and 

adverse. However, the lack of pedestrian lighting 

in some areas and the quality of the existing 

lighting would make the impact more adverse 

than beneficial. 

The no-action alternative would continue current conditions, and taken as a whole, impacts 

on visitor health and safety would be long-term, 

moderate, and adverse because many people 

would be affected by undesirable access conditions and limited pedestrian lighting. 

Impacts on User Capacity 

Under the no-action alternative there would be 

no change in how many people could be accommodated on the National Mall. Degraded conditions from overuse throughout the National 

Mall would remain. General visitors would continue to be negatively affected by uses during 

large demonstrations, national celebrations, and 

special events because fewer permanent amenities would mean that event participants would 

be using general visitor facilities. Some locations, 

such as Union Square with the large reflecting 

pool and stepped levels and the narrow walkways around the Tidal Basin, may limit the 

number of people who can safely and comfortably use a particular location. 

There would be no changes to user capacity as 

the result of continuing present management 

strategies. Impacts would remain long-term, 

moderate to major, and adverse because several 

prominent locations have continued obstacles to 

levels of use that are experienced today. 

 477 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Cumulative Impacts 

Past Actions 

The night sky in Washington, D.C., is dominated 

by lighting of five symbolic icons — the U.S. 

Capitol, the White House, the Washington 

Monument, the Lincoln Memorial, and the 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial. Other public and 

private buildings, memorials, public art, streets 

and walks, and park areas are lit to varying 

degrees, with the potential for conflict. 

New attractions that have been recently built on 

or near the National Mall include the World 

War II Memorial, the National Museum of the 

American Indian, the Capitol Visitor Center, the 

International Spy Museum, Madame Tussauds 

Wax Museum, the Museum of Crime and Punishment, and the Newseum. Nearby in Virginia 

are the Pentagon September 11 Memorial and 

the U.S. Air Force Memorial. Renovated visitor 

destinations include Ford’s Theatre National 

Historic Site, the National Portrait Gallery / 

National Museum of American Art, the Library 

of Congress exhibits, and the National Museum 

of American History. The impact of additional 

destinations in and near the monumental core 

on visitor experience opportunities would 

continue to be long-term, major, and beneficial. 

Pedestrian guide and wayside signs with historic 

information have been placed throughout the 

central business district, providing a sense of 

visitor welcome. Some signs are on and near the 

National Mall and guide visitors to National 

Mall destinations. The impact on visitor experiences has been long-term, moderate to major, 

and beneficial. 

Present and Reasonably Foreseeable 

Actions 

New pedestrian signs and maps would be better 

dispersed and would use symbols and colors to 

make wayfinding easier and more convenient. 

These actions would have long-term, major, 

beneficial impacts. 

A visitor contact station at the Smithsonian 

Metro station on the Mall has improved the 

welcoming experience for visitors at this location, but since the location is not obvious to 

many pedestrians, the impact would continue to 

be long-term, minor to moderate, and beneficial. 

The completion of perimeter security projects 

by the Smithsonian Institution and Department 

of Agriculture at their facilities would have longterm, major, beneficial impacts on public 

enjoyment, health, and safety. 

The completion of future visitor destinations on 

the National Mall (the Martin Luther King, Jr. 

Memorial, the Vietnam Veterans Memorial 

Center, and the National Museum of African 

American History and Culture), as well as those 

nearby (the Dwight D. Eisenhower Memorial, 

Veterans Disabled for Life, and the U.S. Institute 

of Peace) would diversify visitor experience 

opportunities, contribute to visitor enjoyment 

and understanding of ongoing American history 

and values. The future Vietnam Veterans Memorial Center would replace the present information station near the Lincoln Memorial and 

provide restrooms, a bookstore, and information. Impacts to visitor enjoyment, education, 

and the ability to provide a quality American 

experience would be long-term, major, and 

beneficial. 

Cumulative Impact Summary 

Past projects in the memorial core of Washington, D.C., including the development of memorials, public and private museums, the Capitol 

Visitor Center, and other visitor attractions, 

have ensured that this area of the national capital 

provides numerous visitor opportunities. Current NPS projects (the sign system replacement, 

and rehabilitation of the D.C. War Memorial, 

the Lincoln Reflecting Pool, and the Thomas 

Jefferson plaza seawall) would improve visitor 

enjoyment and make it easier for visitors to find 

their way around. Other current projects (such 

as security perimeters, road projects) would 

increase safety. In the future the addition of 

authorized memorials and museums (including 

the Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial, the 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial Center, the Eisenhower Memorial, the U.S. Institute of Peace, the 

National Museum of African American History 

and Culture, and the National Museum of the 

American Latino), as well as future commemorative and cultural opportunities as presented in 

the Monumental Core Framework Plan), would 

all contribute to the quality of visitor 

experiences, opportunities for education and 

478
Visitor Experience: Impacts of the Preferred Alternative 

enjoyment, and visitor facilities in the metropolitan area. 

The impacts of the no-action alternative on 

visitor experience would be long-term, moderate to major, and adverse. The impacts of past, 

present, and reasonably foreseeable actions in 

the metropolitan area would generally be longterm, major, and beneficial. Resulting cumulative impacts would be long-term, major, and 

beneficial, with a slight adverse contribution 

from the no-action alternative. 

Conclusion 

The impacts of the no-action alternative on 

visitor experiences would be long-term, moderate to major, and adverse despite the fact that 

visitors would continue to be inspired by the 

National Mall and its memorials. Visitor expectations for quality experiences would not be met 

because of the degraded condition of natural 

resources, inadequate information and education about park resources and opportunities, 

insufficient facilities (such as restrooms and 

food service) for present user volumes, and continued public health and safety challenges. However, the impacts of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions would generally be 

long-term, major, and beneficial, and these 

impacts would offset the adverse impacts of the 

no-action alternative. The no-action alternative 

would make a slight adverse contribution to 

cumulative impacts. 

IMPACTS OF THE PREFERRED 

ALTERNATIVE

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Under the preferred alternative actions would 

be taken to refurbish the National Mall to be a 

beautiful, welcoming space that would accommodate high levels of use and provide a quality 

American experience. Visitor opportunities 

would be expanded in education, recreation, 

enjoyment, and entertainment; convenient, 

adequately sized, and pleasant multipurpose 

visitor facilities would be provided; pedestrian 

lighting would be improved; visitor capacity 

would be increased in some areas; and public 

health and safety issues would be addressed. 

Impacts on a Quality Visitor Experience 

The quality of the visitor experience would be 

improved on the National Mall. Refurbishing 

the National Mall, addressing deferred maintenance, replacing outdated facilities, and 

improving infrastructure elements would allow 

the National Mall to be maintained to desired 

conditions. Because the refurbishment would 

affect one of the most photographed places in 

our nation, the impacts on visitors’ ability to 

appreciate the beauty of the National Mall 

would be long-term, major, and beneficial. 

Better access and circulation would make it 

easier to visit memorials and adjacent facilities 

(primarily museums and government facilities), 

and additional educational wayside exhibits 

would provide information to increase visitor 

appreciation. Resulting impacts on the visitor 

experience would be long-term, major, and 

beneficial. 

In addition to those impacts related to demonstrations and special events that were described 

under “Impacts Common to All Alternatives,” 

general visitor experiences would be enhanced 

during demonstrations, national celebrations, 

and special events because venues would be 

improved and visitors would have information 

about the nature of the event or demonstration. 

Encouraging special events (not First Amendment demonstrations) during non-peak seasons 

and scheduling them throughout the National 

Mall would help keep major view corridors and 

open space free of activities that might otherwise 

intrude on visitor experiences. In areas that have 

high levels of demand, the requirement that 

special events have a “meaningful association” to 

the National Mall, adjacent areas, or venues 

would also improve general visitor experiences, 

and visitors would be more likely to value and 

enjoy the special events they do see. Compared 

to the no-action alternative, the preferred alternative would have long-term, major, beneficial 

impacts since the experiences of most visitors 

would be improved. 

Developing a staffed welcome plaza with related 

amenities (restrooms, seating, maps, activity 

listings, and multilingual information) on the 

Mall near the Smithsonian Metro station would 

result in long-term, major, beneficial impacts in 

 479 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

terms of creating a welcoming atmosphere for 

visitors. 

Opportunities to experience the nighttime character of the monumental core would be improved. Like the no-action alternative, lighting 

would remain focused on the prominent symbols of our nation — the Lincoln and Thomas 

Jefferson memorials, the Washington Monument, the White House, and the Capitol. 

However, under the preferred alternative the 

National Park Service would work closely with 

the Commission of Fine Arts, the National 

Capital Planning Commission, the Architect of 

the Capitol, the Smithsonian Institution, and 

D.C. city agencies to reestablish the lighting task 

force to develop an approved comprehensive 

lighting guideline for the monumental core area 

that would also prescribe desired lighting 

character for urban and park areas, characterdefining elements such as statuary and building 

facades, pedestrian and vehicular areas, and 

transitions between different light levels. 

Appropriate light levels and light color would 

also be specified for different areas. 

Lighting of other memorials and ornamental 

water bodies would continue to contribute to 

the nighttime character of the National Mall 

without intruding on the lighting of the five 

principal icons. Pedestrian lighting along the 

Tidal Basin and supplementary pedestrian 

lighting around the Mall would provide sufficient lighting for pedestrians to see walkway 

surfaces as well as other people in the area without interfering with the lighting of the prominent memorials or contributing to light pollution. These improvements would result in longterm, moderate to major, beneficial impacts 

affecting the way a great many visitors experience the National Mall at night. 

In summary, the National Mall would continue 

to deeply inspire many visitors, but compared to 

the no-action alternative, the preferred alternative would improve the quality of the visitor 

experiences as a result of refurbishing all areas, 

providing a more welcoming atmosphere, and 

enhancing nighttime experiences. Opportunities 

to experience First Amendment demonstration, 

as well as to understand and appreciate our 

nation’s history, memorials, and core American 

values, would also be enhanced. The preferred 

alternative would result in long-term, major, 

beneficial impacts on visitor experiences and 

their opportunities to have higher quality 

experiences. 

Impacts on Opportunities for Information 

and Education 

Under the preferred alternative developing a 

welcome plaza near the Smithsonian Metro 

station, improving understanding about the 

variety of park programs and wayside exhibits, 

and making use of technology to personalize 

visits would all enhance opportunities for 

information and education. These opportunities 

would help visitors understand the role of the 

National Mall as a civic stage for democracy, the 

history of the capital city, and sustainability and 

stewardship. 

Existing programs would continue to be provided and upgraded, including classroom 

curriculum, cell phone tours, bicycling tours, 

and exhibits at memorials. NPS programs would 

seek to use new technology that would allow 

visitors the flexibility to customize their visits 

and learning experience. Electronic daily listings 

of programs, activities, and events would make 

many more people aware of park programs. 

The Mall welcome plaza would be the hub for 

orientation, information, wayfinding, and hospitality. It could serve as a starting point for many 

guided walks, a group meeting location, and a 

venue for welcoming programs that could include recorded music or small live performances. Impacts on opportunities for education 

would be long-term, major, and beneficial 

because of the plaza’s location at the primary 

Metro entrance to the National Mall. Impacts on 

visitors during construction would be shortterm, minor, and adverse. 

Taken as a whole, the impacts of the preferred 

alternative on opportunities for information and 

education, compared to the no-action alternative, would be long-term, moderate to major, 

and beneficial because information would be 

more readily available, educational opportunities would be more diverse and could be personalized by visitors to meet their interests, a 

welcome plaza at a centralized location would 

help visitors plan their activities and find out 

what opportunities are available, and educa480
Visitor Experience: Impacts of the Preferred Alternative 

tional themes and methods would be expanded. 

These changes would affect most visitors and 

would better fulfill NPS policy goals. 

Impacts on Opportunities for Enjoyment, 

Entertainment, and Informal Recreation 

The preferred alternative would continue to 

provide numerous sunny and shady open space 

opportunities on the National Mall for enjoyment (sightseeing and enjoying views), general 

relaxation, and informal recreational pastimes 

such as picnicking, reading, dog walking, and 

walking/strolling. The impacts of these opportunities would continue to be long-term, 

moderate, and beneficial. 

Long-distance views to and from memorials 

along planned view corridors would continue to 

inspire visitors, but under the preferred alternative the condition of foreground areas as well 

as overall conditions on the National Mall 

would also be improved, helping make visitor 

experiences more enjoyable, a long-term, moderate, beneficial impact on visitor enjoyment. 

Walking and strolling experiences would be improved throughout the National Mall by replacing and widening walks around the Tidal 

Basin, removing gravel from pathways on the 

Mall, and using universally accessible paving 

materials that would also reduce dust and slipperiness, resulting in long-term, major, beneficial impacts. 

Additional recreational opportunities for children would include water features designed for 

play, model boating, and naturalistic features in 

Constitution Gardens that could be climbed on. 

Children’s educational programming could 

include active play or recreation components. 

Like the no-action alternative, informal children’s play (including preschool activities) 

would continue in open turf areas and within the 

shade of trees. While no children’s playgrounds 

would be provided, the carousel would remain, 

continuing a long-term, negligible to minor, 

beneficial impact. Overall impacts on children’s 

recreation would be long-term, minor, and 

beneficial because the needs of a small portion 

of the visiting population would be addressed. 

Opportunities for relevant entertainment, music, 

and performances would be diversified and 

expanded to increase enjoyment. Entertainment 

opportunities would continue at larger activities, 

such as national celebrations and holiday concerts, annual events (National Cherry Blossom 

Festival, Smithsonian Folklife Festival), events 

such as twilight tattoos, and special events such 

as Kennedy Center simulcasts and Screen on the 

Green movies. In addition, several distinctly 

different multipurpose areas with performance 

venues would be created at Union Square, the 

Sylvan Theater area at the Washington Monument, and Constitution Gardens. 

New facilities at Union Square would include 

views of the Capitol, the Mall, and the Washington Monument, as well as nearby destinations 

such as the National Gallery East Building and 

the U.S. Botanic Garden. The redesigned Sylvan 

Theater would be better oriented to the hillside 

to take advantage of seating opportunities, as 

well as views of the Washington Monument. The 

new multipurpose performance venue at Constitution Gardens would be on the east edge of 

the lake, banked by gentle tree-covered hills, 

while views toward the facility from the west and 

northwest would include the Washington 

Monument. These venues would accommodate 

small or large performances on a regular basis, 

while at other times they would be pleasant 

locations for visitors to rest, relax, and enjoy the 

unique views. These multipurpose facilities 

would have long-term, major, beneficial impacts 

on relevant entertainment and enjoyment. 

The welcome plaza on the Mall would be used 

for small performances and programs that 

would contribute to a friendly, hospitable, and 

enjoyable atmosphere. The D.C. War Memorial 

would be renovated to allow small to midsize 

performances, which would be consistent with 

its original function as a bandstand. The steps 

and lower approachway at the Lincoln Memorial, along with the steps and plaza at the 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial, would continue to 

provide seating and performance areas. Infrastructure (such as utilities) would be provided to 

support relevant entertainment and performances. Room Four in the Franklin Delano 

Roosevelt Memorial could also be used more 

frequently for programs, lectures, or appropriate 

performances, which it was designed to accommodate. 

 481 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

The impacts of the preferred alternative on 

opportunities for enjoyment, entertainment, and 

informal recreation, compared to the no-action 

alternative, would be long-term, major, and 

beneficial primarily because of improved opportunities for general enjoyment and relaxation, 

pleasant multipurpose venues, and more 

regularly scheduled relevant entertainment. 

These actions would affect most visitors. 

Impacts on Opportunities for Active 

Recreation 

Under the preferred alternative recreational 

opportunities would be expanded. Additional 

recreation equipment rentals would be available, 

such as canoes and rowboats at the Tidal Basin, 

as well as model boats, bicycles, kites, or ice 

skates. More choice in recreational activities 

would support healthful recreation policies, 

resulting in long-term, minor, beneficial impacts. 

The condition of open space available for pickup 

games (Frisbee, kickball, soccer, football, softball, kite flying) and organized team sports 

(softball, volleyball, etc.) would be improved, 

making play more pleasant and resulting in longterm, moderate, beneficial impacts. Surfaces 

appropriate for jogging or running would be 

provided, a minor to moderate impact on individual joggers and running clubs. Bicycling 

would be improved, with separate bike lanes or 

routes supporting recreational use of the National Mall as described in the “Access and 

Circulation” section. 

The preferred alternative, compared to the noaction alternative, would have long-term, minor 

to moderate, beneficial impacts on opportunities 

for active recreation as the result of additional 

opportunities and improved facilities or 

conditions.

Impacts of Visitor Facilities and 

Amenities 

Under the preferred alternative visitor facilities 

and amenities would be provided on the National Mall to accommodate the high levels of 

visitation it receives. Visitor facilities and amenities would be conveniently located, and they 

would generally be designed to serve multiple 

purposes and to incorporate naturally compatible amenities, such as restrooms near food 

service locations or seating and information by 

restrooms, in accordance with best practices 

used at other sites. All facilities would have an 

educational or informational component. 

Outdated facilities would be replaced. Many 

facilities (including mobile carts) would use a 

consistent design so they would be instantly 

recognizable and easy to find. In general, impacts would be long-term, major, and beneficial 

as the result of providing convenient, wellspaced, and pleasant visitor facilities. 

Restrooms would be conveniently located near 

main pedestrian routes, and on the Mall they 

would be visible from existing refreshment 

stands. Restrooms would be adequately sized for 

expected use. For example, restrooms near tour 

bus parking and subway entrance areas would be 

sized for high levels of use. Restrooms would 

generally be located near destinations or spaced 

no more than one-third of a mile apart for visitor 

comfort and convenience. New restrooms 

would be added, and aging restrooms would be 

replaced with new facilities in better locations. 

Family-friendly restrooms would be provided, 

and additional restroom facilities would be 

provided for women. The impact of more, better 

dispersed, and adequately sized restrooms on 

the visitor experience would be long-term, 

major, and beneficial. 

Drinking water would always be provided near 

restrooms, and drinking fountains would facilitate filling water bottles or taking care of pet 

water needs. Free-standing drinking fountains 

would be removed because they are difficult to 

maintain. Impacts would be long-term, major, 

and beneficial. 

Food service would include additional types of 

facilities, such as full-service restaurants and 

cafeterias, as well as refreshment stands and 

mobile carts. Food service areas would be designed to be pleasant and attractive places for 

visitors to linger, enjoy views and watching 

activities, and be near trash and recycling 

containers, subtly encouraging visitors not to 

litter and reducing impacts at memorials. Outdoor seating areas would have shade options 

and could include potted flowering plants, small 

ornamental water fountains, or music to make 

the spaces more attractive and pleasant. Impacts 

482
Visitor Experience: Impacts of the Preferred Alternative 

on the visitor experience would be long-term, 

major, and beneficial. 

As previously described, multipurpose facilities 

at Union Square, Washington Monument, and 

Constitution Gardens would be designed as 

destinations with a unique architectural style 

compatible with the character of the National 

Mall. 

• Union Square — Designing Union Square 

as a dignified area for visitor enjoyment, 

with food service, restrooms, information, 

retail, seating, and shade, would encourage 

visitors to rest and enjoy the views, programs, events, and performances, or to 

witness or participate in demonstrations. 

Since no visitor facilities are now in this 

area, redevelopment would result in longterm, major, beneficial impacts on 

convenience and comfort for visitors. 

• Washington Monument Grounds — The 

multipurpose facility at the centrally located Washington Monument would be a 

hub for visitor services, replacing the temporary facilities tent. Services such as food, 

restrooms, retail, information, and seating 

would be convenient for those waiting for 

Washington Monument tickets, visitors 

using tour buses and visitor transit, and 

pedestrians on their way to or from memorials around the Tidal Basin. The indoor / 

outdoor facilities would be very flexible 

and would be sized to accommodate large 

numbers of people. Two existing restrooms 

would remain — Monument Lodge was 

recently renovated, and Survey Lodge 

would be remodeled to provide more facilities for people with disabilities. The impacts 

of new and renovated facilities at the Washington Monument would be long-term, 

major, and beneficial. 

• Constitution Gardens — Constitution 

Gardens would provide a higher end multipurpose destination, with food service, 

indoor/outdoor seating in a garden setting, 

restrooms, retail, and a performance area. 

The area is convenient to the World War II 

Memorial and public bus transit (the Circulator), visitor transit, and tour bus drop-off/ 

pickup areas. Restrooms would be replaced. Additional seating would be well 

dispersed, some located for enjoyment of 

views as well as to meet the needs of 

groups. Impacts would be long-term, major, 

and beneficial. 

Visitor facilities and amenities at other locations 

around the National Mall that would enhance 

the visitor experiences would include the 

following: 

• World War II Memorial — The restrooms, 

which are convenient to tour bus drop-offs, 

would remain. 

• Lincoln Memorial — Expanding restrooms 

inside the memorial and adding a restroom 

in the vicinity would make facilities more 

convenient to visitors. 

• Ash Woods — Providing new restrooms in 

a better location would better disperse restroom facilities in this area of the National 

Mall. Should future use levels warrant, this 

area could also provide seasonal food 

service. 

• Tidal Basin Area — The existing refreshment stand would be replaced. Providing a 

multipurpose facility (with food, retail, and 

restrooms) near the Tidal Basin parking lot 

would create a pleasant location to sit and 

enjoy views or recreational opportunities. 

• Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial — If 

future use increased, a restroom and food 

service facility could be located near Ohio 

Drive and West Basin Drive, convenient to 

the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial 

and the future Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial. The Roosevelt Memorial would 

continue to have a bookstore and two restrooms, and the future King Memorial 

would also have a bookstore and restrooms. 

• Thomas Jefferson Memorial — Replacing 

the refreshment stand with food, retail, 

restrooms, and seating sufficient to accommodate tour bus passengers would address 

visitor needs. Restrooms and a bookstore 

would remain inside the memorial. 

The preferred alternative, compared to the noaction alternative, would result in long-term, 

major, beneficial impacts for all visitors as a 

result of providing diverse visitor facilities that 

would be adequately sized and could accommodate multiple purposes (restrooms, food service, 

 483 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

retail, seating). They would be well dispersed 

along pedestrian routes and entries, and they 

would be designed to be pleasant locations that 

contribute to enjoyment of the National Mall. 

Impacts on Public Health and Safety 

Under the preferred alternative a number of 

changes would be made in the way public health 

and safety are addressed. Locations would be 

more easily accessible to people with disabilities 

due to an emphasis on incorporating universal 

designs into all facilities. Grade level changes 

would be minimized at Union Square, and gravel 

on walkways on the Mall would be eliminated 

and high-quality hard surfaces would make it 

easier for all visitors to move around. Elevators 

would continue to be provided at the Lincoln 

Memorial, the Thomas Jefferson Memorial, and 

the Washington Monument. Additional parking 

for people with disabilities would be provided at 

Survey Lodge on the Washington Monument 

grounds, and wheelchairs and scooters would be 

also be available at this location so that people 

with disabilities could easily visit multiple destinations. Breathing problems caused by dust 

from gravel walkways on the Mall would be 

reduced by paving walkways. The resulting impacts would be long-term, moderate to major, 

and beneficial because all visitors would benefit 

from accessible designs. 

Providing shaded seating, indoor food service, 

and access to ornamental water features 

designed to accommodate visitor play would all 

help alleviate health conditions caused by hot 

humid weather. Temporary misters might also 

be used to help cool people during hot humid 

weather. Water bottles would continue to be 

provided during some events. 

Providing pedestrian lighting throughout the 

National Mall, with appropriate transitions to 

uniformly lower lighting levels on the National 

Mall, would improve public safety and prevent 

accidents, as well as enhance the nighttime ambience. Supplementary lighting would ensure 

that pathway lighting would be uniform so that 

there would not be dark areas between pools of 

light that might make visitors feel uncomfortable. Pedestrian lighting around the Tidal Basin 

would also enhance opportunities to visit the 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Thomas Jefferson, 

and George Mason memorials. A lighting plan 

for the National Mall would be developed, and 

all light fixtures would be coordinated, ensuring 

that lighting would be directed at pathways and 

not shine into visitors’ eyes and making it easier 

for people to see surface conditions as well as 

other people in the area or their immediate 

surroundings. 

Roads would continue to be illuminated, and the 

highly developed edges of the National Mall 

would be more brightly lit than interior spaces. 

Some crosswalks could also be more brightly lit 

to increase the visibility of pedestrians. The 

impact of existing road and pedestrian lighting 

on public health and safety would be long-term, 

moderate to major, and beneficial. 

Emergency care would continue to be provided 

by park rangers, and designated first-aid tents 

would continue to be frequently provided by 

event organizers at national celebrations and 

events. Emergency call boxes would be located 

at logical points throughout the National Mall or 

at intersections, and an emergency notification 

system would be provided. 

Changes to public health and safety under the 

preferred alternative, compared to the no-action 

alternative, would result in long-term, major, 

beneficial impacts because of improved access, 

increased pedestrian lighting, an emergency 

announcement system, and amenities to help 

visitors cope with extreme summer weather 

conditions. 

Impacts on User Capacity 

Changes under the preferred alternative would 

increase the number of people who could be 

accommodated on the National Mall without 

adversely affecting resource conditions. 

Changes at various venues, such as wider walks 

around the Tidal Basin, would create pleasanter 

conditions for visitors throughout the year and 

benefit general visitors. Capacity would also be 

increased at Union Square. Capacities at 

national memorials would not change. 

Impacts on visitors would be long-term, major, 

and beneficial, especially during large annual 

events such as the National Cherry Blossom 

Festival, because space would be provided for 

logistical operations and amenities (such as 

484
Visitor Experience: Impacts of Alternative A 

portable restrooms), reducing impacts on 

general visitors. 

Cumulative Impacts 

Past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions 

would be the same as those described under the 

no-action alternative and would be long-term, 

major, and beneficial. The impacts of the preferred alternative would be long-term, major, 

and beneficial. Cumulative impacts would be 

long-term, major, and beneficial, with a substantial beneficial contribution from the preferred 

alternative. 

Conclusion 

Compared to no-action alternative, the impacts 

of the preferred alternative on visitor experiences would be long-term, major, and beneficial 

because of well-maintained areas that would 

meet desired conditions for the National Mall, 

enhanced website information, a more welcoming atmosphere (including a welcome plaza on 

the Mall and daily interpretive program listings), 

more opportunities to understand core 

American values through expanded educational 

themes, well-dispersed and pleasant visitor 

facilities that are adequately sized to meet user 

needs, more food service choice, an improved 

pedestrian and bicycling environment, increased 

opportunities for informal enjoyment, additional recreational opportunities and improved 

playing fields, more shaded seating, additional 

pedestrian lighting, and an emergency 

notification system. These impacts, combined 

with the long-term, major, beneficial impacts of 

past, present, and reasonably foreseeable 

actions, would result in long, term, major, 

beneficial cumulative impacts, with a substantial 

beneficial contribution from the preferred 

alternative. 

IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE A 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

The impacts on the visitor experience under 

alternative A would be similar to those under the 

no-action alternative. The National Park Service 

would continue to provide visitor facilities and 

would address some public health and safety 

issues, and improved resource conditions and 

visitor educational experiences would increase 

the quality and enjoyment of visits. However, 

visitor facilities and services would remain inadequate for the levels of use that the National 

Mall receives. 

Impacts on a Quality Visitor Experience 

Like the no-action alternative, a range of visitor 

experiences would continue to be provided on 

the National Mall. There would be no change in 

opportunities to visit memorials that convey our 

history and democratic values, and there would 

be no change in opportunities to visit adjacent 

facilities (primarily museums and government 

facilities). Visitors would still be able to contemplate core American values and to enjoy visible 

symbols of our form of government, primarily 

the executive branch (symbolized by the White 

House) and the legislative branch (the U.S. 

Capitol). 

Under alternative A the appearance of the National Mall’s landscape would be substantially 

improved as areas were rehabilitated, social 

trails were limited with various types of fencing 

and curbs, and deferred maintenance projects 

were undertaken, including the reconstruction 

of seawalls and deteriorated walkways and the 

repair of outdated facilities and restrooms. 

These improvements would affect the beauty of 

one of the most photographed places in our 

nation, resulting in long-term, moderate, beneficial impacts on visitors’ ability to appreciate the 

beauty of the National Mall. 

While new pedestrian signs would use symbols 

to make wayfinding easier, resulting in longterm, major, beneficial impacts, many visitors 

would continue to have no sense of welcome 

and orientation, with long-term, major, adverse 

impacts on overall experiences. 

In addition to those impacts on general visitors 

related to demonstrations and special events 

that were described under “Impacts Common to 

All Alternatives,” under alternative A requiring 

special events to have a “meaningful association” 

to the National Mall, adjacent areas, or venues 

would improve opportunities for general visitors 

to value and enjoy the special events they do see. 

Compared to the no-action alternative, impacts 

would be long-term, moderate to major, and 

 485 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

beneficial since the experiences of many to most 

visitors would be enhanced. 

Opportunities to experience the nighttime character of the monumental core would remain 

focused on the most prominent symbols of our 

nation — the Lincoln and Thomas Jefferson 

memorials, the Washington Monument, the 

White House, and the Capitol. Like the preferred alternative, the National Park Service 

would work closely with the National Capital 

Planning Commission, the Commission of Fine 

Arts, and the Architect of the Capitol to develop 

a comprehensive lighting guideline for the 

monumental core. Lighting of other memorials 

and ornamental water bodies would continue to 

contribute to the nighttime experience on the 

National Mall. Under alternative A the removal 

of temporary lighting along the north and south 

elm walks flanking the Lincoln Reflecting Pool 

would be consistent with the historic design for 

this area and would focus attention on the 

memorial. 

Alternative A, compared to the no-action alternative, would make some changes in visitor 

opportunities to have quality experiences, primarily as a result of improved landscape conditions, resulting in long-term, moderate, beneficial impacts although no actions would be taken 

to accommodate increased visitor use levels, and 

crowded conditions in some areas would 

continue to adversely affect visitor experiences. 

Impacts on Opportunities for Information 

and Education 

Existing opportunities for information and 

education would remain, with wayside exhibits, 

ranger programs, and a variety of park brochures being provided. There would be an 

additional focus on the city’s history, and more 

living history programs would be provided, 

along with multilingual programs and brochures. 

Rangers throughout the National Mall would be 

able to provide directions and answer questions, 

creating a welcoming atmosphere. Classroom 

curriculum, cell phone tours, a variety of 

bicycling tours, and educational wayside 

exhibits would continue to be provided and 

updated, as well as park brochures, maps, and 

the NPS passport (stamping) program. Park 

websites would also be substantially improved 

and would include virtual tours in addition to 

more educational content and trip planning 

information. 

Compared to the no-action alternative, alternative A would have long-term, moderate, beneficial impacts on opportunities for visitor information and education, primarily because educational themes would be expanded, multilingual 

programs and offerings would be provided, and 

the park website would be improved. 

Impacts on Opportunities for Enjoyment, 

Entertainment, and Informal Recreation 

Alternative A, like the no-action alternative, 

would continue to provide numerous sunny and 

shady spaces for visitors to enjoy sightseeing or 

views, relaxing, and participating in informal 

recreational pastimes, such as picnicking, 

reading, dog walking, and walking/strolling. The 

impacts on visitor enjoyment and informal 

recreation would be long-term, moderate, and 

beneficial. 

Views to and from memorials along planned 

view corridors would continue to inspire visitors, and improved landscape conditions would 

make experiences more enjoyable for many 

visitors, who would readily appreciate the improved appearance of a national treasure. Impacts on visitor enjoyment would be long-term, 

moderate, and beneficial. 

Walking and strolling experiences would continue to take place in less than ideal conditions 

in many areas. For example, walks around the 

Tidal Basin would remain too narrow for 

present levels of use. While walking surfaces in 

need of repair would be replaced, gravel 

pathways would continue to be slippery and 

dusty, as well as inaccessible to many people, 

especially visitors using wheelchairs. Resulting 

impacts would be long-term, moderate, and 

adverse. 

Informal children’s play (including preschool 

activities) would continue in open turf areas and 

within the shade of trees. No children’s playgrounds would be provided, and the carousel 

would be removed, resulting in long-term, 

negligible to minor, adverse impacts. 

486
Visitor Experience: Impacts of Alternative A 

Opportunities for relevant entertainment, such 

as musical and theatrical performances, would 

continue to be limited and would take place 

primarily in conjunction with larger activities, 

such as national celebrations (holiday concerts), 

annual events (National Cherry Blossom Festival, Smithsonian Folklife Festival), events such 

as twilight tattoos, and special events such as 

Kennedy Center simulcasts and Screen on the 

Green movies. Most entertainment venues, 

other than open turf areas, would continue to be 

limited in their ability to conveniently host large 

or small performances on a regular basis. The 

Sylvan Theater would continue to be the primary venue designed for entertainment, although its outdated facilities would remain. 

Circulation changes have affected viewing and 

access to the stage, and the theater’s location 

make it unusable for major events like the 

Fourth of July. The D.C. War Memorial would 

be improved as a small entertainment venue. 

The steps at the Lincoln Memorial and the 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial provide natural 

seating areas, and the hard-surfaced plaza areas 

can support regularly scheduled programs and 

entertainment. Room Four in the Franklin 

Delano Roosevelt Memorial, which was designed for programs, would be used more for 

this purpose. 

Overall impacts on opportunities for enjoyment 

and informal recreation under alternative A, 

compared to the no-action alternative, would be 

long-term, moderate, and beneficial because of 

improved conditions on the Mall and continued 

opportunities for informal recreation. However, 

gravel walkways would continue to adversely 

affect enjoyment for many visitors because of 

dust and difficult access for people with physical 

disabilities. Also, opportunities for relevant 

entertainment would remain limited. Resulting 

impacts on visitor enjoyment would be longterm, moderate, and adverse. 

Impacts on Opportunities for Active 

Recreation 

Like the no-action alternative, existing recreational opportunities would remain. These include recreation equipment rentals (paddleboats), open space available for pickup games 

(Frisbee, kickball, soccer, football, softball, kite 

flying), as well as spaces identified for organized 

team sports (such as softball and volleyball). 

Choices in boating opportunities would remain 

limited to paddleboats. 

Appropriate surfaces and routes for jogging 

would continue to be lacking throughout the 

National Mall. More physical obstacles to prevent social trails adjacent to many walks and the 

coping of the Lincoln Reflecting Pool would 

continue long-term, minor, adverse impacts on 

runners. Bicycling would continue as both a 

circulation method and a recreational pastime, 

with related impacts addressed under the 

“Access and Circulation” section. 

The impacts of alternative A on opportunities 

for active recreation, compared to the no-action 

alternative, would be long-term, negligible, and 

both adverse and beneficial. Opportunities for 

active recreation would remain, a beneficial 

impact, but more obstacles to running would 

result in an adverse impact on joggers, and 

bicycling would not be improved. 

Impacts of Visitor Facilities and 

Amenities 

Under alternative A the emphasis would be on 

protecting the National Mall’s historic landscape, and minimal facilities (such as restrooms) 

would be provided to help meet current visitor 

needs. While outdated visitor facilities would be 

replaced, and small restrooms would be added 

near existing food service locations, associated 

amenities that would enhance and facilitate 

visitor use would not be proposed under this 

alternative. 

Bench seating would be provided in both shady 

and sunny locations, with more seating in shade 

and some seating oriented to take advantage of 

views. Retail facilities would continue to include 

small bookstores, and some locations would 

offer souvenirs. Permanent refreshment stands 

and mobile carts would continue to offer food 

service, but under this alternative more food 

choices would be offered. Outdoor seating 

would remain near refreshment stands, and 

areas would be more pleasant for relaxing, even 

though no indoor seating would be available. 

Visitor facilities at other locations around the 

National Mall would include the following: 

 487 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

• Union Square — Seating would be added at 

Union Square, but no visitor facilities (such 

as food service, retail, or restrooms) would 

be provided. 

• The Mall — In addition to the four current 

refreshment stands, four restrooms would 

be provided on the Mall (east of 15th 

Street), helping meet needs in one of the 

most heavily used areas of the National 

Mall. 

• Washington Monument grounds — Food, 

retail, and restrooms would be moved to a 

new underground facility east of 15th 

Street. This location would make outdoor 

seating impractical because of the surrounding traffic noise, which would also 

adversely affect views and visitor circulation. Existing facilities would remain at 

Monument Lodge (bookstore, restrooms) 

and Survey Lodge (restrooms), while the 

restrooms would be replaced at the Sylvan 

Theater. 

• Constitution Gardens — Restrooms and 

the seasonal refreshment stand would be 

replaced at Constitution Gardens. 

• Lincoln Memorial — A restroom would be 

added near the refreshment stand south of 

the Lincoln Memorial. 

• Ash Woods — The Ash Woods restroom 

would be replaced and would improve the 

distribution of restrooms on the National 

Mall. 

• Tidal Basin — The seasonal refreshment 

stand near the Tidal Basin parking lot 

would be replaced, and restrooms would be 

added. 

• Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial — A

bookstore and restrooms would continue 

to be provided at the Franklin Delano 

Roosevelt Memorial and would be provided at the future Martin Luther King, Jr. 

Memorial. 

• Thomas Jefferson Memorial — A bookstore, retail options, restrooms, and a 

seasonal refreshment stand would remain 

at the Thomas Jefferson Memorial. 

Compared to the no-action alternative, visitor 

facilities under alternative A would be improved, 

so impacts on visitors experiences would be 

long-term, moderate, and beneficial, primarily 

because of additional restrooms and the replacement of outdated facilities (restrooms and 

refreshment stands). 

Impacts on Public Health and Safety 

Alternative A would be similar to the no-action 

alternative in the way that many public health 

and safety concerns would be managed. However, under alternative A longer crosswalk times 

and a permanent mass notification system would 

be provided, improving health and safety for all 

visitors and resulting in long-term, moderate to 

major, beneficial impacts. 

Like the no-action alternative, conditions in 

some locations would continue to make access 

difficult for people with disabilities, such as 

gravel walkways on the Mall and steps at Union 

Square. Elevators would continue to be provided at the Lincoln Memorial, the Thomas 

Jefferson Memorial, and the Washington 

Monument. Distances between destinations, 

drop-off and pickup locations, and parking locations for people with disabilities would continue 

to be inconvenient. The requirement to return 

borrowed wheelchairs to where they were 

picked up could make touring multiple destinations difficult for these visitors. Impacts would 

continue to be short- and long-term, moderate 

to major, and adverse for people with disabilities, as well as up to 25% of visitors who may 

have difficulty walking distances. Also, NPS 

policy goals for universal design and access for 

all segments of society would not be achieved. 

Visitors would continue to be affected by weather extremes, and during hot humid weather 

the National Park Service would continue to 

occasionally run sprinklers to allow people to 

cool down. Water bottles would also continue to 

be provided during some events. Dust from 

loose gravel on walkways, which is exacerbated 

by wind, would continue to affect the comfort 

and breathing of many Mall visitors. 

Pedestrian lighting would be largely concentrated in the east-west corridor between the U.S. 

Capitol and the World War II Memorial. In 

some areas darker spots between light fixtures 

would continue to make some visitors feel uncomfortable because of not being able to see 

488
Visitor Experience: Impacts of Alternative A 

surface conditions or other people. The Tidal 

Basin would continue to have pedestrian lighting 

only at the memorials, leaving the walkway 

around the water body dark. The lack of pedestrian lighting would also continue to affect 

nighttime visits to the Vietnam Veterans, Korean 

War Veterans, Lincoln, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Thomas Jefferson, and George Mason 

memorials. Light from some pedestrian light 

fixtures would continue to shine into visitors’ 

eyes, making it more difficult to see their 

surroundings. 

Roads would continue to be illuminated, along 

with most crosswalks. There would still be a 

transition between the more brightly lit edges of 

the National Mall that are highly developed and 

the interior areas. The impacts on public health 

and safety of pedestrian and road lighting would 

be long-term, moderate to major, and adverse 

because of the lack of pedestrian lighting in 

some areas and the quality of existing lighting. 

However, lighting of the prominent memorials, 

along with the White House and the Capitol, 

would remain focal points for nighttime experiences on the National Mall, with beneficial 

impacts. 

Emergency care would continue to be provided 

by park rangers, and event organizers frequently 

provide first-aid tents during national celebrations and large special events. There are no 

emergency call boxes, and impacts would be 

long-term, minor to moderate, and adverse. 

Taken as a whole, the impacts of alternative A, 

compared to the no-action alternative, would be 

long-term, minor to moderate, and adverse because of continued lack of pedestrian lighting, 

which would affect safe access to memorials for 

many visitors. Providing a mass notification system and improving crossing times at crosswalks 

would have long-term, moderate to major, 

beneficial impacts.

Impacts on User Capacity 

Under alternative A there would be no change in 

how many people could be accommodated on 

the National Mall. General visitors would continue to be negatively affected by uses during 

large demonstrations, national celebrations, and 

special events because fewer permanent amenities would mean that event participants would 

be using general visitor facilities. As the number 

of users increases, so does the number of needed 

support facilities (restrooms, first-aid stations, 

event management offices), and that reduces 

space available for users. 

There would be no changes to user capacity as 

the result of continuing present management 

strategies on the National Mall. However, the 

impact would remain long-term, moderate to 

major, and adverse because several prominent 

locations have continued obstacles to levels of 

use that are experienced today. 

Cumulative Impacts 

The impacts of past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions would be the same as those 

described under the no-action alternative and 

would be long-term, major, and beneficial. The 

overall impacts of alternative A would be longterm, moderate, and beneficial. Cumulative 

impacts would be long-term, major, and beneficial, with a modest beneficial contribution 

from alternative A because of the prominence of 

the National Mall in the city. 

Conclusion 

Compared to the no-action alternative, alternative A would have long-term, moderate, beneficial impacts on visitor experiences because of 

substantially improved resource conditions and 

the appearance of the National Mall, better 

website information, educational themes focused on memorials and the development of the 

capital city, improved visitor facilities supplemented by small visitor facilities and food service at refreshment stands, a better pedestrian 

environment, improved playing field conditions, 

and an emergency notification system. But the 

needs of high volumes of users would not be 

met. These impacts, combined with the impacts 

of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable 

actions, would result in long-term, major, 

beneficial impacts, with a modest beneficial 

contribution from alternative A. 

 489 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE B 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Under alternative B, like the preferred alternative, the National Mall would be refurbished to 

be a beautiful, welcoming space in the heart of 

the nation’s capital. It would be able to accommodate high levels of use and provide quality 

visitor experiences. Additional opportunities for 

education, enjoyment, entertainment, and recreation would be provided, along with convenient, 

adequately sized, and pleasant multipurpose 

visitor facilities. Pedestrian experiences would 

be improved, including nighttime experiences, 

visitor capacity would be increased in some 

areas, and public health and safety issues would 

be addressed. 

Impacts on a Quality Visitor Experience 

The overall quality of visitor experiences on the 

National Mall would be improved. Refurbishing 

the National Mall, addressing deferred maintenance, and improving infrastructure elements 

would allow the National Mall to be maintained 

to desired conditions. Because the refurbishment would affect one of the most photographed places in our nation, the resulting 

impacts on visitors’ ability to appreciate the 

beauty of the National Mall would be long-term, 

major, and beneficial. 

Better access and circulation would make it 

easier to visit memorials and adjacent facilities 

(primarily museums and government facilities), 

and additional wayside education would increase visitor appreciation. Impacts on visitor 

experiences would be long-term, major, and 

beneficial. 

Under alternative B cultural offerings and events 

on the Mall would be permitted to take place 

within the elm tree panels on the Mall if new 

methodologies could ensure that soils would not 

be compacted and that tree roots would not be 

adversely affected. 

In addition to those impacts related to demonstrations and special events that were described 

under “Impacts Common to All Alternatives,” 

the experience of general visitors would be 

enhanced because venues would be improved 

and they would have information about events 

and demonstrations. Compared to the no-action 

alternative, the impacts of alternative B on the 

experience of general visitors would be longterm, major, and beneficial since improvements 

would affect the experience of most visitors. 

Developing a staffed welcome plaza with related 

amenities (restrooms, seating, maps, activity 

listings, and multilingual information) would be 

developed on the Mall near the Smithsonian 

Metro station, which serves as the primary entry 

for many visitors, would create a welcoming 

atmosphere with long-term, major, beneficial 

impacts. 

Opportunities to experience the nighttime 

character of the monumental core would be 

substantially improved. Like the no-action 

alternative, lighting would remain focused on 

the prominent symbols of our nation — the 

Lincoln and Thomas Jefferson memorials, the 

Washington Monument, the White House, and 

the Capitol. Like the preferred alternative, the 

National Park Service would work closely with 

the National Capital Planning Commission, the 

Commission of Fine Arts, and the Architect of 

the Capitol to develop a comprehensive lighting 

guideline for the monumental core area. 

Lighting of other memorials and ornamental 

water bodies would continue to contribute to 

the nighttime character of the National Mall. 

Pedestrian lighting along the Tidal Basin and 

supplementary pedestrian lighting along the 

Mall would enhance the visitor experience 

without interfering with the lighting of the 

prominent memorials. These actions would 

result in long-term, moderate to major, 

beneficial impacts affecting the way a great many 

visitors experience the National Mall at night. 

In summary, alternative B would improve the 

quality of visitor experiences on the National 

Mall, primarily because it would be refurbished, 

a more welcoming atmosphere would be created, and nighttime experiences would be 

enhanced. Opportunities to experience First 

Amendment demonstrations, as well as to 

understand and appreciate our nation’s history, 

memorials, and core American values, would 

also be enhanced. Alternative B would result in 

long-term, major, beneficial impacts on visitor 

experiences. 

490
Visitor Experience: Impacts of Alternative B 

Impacts on Opportunities for Information 

and Education 

Under alternative B, like the preferred alternative, the development of a welcome plaza near 

the Smithsonian Metro station, the improved 

variety of park programs and wayside exhibits, 

and the use of technology to personalize visits 

would all enhance opportunities for information 

and education. These opportunities would help 

visitors understand the role of the National Mall 

as a civic stage for democracy, the history of the 

capital city, and sustainability and stewardship. 

Existing programs would continue to be provided and upgraded, including classroom curriculum, cell phone tours, bicycling tours, and 

exhibits at memorials. NPS programs would 

seek to use new technology in order to personalize visits so that people would be able to explore the National Mall based on their own 

interests, making visits more relevant, enjoyable, 

and inspirational regardless of the time of visit. 

The Mall welcome plaza would be the hub for 

orientation, information, wayfinding, and hospitality. It could serve as a starting point for many 

guided walks, a group meeting location, and a 

venue for welcoming programs that could include recorded music or small live performances. Impacts on opportunities for education 

would be long-term, major, and beneficial 

because of the plaza’s location at the primary 

Metro entrance to the National Mall. 

Electronic daily listings of programs, activities 

and events would make many more people 

aware of park programs. More multilingual 

speakers and publications would also be provided. Park brochures, maps, and the passport 

(stamping) program would be more readily 

visible, with directional signs to information 

areas. Self-service areas would allow visitors to 

obtain maps and brochures at their convenience. 

Park websites would be user friendly and up-todate. 

Taken as a whole, the impacts of alternative B on 

opportunities for information and education, 

compared to the no-action alternative, would be 

long-term, moderate to major, and beneficial 

because information would be more readily 

available, educational opportunities would be 

more diverse and could be personalized by 

visitors to meet their interests, a centralized 

welcome plaza would help visitors plan their 

activities and find out what opportunities are 

available, and educational themes and methods 

would be expanded. These changes would affect 

most visitors and would better fulfill NPS policy 

goals. 

Impacts on Opportunities for Enjoyment, 

Entertainment, and Informal Recreation 

Alternative B, like the preferred alternative, 

would continue to provide numerous sunny and 

shady open spaces on the National Mall for 

enjoyment (sightseeing and enjoying views), 

general relaxation, and informal recreational 

pastimes such as picnicking, reading, dog 

walking, and walking/strolling. The impacts of 

these opportunities would continue to be longterm, moderate, and beneficial. 

Views to and from memorials along planned 

view corridors would continue to inspire visitors, but conditions in foreground areas as well 

as the overall condition of the National Mall 

would be improved, making visitor experiences 

more enjoyable. Impacts would be long-term, 

moderate, and beneficial. 

Walking and strolling experiences would be 

improved throughout the National Mall by 

replacing and widening walks around the Tidal 

Basin, and removing gravel from pathways on 

the Mall and using hard surface paving that 

would be universally accessible and would 

reduce dust. Resulting impacts would be longterm, major, and beneficial because almost all 

visitors would be affected. 

Opportunities for informal children’s play (including preschool activities) would be the same 

as the no-action alternative, with open turf areas 

and shaded areas available for play; no children’s 

playgrounds would be provided, but the carousel would remain, with long-term, negligible to 

minor, beneficial impacts. Under alternative B 

additional children’s play opportunities would 

include water features designed for play, and the 

overall impact on children’s recreation would be 

long-term, minor to moderate, and beneficial 

because the needs of a small portion of the 

visiting population would be addressed. 

 491 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Opportunities for relevant entertainment, music 

and performances would be diversified and 

expanded to increase enjoyment, similar to the 

preferred alternative. Entertainment opportunities would continue at national celebrations 

(holiday concerts), annual events (National 

Cherry Blossom Festival, Smithsonian Folklife 

Festival), events such as twilight tattoos, and 

special events such as Kennedy Center simulcasts and Screen on the Green movies. In addition, several distinctly different multipurpose 

areas with performance venues would be created 

at Union Square, in the Sylvan Theater area at 

the Washington Monument, and Constitution 

Gardens. New facilities at Union Square would 

include magnificent views of the Capitol, the 

Mall, and the Washington Monument, as well as 

nearby destinations such as the National Gallery 

East Building and the U.S. Botanic Garden. 

Replacement facilities at the Sylvan Theater 

would be better oriented to the hillside to 

improve seating and viewing, with views of the 

Washington Monument. Constitution Gardens 

Lake would be constructed as a very shallow 

pool that could be drained to accommodate a 

wide variety of larger entertainment events. 

These venues would accommodate small or 

large performances on a regular basis, while at 

other times they would be pleasant locations for 

visitors to rest, relax, and enjoy the unique 

views. These multipurpose facilities would have 

long-term, major, beneficial impacts on entertainment and enjoyment. 

The welcome plaza on the Mall could support 

small performances, programs, and audio that 

would contribute to a friendly, hospitable, and 

enjoyable atmosphere. The steps of the Lincoln 

Memorial and the lower approachway, as well as 

the steps and plaza at the Thomas Jefferson 

Memorial would both continue to provide 

seating and performance areas. Infrastructure 

(such as utilities) would facilitate entertainment 

and performances. 

The impacts of alternative B on opportunities 

for enjoyment, entertainment, and informal 

recreation, compared to the no-action alternative, would be long-term, major, and beneficial 

primarily because of improved opportunities for 

general enjoyment and relaxation, multipurpose 

venues for entertainment, and more regularly 

scheduled relevant entertainment. These actions 

would affect most visitors. 

Impacts on Opportunities for Active 

Recreation 

Under alternative B recreational opportunities 

would be expanded. There would be additional 

types of rental boats, such as canoes and rowboats, at the Tidal Basin, which would support 

healthful recreation policies and result in longterm, minor, beneficial impacts. The condition 

of open space available for pickup games 

(Frisbee, kickball, soccer, football, softball, kite 

flying) and organized team sports (softball, 

volleyball, etc.) would be improved, making play 

more pleasant and resulting in long-term, moderate, beneficial impacts. Surfaces appropriate 

for jogging or running would be provided, a 

minor to moderate impact on individual joggers 

and running clubs. 

Alternative B, compared to the no-action alternative, would have long-term, minor to moderate, beneficial impacts on opportunities for 

active recreation as the result of additional 

opportunities and improved facilities or 

conditions.

Impacts of Visitor Facilities and 

Amenities 

Under alternative B, similar to the preferred 

alternative, adequate visitor facilities and 

amenities would be provided to accommodate 

high levels of visitation. Visitor facilities would 

be conveniently located, and they generally 

would be designed to serve multiple purposes 

and to incorporate naturally compatible amenities such as restrooms near food service areas or 

seating and information by restrooms, in accordance with best practices used at other sites. All 

visitor facilities would have an educational or 

informational component. Outdated visitor 

facilities would be replaced. Impacts on visitor 

experiences would be long-term, major, and 

beneficial as the result of providing convenient 

and pleasant visitor facilities. 

Restrooms would be conveniently located near 

main pedestrian routes, and on the Mall they 

would be visible from existing refreshment 

stands. New food service facilities would include 

restrooms. Restrooms would be adequately 

492
Visitor Experience: Impacts of Alternative B 

sized to meet expected use levels. For example, 

restrooms near tour bus parking areas and 

subway entrances especially would be sized for 

high use levels. Restrooms would generally be 

located near destinations or spaced no more 

than one-third of a mile apart to provide visitor 

convenience and comfort. New restrooms 

would be added, and aging restrooms would be 

replaced. Family friendly restrooms would be 

provided, along with additional restroom 

facilities for women. The impact of improved 

restrooms on visitor experiences would be longterm, major, and beneficial. 

Drinking water would be provided near restrooms, and drinking fountains would facilitate 

filling water bottles or pet needs. Free-standing 

drinking fountains would be removed because 

they are difficult to maintain. 

Food service would include additional types of 

facilities, such as full-service restaurants and 

cafeterias, as well as refreshment stands and 

mobile carts. All facilities (including mobile 

carts) would use a consistent design to be instantly recognizable and easy to find. Food 

service areas would be designed to be pleasant 

and attractive places to linger, enjoy views and 

activities, and be near trash and recycling containers, subtly encouraging visitors not to litter 

and reducing impacts at memorials. Outdoor 

seating areas would have shade options and 

could include potted flowering plants, small 

ornamental fountains, or music to make these 

spaces more attractive. Impacts would be longterm, major, and beneficial. 

Multipurpose facilities at Union Square, the 

Washington Monument, and Constitution 

Gardens would be destinations with a unique 

architectural style compatible with the character 

of the National Mall. 

• Union Square — Designing Union Square 

as a dignified but formal area for visitor 

enjoyment, with food service, restrooms, 

information, retail, seating, and shade, 

would encourage visitors to rest and enjoy 

the views, programs, events, and 

performances, or to witness or participate 

in demonstrations. Since there are no 

visitor facilities in this area, this redevelopment would result in long-term, major, 

beneficial impact on convenience and 

comfort for visitors. 

• Washington Monument Grounds — The 

multipurpose facility at the centrally located Washington Monument would be a 

hub for more casual visitor services, replacing the temporary facilities tent. Services 

such as food, restrooms, retail, information, 

and seating would be convenient for those 

waiting for Washington Monument tickets, 

visitors using tour buses and visitor transit, 

and pedestrians on their way to or from 

memorials around the Tidal Basin. The 

indoor/outdoor facilities would be very 

flexible and would be sized to accommodate large numbers of people. Survey Lodge 

would be remodeled to provide more facilities for people with disabilities. The impacts 

of new and renovated facilities at the Washington Monument would be long-term, 

major, and beneficial. 

• Constitution Gardens — Constitution 

Gardens would provide a higher end 

multipurpose destination, with food 

service, indoor/outdoor seating in a garden 

setting, restrooms, and retail. The lake 

would be drainable to allow large entertainment events or performances. The area 

is convenient to the World War II 

Memorial and public bus transit (the Circulator), visitor transit, and tour bus dropoff/pickup areas. Restrooms would be 

replaced. Additional seating would be well 

dispersed, some located for enjoyment of 

views as well as to meet the needs of 

groups. Impacts would be long-term, major, 

and beneficial. 

Visitor facilities and amenities at other locations 

around the National Mall that would enhance 

visitor experiences would include the following: 

• World War II Memorial — The restrooms, 

which are convenient to tour bus drop-offs, 

would remain. 

• Lincoln Memorial — Expanding restrooms 

inside the memorial and adding restrooms 

near the refreshment stands both north and 

south of the memorial would make facilities 

more convenient to visitors. 

• Ash Woods — Providing new restrooms in 

a better location would better disperse rest-

 493 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

rooms. Should future use levels warrant, 

this area could provide seasonal food 

service. 

• Tidal Basin Area — The existing refreshment stand would be replaced with a multipurpose facility (food, retail, and restrooms) near the Tidal Basin parking lot, 

creating a pleasant location to sit and enjoy 

views. 

• Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial — If 

future use increased, food service could be 

provided and would also be convenient to 

the future Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial. The Roosevelt Memorial would continue to have a bookstore and two restrooms, and the future King Memorial 

would also have a bookstore and restrooms. 

• Thomas Jefferson Memorial — Replacing 

the refreshment stand near the Thomas 

Jefferson Memorial and providing restrooms and plenty of seating to accommodate tour bus passengers would address 

visitor needs. Restrooms, a bookstore, and 

retail would continue at the memorial itself. 

Taken as a whole, the impacts under alternative 

B of visitor facilities and amenities on the visitor 

experience would be long-term, major, and 

beneficial, compared to the no-action alternative. These impacts would result from diverse 

types of visitor facilities that were adequately 

sized, met multiple purposes, were well dispersed, and were designed to be pleasant and 

contribute to enjoyment of the National Mall. 

Impacts on Public Health and Safety 

Under alternative B, like the preferred alternative, a number of changes in the way that public 

health and safety are addressed would be made. 

Locations would be more easily accessible to 

people with disabilities due to an emphasis on 

incorporating universal designs into all facilities. 

Grade level changes would be minimized at 

Union Square, and gravel on walkways on the 

Mall would be eliminated and high-quality hard 

surfaces would make it easier for all visitors to 

move around. Elevators would continue to be 

provided at the Lincoln Memorial, the Thomas 

Jefferson Memorial, and the Washington 

Monument. Additional parking for people with 

disabilities would be provided at Survey Lodge 

on the Washington Monument grounds, and 

wheelchairs and scooters would also be available 

at this location so that people with disabilities 

could easily visit multiple destinations. The 

resulting impacts would be long-term, moderate 

to major, and beneficial because all visitors 

would benefit from accessible designs. 

Providing shaded seating, indoor food service, 

and access to ornamental water features designed to accommodate visitor play would all 

help alleviate health conditions caused by hot 

humid weather. Temporary misters might also 

be used to help cool people during hot humid 

weather. Water bottles would continue to be 

provided during some events. Breathing problems caused by dust from gravel walkways on 

the Mall would be reduced by paving walkways. 

Providing pedestrian lighting throughout the 

National Mall, with appropriate transitions to 

uniformly lower lighting levels on the National 

Mall, would improve public safety and prevent 

accidents, as well as enhance the nighttime ambience. Supplementary lighting would ensure 

that pathway lighting would be uniform so that 

there would not be dark areas between pools of 

light that might make visitors feel uncomfortable. Pedestrian lighting around the Tidal Basin 

would also enhance opportunities to visit the 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Thomas Jefferson, 

and George Mason memorials at night. A lighting plan for the National Mall would be developed, and all light fixtures would be coordinated, ensuring that lighting would be directed 

at pathways and not shine into visitors’ eyes, 

making it easier for people to see surface conditions as well as other people in the area or their 

immediate surroundings. 

Roads would continue to be illuminated, and the 

highly developed edges of the National Mall 

would be more brightly lit than interior spaces. 

Some crosswalks could also be more brightly lit 

to increase the visibility of pedestrians. The 

impact of existing road and pedestrian lighting 

on public health and safety would be long-term, 

moderate to major, and beneficial. 

Emergency care would continue to be provided 

by park rangers, and designated first-aid tents 

would continue to be frequently provided by 

event organizers at national celebrations and 

events. Emergency call boxes would be located 

494
Visitor Experience: Impacts of Alternative C 

at logical points throughout the National Mall or 

at intersections, and an emergency announcement system would be provided. 

Changes to public health and safety under alternative B, like the preferred alternative, would 

result in long-term, major, beneficial impacts 

compared to the no-action alternative. These 

impacts would result from improved access, 

increased pedestrian lighting, an emergency 

announcement system, and amenities to help 

visitors cope with extreme summer weather 

conditions. 

Impacts on User Capacity 

Changes under alternative B would increase the 

number of people who could be accommodated 

on the National Mall without adversely affecting 

resource conditions. Changes at venues for 

demonstrations and special events would also 

positively affect general visitors. For example, 

wider walks at the Tidal Basin would benefit 

visitors throughout the year. User capacity 

would also be increased at Union Square and 

Constitutiton Gardens. There would be no 

change in capacities at national memorials. 

Like the no-action alternative, technology would 

continue to be used to increase the capacity of 

various venues and to extend venue areas. 

Technology could also be used to provide 

opportunities for people to participate in offsite 

demonstrations through virtual connections or 

to take part in multi-venue events. This action 

would align with the NPS policy to use websites 

to reach a broader audience. 

Increases in the physical capacity of the National 

Mall under alternative B, compared to the noaction alternative, would result in long-term, 

major, beneficial impacts on all visitors. 

Cumulative Impacts 

The impacts of past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions would be the same as those 

described under the no-action alternative and 

would be long-term, major, and beneficial. The 

impacts of alternative B would also be long-term, 

major, and beneficial. Cumulative impacts would 

generally be long-term, major, and beneficial. 

Alternative B would make a substantial beneficial contribution to cumulative impacts 

because of the prominence of the National Mall 

in the city. 

Conclusion 

Compared to the no-action alternative, the 

impacts of alternative B on visitor experiences 

would be long-term, major, and beneficial 

because of well-maintained areas that would 

meet desired conditions, better website information, educational themes focused on the memorials and the civic function of the National Mall, 

well-dispersed and pleasant visitor facilities that 

were adequately sized to meet user needs, more 

food service choice, an improved pedestrian 

environment, increased opportunities for informal enjoyment as well as additional recreational 

opportunities and improved playing fields, more 

shaded seating, additional pedestrian lighting, 

and an emergency notification system. These 

impacts, combined with the long-term, major, 

beneficial impacts of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions, would result in long, 

term, major, beneficial cumulative impacts, with 

a substantial beneficial contribution from 

alternative B. 

IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE C 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Under alternative C the National Mall would be 

refurbished to improve resource conditions, to 

be an ecologically sustainable urban open space 

with a focus of urban recreation and healthy lifestyles. Visitor opportunities would be expanded 

in education, recreation, and stewardship; convenient, adequately sized, and pleasant multipurpose visitor facilities would be provided; 

bicycling and pedestrian experiences would be 

vastly improved, as would nighttime experiences; and public health and safety issues would 

be addressed. 

Impacts on a Quality Visitor Experience 

The quality of visitor experiences would be 

improved on the National Mall. Refurbishing 

the National Mall, addressing deferred maintenance, replacing outdated facilities, and 

improving infrastructure would allow it to be 

maintained to desired conditions. Because the 

refurbishment would affect one of the most 

 495 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

photographed places in our nation, the impacts 

on visitors’ ability to appreciate the beauty of the 

National Mall would be long-term, major, and 

beneficial. 

Better circulation would make it easier to visit 

memorials that convey our history and democratic values or to visit adjacent facilities (primarily museums and government facilities). 

Visitors would still be able to contemplate core 

American values and to enjoy visible symbols of 

our democratic government, but additional 

wayside education would increase visitor 

appreciation. 

Cultural offerings and events on the Mall would 

only be permitted in designated grass areas, 

resulting in short- and long-term, minor to 

negligible, adverse impact on visitors who would 

still have opportunities to participate in events 

but at different locations. 

In addition to those impacts related to demonstrations and special events that were described 

under “Impacts Common to All Alternatives,” 

the experiences of general visitors would be 

enhanced because venues for special events and 

demonstrations would be improved. Compared 

to the no-action alternative, the impacts of 

alternative C on general visitor experiences 

would be long-term, major, and beneficial since 

improvements would affect the experiences of 

most visitors. 

Providing a staffed visitor contact station with 

related amenities (restrooms, seating, maps) on 

the Mall near the Smithsonian Metro station 

would result in long-term, major, beneficial 

impacts in terms of create a more welcoming 

experience for visitors. 

Opportunities to experience the nighttime character of the monumental core would be substantially improved. Like the no-action alternative, 

lighting would remain focused on the prominent 

symbols of our nation — the Lincoln and 

Thomas Jefferson memorials, the Washington 

Monument, the White House, and the Capitol. 

Like the preferred alternative and alternatives A 

and B, the National Park Service would work 

closely with the National Capital Planning Commission, the Commission of Fine Arts, and the 

Architect of the Capitol to develop a comprehensive lighting guideline for the monumental 

core area. Lighting of other memorials and 

ornamental water bodies would continue to 

contribute to the nighttime character of the 

National Mall without intruding on lighting of 

the principal icons. 

Under alternative C the emphasis on pedestrian 

lighting around the Tidal Basin and elsewhere 

on the Mall would be on reducing light pollution. These improvements would result in longterm, moderate to major, beneficial impacts 

affecting the way a great many visitors experience the National Mall at night. 

In summary, the National Mall would continue 

to deeply inspire many visitors, but compared to 

the no-action alternative, alternative C would 

improve the quality of the American experience, 

primarily as a result of refurbishing all areas, 

enhancing nighttime experiences, and improving signs. Opportunities to experience First 

Amendment demonstrations, as well as to 

understand and appreciate our nation’s history, 

memorials, and core American values, would 

also be enhanced. Alternative C would result in 

long-term, major, beneficial impacts on visitors 

and their opportunities to have higher quality 

experiences. 

Impacts on Opportunities for Information 

and Education 

Under alternative C educational opportunities 

would be focused on stewardship and activities. 

Education would help visitors understand the 

role of the National Mall in the history of the 

capital city, sustainability, and stewardship. 

Existing programs would continue to be provided, but they would be upgraded to be current 

and engaging under alternative C, including 

classroom curriculum, cell phone tours, and 

exhibits at memorials. The number and variety 

of biking and walking tours would be expanded. 

Park brochures, maps, and the NPS passport 

(stamping) program would be more readily 

visible, with directional signs to information 

areas. Self-service areas would allow visitors to 

obtain maps and brochures at their convenience. 

Park websites would be user friendly and up-todate. 

Taken as a whole, compared to the no-action 

alternative, the impacts of alternative C on 

496
Visitor Experience: Impacts of Alternative C 

opportunities for information and education 

would be long-term, minor, and beneficial 

because educational themes and bicycling tours 

would be expanded. 

Impacts on Opportunities for Enjoyment, 

Entertainment, and Informal Recreation 

Like the other alternatives, alternative C would 

continue to provide numerous sunny and shady 

open space opportunities on the National Mall 

for enjoyment (sightseeing and enjoying views), 

general relaxation, and informal recreational 

pastimes, such as picnicking, reading, dog 

walking, and walking/strolling. The impacts of 

these opportunities would continue to be longterm, moderate, and beneficial. 

Long-distance views to and from memorials 

along planned view corridors would continue to 

inspire visitors, but these opportunities would be 

further enhanced because foreground views 

would also be improved, helping make visitor 

experiences more enjoyable, resulting in longterm, moderate, beneficial impacts. 

Areas would be enhanced by seasonal floral 

variety. Walking and strolling experiences would 

be improved throughout the National Mall as a 

result of replacing and widening walks around 

the Tidal Basin and replacing gravel surfaces on 

Mall pathways with universally accessible 

paving, with long-term, major, beneficial impacts 

for nearly all visitors. 

Informal children’s play (including preschool 

activities) would continue in open turf areas and 

within the shade of trees, similar to the noaction alternative. Under alternative C, however, 

several children’s playgrounds would be provided (on the Mall, at Constitution Gardens, and 

along the Potomac River); model boats could be 

used at Constitution Gardens Lake, and naturalistic features in the gardens would be climbable; 

water features designed for play would be 

provided; and the carousel would remain. The 

resulting impacts for children’s enjoyment 

would be long-term, moderate, and beneficial to 

a relatively small number of people. 

Opportunities for relevant entertainment and 

performances would be facilitated by providing 

infrastructure and flexible spaces. Entertainment 

would continue to be provided at national 

celebrations (holiday concerts), annual events 

(National Cherry Blossom Festival, Smithsonian 

Folklife Festival), events such as twilight tattoos, 

and special events such as Kennedy Center 

simulcasts, and Screen on the Green movies. The 

steps and lower approachway of the Lincoln 

Memorial, as well as the steps and plaza at the 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial, would continue to 

provide seating areas, and infrastructure (such as 

electrical outlets) would be provided to facilitate 

appropriate entertainment and performances. 

The impacts of alternative C on opportunities 

for enjoyment, entertainment, and informal 

recreation, compared to the no-action alternative, would be long-term, major, and beneficial. These impacts would result from improved opportunities for general enjoyment and 

relaxation, pleasant multipurpose venues for 

entertainment, and more regularly scheduled 

appropriate entertainment. Almost all visitors 

would be affected. 

Impacts on Opportunities for Active 

Recreation 

Active recreational opportunities would be expanded under alternative C, compared to the 

no-action alternative. The north bay of the Tidal 

Basin would be filled and used for recreation 

fields. Additional types of watercraft, such as 

canoes and rowboats, would be available for 

rent at the Tidal Basin, as well as kites at the 

Washington Monument and ice skates at the 

Capitol Reflecting Pool. These additional 

choices would support healthy recreational 

activities, which could increase with new or 

improved opportunities in visible areas, resulting 

in long-term, minor to moderate, beneficial 

impacts. 

The condition of open spaces available for 

pickup games (Frisbee, kickball, soccer, football, 

softball, kite flying) and organized team sports 

(softball, volleyball, etc.) would be improved, 

making play more pleasant, with long-term, 

moderate, beneficial impacts. Surfaces appropriate for jogging or running would be provided, 

a minor to moderate impact on individual 

joggers and running clubs. Bicycling would be 

improved with separate bike lanes or routes, 

supporting this recreational use of the National 

 497 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Mall (also see the “Access and Circulation” 

section). 

Compared to the no-action alternative, alternative C would have long-term, moderate, beneficial impacts on opportunities for active recreation as a result of additional opportunities and 

improved facilities or conditions for active 

recreation.

Impacts of Visitor Facilities and 

Amenities 

Under alternative C, like the preferred alternative, the National Mall would be refurbished, 

and adequate facilities and amenities would be 

provided to accommodate high levels of visitation. Visitor facilities would be conveniently 

located, well-dispersed, and designed to serve 

multiple purposes, such as restrooms near food 

service locations or seating and information by 

restrooms, in accordance with best practices 

used at other sites. Outdated visitor facilities 

would be replaced. All visitor facilities would 

have an educational, stewardship, or informational component. A consistent architectural 

style for most visitor facilities (including restrooms and refreshment stands) would make 

them immediately recognizable. Resulting 

impacts would be long-term, major, and 

beneficial. 

Restrooms would be conveniently located near 

main pedestrian routes. Several restrooms would 

be self-cleaning so that they could be open for 

longer times. Facilities would be adequately 

sized for expected use. Restrooms would be generally located near destinations or spaced no 

more than one-third of a mile apart for visitor 

comfort and convenience. Family-friendly 

restrooms would be provided, and additional 

restrooms would be provided for women. The 

impact of improved, well-dispersed restrooms 

on visitor experiences would be long-term, 

major, and beneficial. 

Drinking water would be provided near restrooms, and drinking fountains would facilitate 

filling water bottles or taking care of pet water 

needs. Free-standing drinking fountains would 

be removed because they are difficult to 

maintain. 

Food service under alternative C would remain 

focused on refreshment stands and mobile carts, 

and as previously mentioned, all facilities (including mobile carts) would use an appropriate 

design that would be easily recognizable. While 

food service areas would continue to rely on 

refreshment stands, surrounding areas would be 

designed to be pleasant, attractive places for visitors to linger, enjoy views and watching activities, and be near trash and recycling containers, 

subtly encouraging visitors not to litter and reducing impacts on memorials. Outdoor seating 

areas would have shade options and could include potted flowering plants, small ornamental 

fountains, or music. 

Other facilities throughout the National Mall 

that would improve the visitor experience would 

include the following: 

• Union Square — Facilities at Union Square 

would include self-cleaning restrooms, 

food service, and retail. This would be a 

convenient location for visitors at the east 

end of the National Mall. 

• The Mall — Outdoor areas adjacent to the 

refreshment stands on the Mall would be 

redesigned to accommodate more users, 

and restrooms would be located near each 

refreshment stand. 

• Washington Monument — Temporary facilities (food, retail, and restrooms) at the 

Washington Monument would be relocated 

north of Independence Avenue between 

14th and 15th streets. This location, 

however, would be less convenient for 

visitors getting tickets for the monument 

and for tour bus drop-offs. In addition to 

two existing restrooms (Monument Lodge, 

Survey Lodge), restrooms would be 

replaced near the rebuilt Sylvan Theater, 

and self-cleaning restrooms would be located on the northwest corner of the 

grounds between 17th and Constitution 

Avenue. 

• World War II Memorial — The restrooms, 

which are convenient to tour bus drop-offs, 

would remain. 

• Constitution Gardens — At Constitution 

Gardens the existing restroom and refreshment stand would be removed and replaced 

498
Visitor Experience: Impacts of Alternative C 

by a garden café/restroom at the east end of 

the lake. However, removal of restrooms 

would mean the next nearest public restrooms for visitors touring the National Mall 

would be near the Lincoln Memorial. 

• Lincoln Memorial — A restroom would be 

added near the south refreshment stand. 

• Ash Woods — Restrooms would be replaced or relocated to better disperse 

facilities. 

• Tidal Basin — The outdated refreshment 

stand in the parking lot would be replaced 

and would include restrooms. 

• Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial — A 

refreshment stand without restrooms that 

would also be convenient to the future 

Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial would be 

provided. A bookstore and restrooms 

would remain at the memorial and would 

be provided at the future King Memorial. 

• Thomas Jefferson Memorial — Restrooms 

would be replaced; the bookstore and retail 

would continue; the nearby refreshment 

stand would be replaced and relocated to 

be more convenient to the tour bus dropoff, but would not include restrooms. Additional seating would be well dispersed, 

some located for enjoyment of views as well 

as to meet the needs of groups. 

Alternative C, compared to the no-action alternative, would makes substantial changes to 

visitor facilities by providing more visitor facilities that would be adequately sized, conveniently 

located, well dispersed, and designed to be 

pleasant and to contribute to enjoyment of the 

National Mall, Resulting impacts would be 

long-term, major, and beneficial, and all visitors 

would be affected. 

Impacts on Public Health and Safety 

Under alternative C several changes would be 

made in how public health and safety concerns 

would be addressed. Removing gravel from 

walkway surfaces and using universally accessible materials on all walkways would make it 

easier for all visitors to move around and would 

reduce dust and related breathing problems for 

some visitors. Elevators would continue to be 

provided at the Lincoln Memorial, the Thomas 

Jefferson Memorial, and the Washington Monument. To modify the impact of weather extremes 

and hot humid weather, visitors would find 

more seating in shade, indoor food service, and 

access to ornamental water features designed to 

accommodate visitor play. Occasionally temporary misters could be used to help cool people 

during hot humid weather. Water bottles would 

continue to be provided during some events. 

To improve public safety and prevent accidents, 

pedestrian crosswalks would be improved. Also, 

pedestrian lighting would be improved throughout the National Mall. Providing pedestrian 

lighting around the Tidal Basin would improve 

the pedestrian experience, as well as opportunities to visit the Franklin Delano Roosevelt, 

Thomas Jefferson, and George Mason memorials. All light fixtures on the National Mall 

would be coordinated, and lighting would be 

directed at pathways and not shine into visitors’ 

eyes, making it easier for people to see surface 

conditions as well as other people in the area or 

their immediate surroundings. This would help 

night visitors feel safer and more comfortable 

Roads would continue to be illuminated, and the 

highly developed edges of the National Mall 

would be more brightly lit than interior areas, 

with appropriate transitions so people could 

adjust to lower lighting levels. Some crosswalks 

would also be more brightly lit to increase the 

visibility of pedestrians. The impact of existing 

road and pedestrian lighting on public health 

and safety would be long-term, moderate to 

major, and beneficial. 

Emergency care would continue to be provided 

by park rangers; and designated first-aid tents 

would continue to be frequently provided at 

national celebrations and events. Emergency call 

boxes would be dispersed near logical areas or 

intersections. A mass notification system would 

be provided. 

Changes to public health and safety under 

alternative C would result in long-term, major, 

beneficial impacts because of improved access, 

safer night and pedestrian experiences, amenities to help people cope with weather extremes, 

and an emergency announcement system. 

 499 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Impacts on User Capacity 

Alternative C would make changes in the ability 

to accommodate people on the National Mall. 

Changes at various venues would benefit general 

visitors. For example, wider walks around the 

Tidal Basin would create pleasanter conditions 

for visitors throughout the year, not only during 

the National Cherry Blossom Festival. Capacities 

at national memorials would not change. 

Like the no-action alternative, technology would 

continue to be used to increase the capacity of 

various venues and to extend venue areas. Technology could also be used to provide opportunities for people to vicariously participate in offsite 

demonstrations through simulcasts or to take 

part in multi-venue events. This action would be 

consistent with NPS policies to use websites to 

reach a worldwide audience. 

Compared to the no-action alternative, alternative C would result in long-term, major, 

beneficial impacts on general visitors. 

Cumulative Impacts 

Past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions 

would be the same as those described under the 

no-action alternative, and impacts would result 

in long-term, major, and beneficial. The impacts 

of alternative C would be long-term, major, and 

beneficial. Cumulative impacts on visitor 

experiences would be long-term, major, and 

beneficial. Alternative C would make a 

substantial beneficial contribution to cumulative 

impacts because of the prominence of the 

National Mall in the city. 

Conclusion 

Compared to the no-action alternative, alternative C would have long-term, major, beneficial 

impacts on visitor experiences because of 

improved conditions on the National Mall, 

better website information, educational themes 

focused on memorials along with stewardship 

and healthy lifestyles, well-dispersed and 

pleasant facilities that were adequately sized to 

meet user needs, more food service choice, an 

improved pedestrian and bicycling environment, 

increased opportunities for informal enjoyment, 

additional recreational opportunities and improved playing fields, more shaded seating, 

additional pedestrian lighting, and an emergency 

notification system. Cumulative impacts would 

be long-term, major, and beneficial, with a 

substantial beneficial contribution from 

alternative C. 

500
SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT

METHODOLOGY FOR IMPACT 

ANALYSIS

This section analyzes the impacts of the alternatives on the socioeconomic environment of the 

National Mall and surrounding areas. The parks’ 

commercial and economic influence, while 

centered in Washington, D.C., extends west to 

Arlington and Fairfax counties in Virginia, and 

east to Montgomery and Prince George’s counties in Maryland. While the description of the 

socioeconomic impacts focuses on Washington, 

D.C., regional impacts are also addressed. The 

analysis takes into consideration NPS Management Policies 2006, comments made during the 

2007 public scoping period, and a 2008 National 

Mall visitor study that addressed socioeconomic 

issues. 

The following categories of impacts are evaluated: 

• Impacts of increased visitation —The 

beneficial and adverse impacts of visitation 

generated by the alternatives on the local 

and regional economy are analyzed.

• Impacts on commercial business opportunities — This analysis looks at the beneficial and adverse impacts of commercial 

service opportunities on the National Mall, 

including nonprofit bookstores, commercial facilities (recreation, food service, and 

transit), and the type and dispersal of facilities. It also looks at the beneficial and adverse impacts on commercial opportunities 

adjacent to the National Mall and in 

surrounding areas. 

• Impacts of construction opportunities —

The beneficial and adverse impacts of new 

construction opportunities for local and 

regional businesses are analyzed. 

Impact Intensity Levels 

The following impact intensity levels were established for impacts on the socioeconomic 

environment: 

• Negligible — The impact would not be detectable or would be barely detectable to 

the local or regional socioeconomic environment or most commercial 

opportunities. 

• Minor — The impact would be detectable 

to the local or regional socioeconomic environment or on commercial opportunities. 

• Moderate — The impact would be readily 

apparent and would have an appreciable 

impact, either beneficial or adverse, on the 

local and regional economy or on commercial opportunities. 

• Major — The impact would be severely 

adverse or exceptionally beneficial to the 

local or regional economy or on commercial opportunities. 

Type of Impact 

Impacts could be either beneficial or adverse. 

Beneficial impacts would support the park mission and purpose, would comply with federal 

regulations and NPS or local policies, or would 

positively affect the local and regional economy 

or commercial opportunities. Adverse impacts 

would not support the park mission or purpose, 

would be inconsistent with federal regulations 

or with NPS or local policies, or would negatively affect the local and regional economy or 

commercial opportunities. 

Duration of Impacts 

Impacts could be temporary, short-term, or 

long-term; no permanent economic impacts are 

expected. 

• Temporary — The impact would usually 

last for a few hours or up to two days, such 

as a road closure for a day or less or limited 

access to an area during a demonstration or 

special event. 

• Short-term — The impact would generally 

last up to one year or the life of a construction project. 

 501
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

• Long-term — The impact would last longer 

than one year or for the life of the plan (up 

to 50 years). 

Regulations and Policies 

The NPS Management Policies 2006 recognize 

that commercial services may be needed in 

parks, and guidance is provided for any such 

facilities. 

Through the use of concession contracts 

or commercial use authorizations, the 

National Park Service will provide commercial visitor services that are necessary 

and appropriate for public use and enjoyment. Concession operations will be consistent to the highest practicable degree 

with the preservation and conservation of 

resources and values of the park unit. 

Concession operations will demonstrate 

sound environmental management and 

stewardship (NPS 2006e, ch. 10). 

Concession operations are subject to the provisions of the National Park Service Concessions 

Management Improvement Act of 1998, NPS 

regulations (36 CFR Part 51), Director’s Order 

#48A: Concession Management (NPS 2004b), and 

other specific guidance issued by the NPS 

director (NPS 2006e, sec. 10.2.1). 

A park commercial services strategy must be in 

place to ensure that concession facilities and 

services are necessary and appropriate for public 

enjoyment, complementary to the park mission 

and visitor service goals, financially viable, use 

sustainable principles and green building practices, and are addressed in an approved management plan. A viability study / analysis will be 

prepared to ensure that the overall contract is 

feasible (NPS 2006e, sec. 10.2.2). 

To obtain the best service provider and maximize benefits to the government, the National 

Park Service encourages competition in the 

awarding of concession contracts (NPS 2006e, 

sec. 10.2.3.4). 

Visitor services will be provided in a manner that 

is consistent with and supportive of the interpretive themes, goals, and objectives articulated in 

each park’s planning documents, mission statement, and/or interpretive plan. Commercial 

services should instill in visitors an appreciation 

of the park. This could be accomplished through 

guided activities; the design, architecture, landscape, and decor of facilities; and educational 

programs. Retail merchandise (such as souvenirs) 

and displays also present opportunities to educate visitors about park history; natural, cultural, 

and historical resources; and sustainable environmental management (NPS 2006e, sec. 10.2.4.4). 

IMPACTS COMMON TO ALL 

ALTERNATIVES 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Impacts of Increased Visitation 

As discussed under visitation projections (see 

page 319), projects planned by the National Park 

Service and others on the National Mall would 

contribute to increased visitation to the National 

Mall. New sites such as the Vietnam Veterans 

Memorial Center and the Martin Luther King, 

Jr. Memorial would attract more visitors and 

lengthen stays on the National Mall, as well as in 

the local area. These facilities would provide 

additional services and increased overall satisfaction. Impacts would be long-term, minor, and 

beneficial. New memorials could initially increase visitor use by an estimated 4% (see page 

319). 

Impacts on Commercial Business 

Opportunities 

Business opportunities on the National Mall, 

such as retail, food service, recreation services, 

and transit, would be created under all alternatives. Commercial services are provided through 

multiple commercial contracts that are periodically bid through a competitive process. New 

commercial opportunities on the National Mall 

would be assessed for economic feasibility, 

necessity, and appropriateness by the National 

Park Service before any new services were 

offered for bid. 

Under all alternatives a new facility would be 

developed for food service and retail at the 

Washington Monument to replace the temporary facility that will be removed when the 

National Museum for African American History 

and Culture is constructed. 

502
Socioeconomic Environment: Impacts Common to All Alternatives 

Impacts on commercial business opportunities 

would be long-term, minor, and beneficial for 

individual businesses that successfully bid on the 

contracts. Under all alternatives bookstores 

(which are operated by Eastern National as a 

nonprofit enterprise) would continue to offer 

educational publications for visitors. 

Improved conditions on the National Mall 

would also increase visitor use in surrounding 

areas because visitors would continue to use 

commercial businesses such as restaurants, 

lodging, and other services. Impacts would be 

long-term, minor, and beneficial. 

Costs to Visitors 

The National Mall and its memorials would 

remain free to the public; there would be no 

entrance or gate fees to visit historic attractions 

on the National Mall, which is authorized by 16 

USC 6802(d)(3)(C). This is a long-term, major, 

beneficial impact that affects all users. 

Costs to Concessioners 

Tax amounts for concessioners are contractually 

based and are determined as a percentage of 

gross revenue, while taking into account operating costs and providing a reasonable opportunity to make a profit. Most contracts increase the 

franchise fees at a certain dollar threshold, so 

they can vary widely. 

These parameters will most likely change with 

new contract requirements, which are set in law. 

The franchise fees will be based on the financial 

analysis that will be completed during prospectus development and will take into account possessory interest (leasehold surrender interest), 

expenses (including a dedicated repair and 

maintenance reserve necessary to ensure park 

assets are properly maintained. 

Because a number of variables must be considered, concessioner tax rates cannot readily be 

compared with other business tax rates. For 

example, certain types of older contracts include 

a possessory interest provision, where the concessioner is reimbursed for capital improvements they make to government facilities, less 

depreciation. This is a liability that has to be 

reconciled at the end of the contract in some 

fashion, the impact of which is not figured until 

the end of the contract. 

Impacts on Construction Opportunities 

Construction projects under all alternatives 

would include deferred maintenance projects, 

which total more than $400 million (in 2008 

dollars). These projects include walk and site 

furnishing repairs, as well as larger projects such 

as the replacement of the concession facility at 

the Washington Monument and seawall repairs 

at the Tidal Basin and along the Potomac River. 

Projects would be accomplished as they were 

funded, presumably over several years rather 

than all at once. Assuming that these projects 

were accomplished over 10 years, annual 

construction expenditures would amount to 

about $40 million. 

In 2007 construction-related earnings in the 

Washington, D.C., area amounted to about $899 

million, or 1.2% of total regional earnings of $73 

billion (see Table 28, page 342). Annual expenditures of $40 million on National Mall related 

projects would contribute less than 5% to construction-related earnings in the D.C. area. 

While these projects would positively influence 

individual construction businesses who successfully bid on projects, the overall impact on 

the local and regional economy would be shortterm and beneficial but minor in intensity because construction contributes about 1.25% to 

the economy. 

The Trust for the National Mall is the authorized nonprofit fundraising partner for the National Park Service. The trust’s goal is to raise 

funds to help restore the National Mall. For 

example, in 2008 the trust provided $1.1 million 

in matching funds for an improved sign and 

wayfinding system that is part of the NPS 

Centennial Initiative. Their final fundraising 

goals will depend on the outcome of the 

National Mall plan, but are expected to total 

several hundred million dollars, which would 

reduce federal expenditures. 

Conclusion 

Impacts on the local and regional economy 

would be long-term, minor, and beneficial as a 

result of visitation to existing monuments and 

memorials on the National Mall. Impacts on 

 503 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

commercial business opportunities in and 

around the National Mall, as well as in the metropolitan area, would be long-term, minor, and 

beneficial as a result of new business opportunities for retail and food service near the National 

Mall and ongoing use of businesses in adjacent 

destinations and surrounding areas. The 

construction of previously approved projects 

would result in short-term, minor, beneficial 

impacts on the local and regional economy. 

IMPACTS OF THE NO-ACTION 

ALTERNATIVE

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Under the no-action alternative the National 

Park Service would continue current measures 

of managing and preserving the National Mall. 

Standard maintenance activities would continue, 

and deferred maintenance projects would be 

undertaken as funding permits. No major new 

initiatives would be undertaken. 

Impacts of Increased Visitation 

Based on general visitation patterns over the last 

five years, visitation under the no-action 

alternative is projected to grow at about 1.25% 

per year, and the impact on the local and regional economy would be long-term, negligible, 

and beneficial since changes would likely not be 

detectable in the local and regional economy. 

Impacts on Commercial Business 

Opportunities 

Current commercial opportunities on the 

National Mall for food service, retail, and 

recreational activities are very limited, and the 

level of business opportunities would likely not 

change under the no-action alternative. However, the long-term competitiveness of commercial businesses could be diminished if visitors patronized businesses in adjacent museums 

and galleries, which provide more diverse and 

desired visitor services. Based on the 2008 

survey, visitors desired more choice and spent 

substantially more money at restaurants than at 

food stands (see Table 33). Based on public 

scoping comments, visitors want larger facilities 

that can accommodate more people and more 

areas with protection from the weather while 

touring the National Mall, and they want an 

increased variety of food types and venues (NPS 

2007d). 

Commercial opportunities in adjacent areas 

would continue to be affected under the noaction alternative as a result of many National 

Mall visitors seeking a variety of food services, 

retail, and recreational activities because of 

insufficient services on the Mall. Resulting 

impacts would be long-term, negligible, and 

beneficial to businesses in surrounding areas. 

Impacts on Construction Opportunities 

Actions under the no-action alternative would 

provide some construction business opportunities with planned maintenance and repairs, as 

described under “Impacts Common to All 

Alternatives.” Construction-related expenditures under the no-action alternative would total 

more than $400 million (in 2008 dollars). While 

these projects would positively influence individual construction businesses in the local or 

regional area, the overall impact would be shortterm and minor. 

Cumulative Impacts 

Past Actions 

Past planning efforts for the National Mall were 

largely guided by L’Enfant and McMillan plans, 

the 1973 Washington Mall Plan, and the 1981 

Capitol Master Plan. L’Enfant’s plan was based 

on formal design principles, including axial lines, 

vistas, terminal focal points, and rectilinear 

shapes. Since the early 1900s the McMillan plan 

has guided the majority of new developments 

and renovations and included the original vision 

of tree-lined walkways and open public grounds. 

Existing memorials reflect the original character 

and visions of the L’Enfant and MacMillan 

plans, and the construction of approved memorials would complete that concept. Currently, 

the memorials and monuments of the National 

Mall are the main attractions to tourists and are 

the primary reason for visitation to the area. 

Based on the 2008 visitor study, 31.7% of visitors 

said that the memorials and monuments were 

the primary reason they visited the area (see 

Table 16), nearly double the next most common 

reason for visiting. Further, 96.9% of visitors 

made a point of viewing the monuments and 

504
Socioeconomic Environment: Impacts of the No-Action Alternative 

memorials during their visit, with the next most 

common activity being visiting museum sites 

(74.6%, see Table 31). 

Present Actions 

Comprehensive or cooperative planning efforts 

that are interrelated with the current NPS planning effort for the National Mall involve multiple agencies and include several projects and 

plans that involve various areas in or around 

central Washington, D.C. Currently, most commercial opportunities, including retail shops, gift 

shops, food courts and restaurants, movies, and 

rides, are provided by museums and galleries 

near the National Mall. 

Some planning actions and projects (the NCPC 

Extending the Legacy and Monumental Core

Framework Plan; the Capitol Complex Master 

Plan; and the NPS Comprehensive Design Plan 

for the White House and President’s Park, the 

Urban Flooding Study, and the Rock Creek

General Management Plan) would not directly 

contribute to an economic impact on the local 

and regional area. However, together these plans 

would positively affect the local and regional 

area by providing guidance for a higher quality 

visitor environment in the future, which could 

attract more visitors. 

Installing upgraded signs and information would 

help visitors find their way around the National 

Mall, resulting in pleasanter experiences. This in 

turn could be expected to encourage visitors to 

stay longer and make greater use of commercial 

opportunities for food, retail, and commercial 

recreation on and near the National Mall. 

Ongoing repairs, deferred maintenance, and 

projects supported by the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and the NPS 

Centennial Initiative are underway and common 

to all alternatives. Through the 2009 American 

Recovery and Reinvestment Act, $60.8 million 

was appropriated to maintain and upgrade areas 

of the National Mall, including the D.C. War 

Memorial, the Lincoln Reflecting Pool area, and 

the Thomas Jefferson Memorial plaza. The 

visitor sign and wayfinding system is being 

replaced through the NPS Centennial Initiative, 

with matching funding provided by the Trust for 

the National Mall. Additional road projects have 

been funded through programs under the jurisdiction of the Federal Highway Administration. 

Projects that are being undertaken by the 

Smithsonian Institution include renovation of 

the Arts and Industries Building and completion 

of Mallwide security projects. 

Overall, the cumulative impact of these projects 

on the local and regional economy is expected to 

be long-term, minor, and beneficial. Projects 

such as the renovation of Lincoln Reflecting 

Pool, Ford’s Theatre, the National Museum of 

American History, the National Portrait Gallery, 

the National Museum of American Art, the D.C. 

War Memorial, and the Thomas Jefferson Memorial, along with new attractions such as the 

Newseum, Madame Tussauds Wax Museum, 

and the Museum of Crime and Punishment, 

would have direct impacts on the local and 

regional economy by bringing in more visitors to 

the area. Based on past visitor use trends, total 

visitation increased noticeably when new 

memorials on the National Mall opened (see 

“Past Visitor Use Trends,” page 319). Thus, as 

these plans are fully implemented, total visitation levels could be expected to increase. 

Reasonably Foreseeable Actions 

Reasonably foreseeable actions that are being 

considered by the National Park Service include 

completing the security perimeter at the Thomas 

Jefferson Memorial and stabilizing the plaza in 

front of the memorial, and completing the 

Potomac Park levee project in cooperation with 

the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 

Future construction projects on and near the 

National Mall that would come under the 

management of the National Park Service 

include the Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial 

(including a bookstore), the Vietnam Veterans 

Memorial Center (including a bookstore), and 

the Dwight D. Eisenhower Memorial. These 

projects would be expected to have a long-term, 

minor, beneficial impact on the local and 

regional economy. 

Implementing recommendations from the NPS 

Visitor Transportation Study would convert free 

parking on about 950 spaces on the National 

Mall to paid parking, thus reducing parking use 

by local workers and making parking more 

 505 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

available to visitors. Lots south of the Thomas 

Jefferson Memorial (approximately 230 spaces) 

would remain free. The impact on visitors accustomed to free parking in these spaces would be 

long-term, minor, and adverse because only a 

few visitors would be affected; impacts on the 

local and regional economy would be negligible. 

Parking fees could be used to reduce the overall 

cost of a visitor transportation service. 

Other projects that would have a socioeconomic 

effect from construction include the National 

Museum of African American History and 

Culture, the consolidation and relocation of the 

14th Street bridges to improve access to the 

downtown areas, and the construction of the 

U.S. Institute of Peace headquarters northwest 

of the intersection of Constitution Avenue and 

23rd Street NW. It is expected that commercial 

opportunities would be provided at these 

facilities. 

New attractions such as Martin Luther King, Jr. 

Memorial, the National Museum of African 

American History and Culture, and the Vietnam 

Veterans Memorial Center could increase visitation levels on the National Mall by up to 4% 

annually as each project opened, and then would 

presumably level off. In addition, increased 

tourist attractions would encourage visitors to 

stay longer and spend more in the local and 

regional area since there would be more things 

to see and do. Earnings in the D.C. area related 

to increases in the tourist-related sectors — accommodation (lodging) and food service; and 

arts, entertainment, and recreation — amount to 

about 3% of total regional earnings. So the additional impact of increased visitation on the local 

and regional economy is expected to be longterm, minor, and beneficial because of resource 

improvements on and near the National Mall, 

wayfinding information, visitor facilities, and 

more tourist attractions in the region. 

The construction of all these future facilities and 

memorials would result in short-term, minor, 

beneficial impacts on the local and regional 

economy because construction-related earnings 

contributed only about 1.2% to the D.C. 

economy in 2007. However, cumulatively these 

projects, including reconstruction of the 14th 

Street bridge corridor, could make a significant 

contribution to construction-related spending. 

Cumulative Impacts Summary 

Past and present projects in and around the 

study area, including memorials, museums, and 

other visitor destinations, have contributed to 

increased visitation. All memorials and a great 

many past, present, and future visitor destinations would remain free to users. Future new 

visitor destinations such as the Martin Luther 

King, Jr. Memorial, the Vietnam Veterans 

Memorial Center, the National Museum of 

African American History and Culture, the 

Eisenhower National Memorial, and the 

National Museum of the American Latino would 

similarly increase tourism, and some could 

appeal to user groups that have not been traditionally drawn to the National Mall or its 

surroundings. Some new commercial opportunities for food service and retail would be provided at new facilities, offering more choices for 

visitors. These actions would not affect the 

commercial opportunities afforded street 

vendors on surrounding streets. Parking fees 

would be applied to free spaces on the National 

Mall to make parking spaces more available for 

visitors and support an improved visitor transportation service. Construction opportunities 

would have short-term, minor, beneficial 

impacts on the local and regional economy 

because of the economy’s size. 

Taken together, the impacts of past, present, and 

reasonably foreseeable actions would be longterm, minor, and beneficial due to the size of the 

local and regional economy. Impacts of the noaction alternative would be long-term, 

negligible, and beneficial. Cumulative impacts 

would be long-term, minor, and beneficial, with 

a slight beneficial contribution from actions 

under this alternative. 

Conclusion 

Impacts on the local and regional economy 

under the no-action alternative would be longterm, negligible, and beneficial because of 

slightly increased visitation levels to the National 

Mall and related visitor expenditures at commercial businesses. Cumulative impacts would 

be long-term, minor, and beneficial due to increased visitation, plus business and construction opportunities, with a slight beneficial contribution to cumulative impacts from the noaction alternative. 

506
Socioeconomic Environment: Impacts of the Preferred Alternative 

IMPACTS OF THE PREFERRED 

ALTERNATIVE

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Under the preferred alternative the National 

Mall would be refurbished to protect the historic landscape, accommodate high levels of use, 

and better meet visitor expectations. Temporary 

facilities and permanent infrastructure would be 

developed to facilitate improved civic forums 

and stages for special events and enjoyment. 

Impacts of Increased Visitation 

Compared to the no-action alternative, the preferred alternative would undertake actions to 

improve resource conditions, visitor facilities, 

and infrastructure throughout the National 

Mall, positively affecting local and nonlocal 

residents. Improved visitor information, 

services, and amenities would create safer and 

more comfortable conditions for all visitors. 

These actions could contribute to increased 

overall visitation levels. 

Multipurpose facilities at Union Square, the 

Washington Monument, and Constitution 

Gardens would stimulate more visitation and 

also attract more local residents since a greater 

array of programs and events would be offered. 

Improved event facilities, logistics, and operations would facilitate the hosting of special 

events and demonstrations, and allow more 

people to attend events, which could result in 

more local visitation as well as longer stays on 

the National Mall. Increased daytime and 

evening programs at the Washington Monument 

grounds and Constitution Gardens would 

provide a variety of events that would enhance 

experiences, encouraging visitors to stay longer 

on the National Mall and also in the metropolitan area. Improved food facilities and food 

choice at these places would also increase visitor 

use on the National Mall. 

Additional recreational opportunities would be 

provided for bicycling (with separate lanes or 

routes), as well as for rowboat, canoe, and kayak 

rentals in the Tidal Basin area. Improving the 

variety and quality of recreational activities 

could also lead to extended stays. 

Increasing visitor parking availability on NPS 

roadways through metering and improving 

access for people with disabilities would 

enhance opportunities for a small portion of 

visitors. 

Increasing the variety of guided tours, multiseasonal touring opportunities, bicycling tours, 

and multilingual tours would improve visitor 

understanding of and satisfaction with the National Mall. This could result in longer visitor 

seasons as well as attracting more international 

visitors to the local and regional area. 

Compared to the no-action alternative, the 

preferred alternative would provide new and 

upgraded opportunities, services, and amenities 

for visitors that would tend to make them stay 

longer. Resulting impacts on the local and regional economy would be long-term and beneficial but minor because visitor expenditures 

related to recreation, entertainment, and food 

service amount to less than 3% of tourist-related 

earnings in the D.C. area. 

Impacts on Commercial Business 

Opportunities 

Commercial business opportunities on the 

National Mall would increase and be more 

diversified in several areas because different 

types of commercial opportunities, such as food 

service and recreation equipment rentals, would 

be offered. Multipurpose facilities at Union 

Square, the Washington Monument grounds, 

Constitution Gardens, and the Tidal Basin area 

would provide pleasant places for visitors to relax 

and enjoy programs, performances, and 

appropriate entertainment. In addition to providing restrooms and shaded rest areas, these 

multipurpose facilities would also offer commercial business opportunities for food service, 

shopping for souvenirs, and performance venues. 

These facilities would also meet the needs of 

different user groups, such as event participants, 

performers, and audiences, as well as general 

visitors to the National Mall. Additional 

commercial food service facilities could also be 

replaced or added at the Thomas Jefferson 

Memorial, along Ohio Drive or, in Ash Woods. 

Diversifying food choices and venues (e.g., indoor/outdoor seating) on the National Mall 

would generate more commercial business 

 507 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

opportunities. Also, outdoor cafés or garden 

restaurants would better meet visitor desires as 

indicated in public scoping comments (NPS 

2007d). 

Improved interpretation/educational programs 

and facilities (multilingual programs) could 

increase some commercial opportunities for 

international or group tours on the National 

Mall. 

It is possible that paid parking could be managed 

through a commercial services contract, which 

would be a long-term, minor, beneficial impact 

on commercial business opportunities. 

Impacts under the preferred alternative on 

commercial business opportunities on the 

National Mall would be long-term, minor, and 

beneficial because increased services would both 

meet visitor needs and increase use of those 

services and facilities on the National Mall. 

The demand for commercial opportunities in 

nearby and surrounding areas in Washington, 

D.C., would also increase with improved services of the National Mall because of increased 

visitation and potentially longer stays in the 

metropolitan area. This would create more 

business opportunities for lodging, restaurants, 

and retail in the region that would not be offered 

on the National Mall. Impacts would be longterm, minor, and beneficial because touristrelated sectors (lodging and food service) 

account for only about 3% of D.C. earnings. 

Impacts on Construction Opportunities 

Construction-related expenditures under the 

preferred alternative would amount to about 

$200 million to $240 million more than under 

the no-action alternative. Including more than 

$400 million in deferred maintenance, as noted 

under “Impacts Common to All Alternatives,” 

total expenditures under the preferred alternative would be about $600 million to $650 million. 

Projects under the preferred alternative would 

include civic infrastructure, multipurpose 

facilities, a welcome area at the Mall Metro station, wider walks around the Tidal Basin, improved connections to the Kennedy Center, and 

better pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Key areas 

for major improvements would include Union 

Square, the Mall, the Washington Monument, 

Constitution Gardens, Ash Woods, the Tidal 

Basin, and the Potomac Riverfront. 

It is assumed that expenditures would occur 

over several years. While impacts on individual 

businesses who successfully bid on projects 

could be substantial, the contribution to regional 

construction earnings would be about 6% per 

year, assuming that projects were phased over 10 

years at $60–$65 million per year and that total 

construction earnings in the D.C. area would be 

$900 million per year or more. Resulting impacts 

would be short-term, minor, and beneficial. 

Cumulative Impacts 

The impacts of past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions would be long-term and 

beneficial because of more tourist attractions 

and commercial business opportunities that 

could encourage visitors to stay longer and 

spend more in the local and regional area since 

there would be more things to see and do. 

However, the intensity would only be minor due 

to the size of the local and regional economy. 

Actions under the preferred alternative would 

result in long-term, minor, beneficial impacts on 

the local and regional economy because of 

increased and improved facilities and services 

across the National Mall. These impacts, in 

combination with the impacts of past, present, 

and reasonably foreseeable actions, would result 

in long-term, minor, beneficial impacts on the 

local and regional economy. Constructionrelated impacts would be short-term, minor, and 

beneficial. The preferred alternative would make 

a slight beneficial contribution to these impacts. 

Conclusion 

The preferred alternative would result in longterm, minor, and beneficial impacts on the local 

and regional economy because of longer visitor 

stays due to better resource conditions and new 

and improved visitor services and facilities, 

increased and diversified commercial business 

opportunities that would meet visitor needs on 

the National Mall and in surrounding areas, and 

minor increases in construction-related expenditures. These impacts, in combination with the 

impacts of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions, would result in long-term, minor, 

beneficial cumulative impacts on the local and 

508
Socioeconomic Environment: Impacts of Alternative A 

regional economy, with a slight beneficial contribution from the preferred alternative. 

IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE A 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Alternative A would focus on the historic 

designed landscape and increased visitor 

education to create a sense of place that would 

reinforce the civic, historic, and symbolic role of 

the National Mall to our nation. 

Impacts of Increased Visitation 

Under alternative A visitation would be projected to continue to increase at an average rate 

of 1.25% per year since there would be no 

significant introduction of facilities or programs. 

Fewer local groups might use the National Mall 

because of limits on the number of special events 

and temporary facilities to protect natural 

resources and views. However, this would not 

affect national celebrations such as Fourth of 

July, the National Cherry Blossom Festival, the 

Festival or American Folklife, or First 

Amendment demonstrations. 

Impacts on the local and regional economy 

would be long-term, negligible, and beneficial 

because actions under alternative A would affect 

different user groups. Most visitors would enjoy 

enhanced experiences with improved landscape 

conditions and the protection of historic vistas 

on the National Mall, but the number of visitor 

groups who come to the National Mall due to 

events could decrease because visitor needs 

would not be fully met. 

Impacts on Commercial Business 

Opportunities 

Improving food service facilities and diversifying 

food choices at the Washington Monument, 

Constitution Gardens, and the Tidal Basin area 

would maintain existing commercial business 

opportunities on the National Mall rather than 

providing new services, nor would visitor requests for more diversified food service options 

be met since refreshment stands would remain 

the primary locations for food service. However, 

constructing new restrooms and renovating outdated restrooms and visitor facilities throughout 

the National Mall could encourage visitors to 

stay longer because of a more pleasant 

atmosphere. 

Impacts under alternative A on commercial 

business opportunities on the National Mall 

would be long-term, negligible, and beneficial, 

because while outdated food service facilities 

would be replaced or renovated, most food 

service would be at refreshment stands. 

As described for the preferred alternative, it is 

possible that paid parking could be managed 

through a commercial services contract, which 

would be a long-term, minor, beneficial impact 

on commercial business opportunities. 

Impacts under alternative A on commercial 

business opportunities in adjacent destinations 

and surrounding areas would be long-term, 

negligible, and beneficial because visitors would 

likely continue to seek commercial opportunities in adjacent areas for more diversity.

Impacts on Construction Opportunities 

Construction-related expenditures under alternative A would amount to about $94 million to 

$136 million more than under the no-action 

alternative. Including more than $400 million in 

deferred maintenance, as noted under “Impacts 

Common to All Alternatives,” total expenditures 

under this alternative would be about $500 

million to $540 million. Projects to improve 

resource conditions and address deferred 

maintenance would comprise most of the costs. 

Other projects include building new restrooms 

and renovating outdated restrooms and visitor 

facilities throughout the National Mall. 

It is assumed that expenditures would occur 

over several years. While impacts on individual 

businesses who successfully bid on projects 

could be substantial, the contribution to regional 

construction earnings would be about 5% per 

year, assuming that projects were phased over 10 

years at $50–$54 million per year and that total 

construction earnings in the D.C. area would be 

$900 million per year or more. Resulting impacts 

would be short-term, minor, and beneficial. 

Cumulative Impacts 

The impacts of past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions would be the same as those 

 509 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

discussed under the no-action alternative and 

would be long-term, minor, and beneficial. The 

impacts of alternative A on the local and regional 

economy would also be long-term, minor, and 

beneficial. Cumulative impacts would be longterm, minor, and beneficial. There would be a 

slight beneficial contribution to cumulative 

impacts under alternative A. 

Conclusion 

Actions under alternative A would result in longterm, minor, beneficial impacts on the local and 

regional economy compared to the no-action 

alternative. Visitor experiences would be enhanced due to improved conditions of the 

historic landscape and vistas, but visitation levels 

would likely increase only slightly. Commercial 

business opportunities on the National Mall 

would increase slightly with improved food 

service facilities. There would be a minor 

increase in construction-related expenditures. 

These impacts, in combination with the impacts 

of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable 

actions, would result in long-term, minor, 

beneficial cumulative impacts on the local and 

regional economy, with a slight beneficial 

contribution from this alternative. 

IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE B 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Alternative B would focus on creating a welcoming national civic space for public gatherings, 

events, and high-use levels. 

Impacts of Increased Visitation 

Compared to the no-action alternative, alternative B would undertake actions to improve 

resource conditions, visitor facilities, and 

infrastructure throughout the National Mall, 

positively affecting local and nonlocal visitors. 

Improved information, services, and amenities 

would create safer and more comfortable 

conditions for all visitors. These actions could 

contribute to increased overall visitation levels. 

Similar to the preferred alternative, multipurpose visitor facilities at Union Square, the Washington Monument, and Constitution Gardens 

would stimulate more visitation and also attract 

more local residents since a greater array of programs and events would be offered. Improved 

event facilities, logistics, and operations for 

special events and demonstrations throughout 

the National Mall would accommodate more 

people, which could result in increased visitation 

from the local and regional area. 

Impacts of increased visitation on the local and 

regional economy under alternative B would be 

long-term and beneficial because improved 

resources conditions, facilities, services, and 

amenities would encourage more people to 

come and stay longer. However, the intensity of 

the economic impact would be minor because 

visitor expenditures related to recreation, 

entertainment, and food service amount to less 

than 3% of tourist-related earnings in the D.C. 

area. 

Impacts on Commercial Business 

Opportunities 

Under alternative B commercial business opportunities would be increased and diversified at 

several locations across the National Mall. Food 

service opportunities would be added or expanded at Union Square, the Washington 

Monument, Constitution Gardens, the Franklin 

Delano Roosevelt Memorial, the Thomas 

Jefferson Memorial, and the Tidal Basin area. 

Providing more restrooms on the Mall, as well as 

flexible performance facilities or stages at Union 

Square, Washington Monument, and Constitution Gardens would increase commercial business opportunities. Commercial equipment 

rentals would be increased in the Tidal Basin 

area. 

Impacts of alternative B on food service opportunities on the National Mall would be longterm, minor, and beneficial because there would 

be more diverse types of food facilities and food 

options. Impacts on recreational business opportunities on the National Mall would be longterm, minor, and beneficial. 

As described for the preferred alternative, it is 

possible that paid parking could be managed 

through a commercial services contract, which 

would be a long-term, minor, beneficial impact 

on commercial business opportunities. 

510
Socioeconomic Environment: Impacts of Alternative B 

Commercial opportunities in adjacent destinations and surrounding areas in Washington, 

D.C., would improve under alternative B. However, this benefit would be somewhat offset by 

the increased availability of more food service 

facilities and food choices on the National Mall, 

which could serve more visitors compared to the 

no-action alternative. Impacts would be longterm, minor, and beneficial because overall 

demand would be increased due to greater 

visitation, but improved services on the National 

Mall (e.g., food services) would reduce the need 

for visitors to go to businesses in adjacent areas. 

Under this alternative underground parking garages would be built if feasible. The cost of developing garages is very high; one general industry estimate is $30,000 to $50,000 per space 

(compared to $15,000 per space in an aboveground parking structure); costs depend on 

design efficiency, construction method, labor 

costs, and geographical area (Parking Design 

Group 2008). An underground garage on the 

National Mall would also have to take geotechnical and security factors into consideration, 

possibly increasing the cost. Operating costs 

average about $650 per space per year (Urban 

Parking Concepts 2009), which would be 

reflected in high visitor parking fees. 

Impacts on Construction Opportunities 

Construction-related expenditures under alternative B would amount to about $190 million to 

$280 million more than under the no-action 

alternative. Including more than $400 million in 

deferred maintenance, as noted under “Impacts 

Common to All Alternatives,” total expenditures 

under this alternative would be about $600 

million to $650 million. In addition to projects to 

improve resource conditions and address deferred maintenance, other projects would include underground parking garages and rebuilding Constitution Gardens Lake as a drainable 

pool for events, along with new restrooms and 

visitor facilities. 

It is assumed that expenditures would occur 

over several years. While impacts on individual 

businesses who successfully bid on projects 

could be substantial, the contribution to regional 

construction earnings would be about 6% per 

year, assuming that projects were phased over 10 

years at $60–$65 million per year and that total 

construction earnings in the D.C. area would be 

$900 million per year or more. Resulting impacts 

would be short-term, minor, and beneficial. 

Cumulative Impacts 

The impacts of past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions would be the same as those 

described under the no-action alternative and 

would be long-term, minor, and beneficial. 

Actions under alternative B would also result in 

long-term, minor, beneficial impacts on the local 

and regional economy because of increased and 

improved facilities and services across the 

National Mall and in surrounding areas that 

would likely increase visitor use since there 

would be more things to see and do. Construction-related impacts on the local and regional 

economy would be short-term, minor, and 

beneficial. These impacts, in combination with 

the impacts of past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions, would result in long-term, 

beneficial cumulative impacts that would be 

minor in intensity because related expenditures 

and earnings would represent a very small 

percentage of the local and regional economy. 

Alternative B would make a slight beneficial 

contribution to these impacts. 

Conclusion 

Impacts on the local and regional economy 

under alternative B would be long-term, minor, 

and beneficial because of longer visitor stays due 

to better resource conditions and improved 

services and facilities, increased and diversified 

commercial business opportunities that would 

meet visitor needs, and minor increases in construction-related expenses. Parking costs for 

underground garages (if determined feasible) 

would result in long-term, minor, adverse impacts on visitor costs. These impacts, in combination with the impacts of past, present, and 

reasonably foreseeable actions, would result in 

long-term, minor, beneficial cumulative impacts 

on the local and regional economy, with a slight 

beneficial contribution from alternative B. 

 511 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE C 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Alternative C would focus on urban open space, 

urban ecology, recreation, and healthy lifestyles. 

Impacts of Increased Visitation 

Compared to the no-action alternative, alternative C would offer more diverse recreational 

opportunities and activities to meet evolving 

recreational needs by redesigning or expanding 

areas, improving field conditions, and providing 

more recreation equipment rentals (watercraft 

and bicycles). These improvements would increase visitor use on the National Mall throughout the year, especially among local residents, 

but would not necessarily increase overall visitation levels, especially from outside the region. 

Impacts of increased visitation on the local and 

regional economy under alternative C would be 

long-term and beneficial because improved 

resources conditions, facilities, services, and 

amenities would encourage more people to 

come and stay longer. However, the intensity of 

the economic impact would be negligible because visitor expenditures related to recreation, 

entertainment, and food service amount to less 

than 3% of tourist-related earnings in the D.C. 

area. 

Impacts on Commercial Business 

Opportunities 

Commercial business opportunities on the 

National Mall under alternative C, similar to 

alternative B, would be increased at many places. 

For example, food service opportunities would 

increase at Union Square, the Washington 

Monument, Constitution Gardens, the Franklin 

Delano Roosevelt Memorial, the Thomas 

Jefferson Memorial, and the Tidal Basin area. 

In addition, commercial business opportunities 

for recreational services would increase at 

several locations, such as ice skate rentals at 

Union Square, model boat and lawn chair rentals 

at Constitution Gardens, and rental boats such 

as kayaks and rowboats at the Tidal Basin, in 

addition to paddleboats. 

Like alternative B, impacts of alternative C on 

commercial business opportunities on the 

National Mall would be long-term, minor, and 

beneficial because of more diverse types of food 

facilities and food options, as well as year-round 

recreation equipment rentals. 

As described for the preferred alternative, it is 

possible that paid parking could be managed 

through a commercial services contract, which 

would be a long-term, minor, beneficial impact 

on commercial business opportunities. 

More recreational activities and opportunities 

on the National Mall would increase commercial business opportunities in adjacent destinations and surrounding areas in Washington, 

D.C. Impacts would be long-term, minor, and 

beneficial because of increased overall demand 

due to greater visitor use of the National Mall, 

but improved services (e.g., food services) on the 

National Mall would reduce the need for visitors 

to use commercial businesses in adjacent areas. 

Impacts on Construction Opportunities 

Construction-related expenditures under alternative C would amount to $255 million to $300 

million more than under the no-action alternative. Including more than $400 million in 

deferred maintenance, as noted under “Impacts 

Common to All Alternatives,” total expenditures 

under this alternative would be $655 million to 

$705 million. In addition to projects to improve 

resource conditions and address deferred 

maintenance, other projects would include 

filling in the north bay of the Tidal Basin for 

additional recreation space, developing separate 

bike routes and lanes, changing roads, 

constructing a vehicular tunnel, and adding 

playgrounds. 

It is assumed that expenditures would occur 

over several years. While impacts on individual 

businesses who successfully bid on projects 

could be substantial, the contribution to regional 

construction earnings would be about 7% per 

year, assuming that projects were phased over 10 

years at $65.5 million per year and that total 

construction earnings in the D.C. area would be 

$900 million per year or more. Resulting impacts 

would be short-term, minor, and beneficial. 

512
Socioeconomic Environment: Impacts of Alternative C 

Cumulative Impacts 

The impacts of past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions would be the same as those 

described under the no-alternative and would be 

long-term, minor, and beneficial. Actions under 

alternative C would also result in long-term, 

minor, beneficial impacts on the local and 

regional economy because of increased and 

improved facilities and services across the 

National Mall and in surrounding areas that 

would likely increase visitor use since there 

would be more things to see and do. Construction-related impacts on the local and regional 

economy would be short-term, minor, and 

beneficial. These impacts, in combination with 

the impacts of past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions, would result in long-term, 

beneficial cumulative impacts that would be 

minor in intensity because related expenditures 

and earnings would represent a very small 

percentage of the local and regional economy. 

Alternative C would make a slight beneficial 

contribution to these impacts. 

Conclusion 

Impacts on the local and regional economy 

under alternative C would be long-term, minor, 

and beneficial because of longer visitor stays due 

to better resource conditions, improved services 

and facilities, and more year-round recreational 

opportunities; diversified commercial business 

opportunities that would meet visitor needs; and 

minor increases in construction-related expenses. These impacts, in combination with the 

impacts of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions, would result in long-term, 

minor, beneficial cumulative impacts on the 

local and regional economy, with a slight beneficial contribution from alternative C.

 513 
PARK OPERATIONS

METHODOLOGY FOR IMPACT 

ANALYSIS

The impacts of the alternatives on park operations are evaluated for their potential to affect 

the following park operational issues: 

• Impacts on park operations — The beneficial or adverse impacts on park operations 

due to implementing quality standards, 

using best practices to make operations and 

maintenance more efficient, addressing deferred maintenance, maintaining assets and 

infrastructure, ensuring safe and efficient 

operations, and changing staffing focus are 

discussed. 

• Impacts on sustainability — This analysis 

focuses on the degree to which the alternatives would either beneficially or adversely 

affect sustainability goals for facility design, 

recycling, water use, parking, and renewable energy.

Impact Intensity Levels 

The following thresholds were established for 

impacts on park operations: 

• Negligible — The impact on the ability to 

achieve most park standards, the efficiency 

of park operations, or sustainability would 

not be detectable or would be barely 

detectable. 

• Minor — The impact on the ability to 

achieve most park standards, efficiency of 

park operations, or sustainability would be 

detectable or would affect less than 10 

acres. 

• Moderate — The impact on the ability to 

achieve most park standards, efficiency of 

park operations, or sustainability would be 

readily apparent or would affect less than 

100 acres. 

• Major — The impact on the ability to 

achieve most park standards, efficiency of 

park operations, or sustainability would be 

obvious to all users or would affect more 

than 100 acres, and would be severely 

adverse or exceptionally beneficial.

Type of Impact 

Impacts could be either beneficial or adverse. A 

beneficial impact would be consistent with 

federal regulations and NPS policies, would 

incorporate acceptable best practices, or would 

improve the results and efficiency of park activities such as maintenance. An adverse impact 

would be inconsistent with federal regulations 

or NPS policies; would not improve sustainability, maintenance, communications, equipment, 

or technology; or would fail to incorporate 

relevant improvements from best practices. 

Duration of Impacts 

Impacts could be temporary, short-term, or 

long-term. 

• Temporary — The impact would usually 

last for a few hours or up to two days, such 

as a road closure for a day or less or limited 

access to an area during a demonstration or 

maintenance operations. 

• Short-term — The impact would generally 

last up to one year or the life of a construction project. 

• Long-term — The impact would last longer 

than one year or for the life of the plan (up 

to 50 years). 

Legislations, Regulations, and 

Policies 

The Energy Policy Act of 1992 updated energy 

efficiency ratings, standards, codes and labels; 

established voluntary guidelines; provided 

technical assistance; and set energy conservation 

requirements for federal agencies. 

The Energy Independence and Security Act of 

2007 amended section 543 of the National 

Energy Conservation Policy Act by adding a new 

subsection to address “Use of Energy and Water 

Efficiency Measures in Federal Buildings” (42 

USC 8253(f)). 

514
Park Operations: Methodology for Impact Analysis 

The following executive orders and regulations 

apply: 

• Executive Order 13101, “Greening the 

Government through Waste Prevention, 

Recycling, and Federal Acquisition” 

(September 14, 1998) 

• Executive Order 13123, “Greening the 

Government through Efficient Energy 

Management” (June 3, 1999). The order 

addresses the importance of federal 

leadership and associated savings. It 

established various goals, such as reducing 

greenhouse gases by 30% by 2010 compared to such emissions levels in 1990; 

improving energy efficiency by 35% by 

2010 relative to 1985; expanding renewable 

energy; reducing use of petroleum; and 

increasing water conservation. 

• Executive Order 13149, “Greening the 

Government through Federal Fleet and 

Transportation Efficiency.” 

• “Facility Energy Management Guidelines 

and Criteria for Energy and Water Evaluations in Covered Facilities” specifies 

approaches for implementing the energy 

and water provisions of the Energy Independence and Security Act (U.S. 

Department of Energy 2008). 

• Executive Order 13327, “Federal Real 

Property Asset Management” (February 4, 

2004) establishes as policy of the United 

States the promotion of the efficient and 

economical use of America’s real property 

assets and to assure management accountability for implementing federal real 

property management reforms. Based on 

this policy, executive branch departments 

and agencies are to recognize the 

importance of real property resources 

through increased management attention, 

the establishment of clear goals and 

objectives, improved policies and levels of 

accountability, and other appropriate 

action. 

NPS Management Policies 2006 

General Maintenance 

The NPS Management Policies 2006 require 

providing “a safe, sanitary, environmentally 

protective and esthetically pleasing environment 

for visitors and employees, protecting the physical integrity of facilities, and preserving and 

maintaining facilities in their optimum sustainable condition to the greatest extent possible” 

(sec. 9.1.4). Preventive and rehabilitative maintenance programs will incorporate sustainable 

design elements, and practices. 

Maintenance facilities are to be consistent in 

design, scale, texture, and details with other park 

facilities. Whenever feasible concession and 

park facilities should be integrated or provided 

adjacent to each other to reduce impacts (NPS 

2006e, sec. 9.4.4). 

Utilities 

The National Park Service will use municipal 

systems, share in providing such systems, provide the least obtrusive systems, and use the least 

polluting power supply options (NPS 2006e, sec. 

9.1.5). 

Waste Management 

Integrated solid and hazardous waste management practices will be implemented to reduce 

waste. Reuse and recycling will be maximized 

(NPS 2006e, sec. 9.1.6.1). 

Soil Resource Management 

Park managers will actively seek to understand 

and preserve the soil resources of parks, and to 

prevent, to the extent possible, the unnatural 

erosion, physical removal, or contamination of 

the soil or its contamination of other resources. 

Management action will be taken to prevent or 

at least minimize adverse, potentially irreversible 

impacts on soils. Soil conservation and soil 

amendment practices may be implemented to 

reduce impacts. 

When use of a soil fertilizer or other soil amendment is an unavoidable part of maintaining an 

altered plant community, the use will be guided 

by a written prescription. The prescription will 

be designed to ensure that use of a soil fertilizer 

or soil amendment does not unacceptably alter 

the physical, chemical, or biological characteristics of the soil, biological community, or surface or groundwaters (NPS 2006e, sec. 4.8.2.4). 

 515 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Sustainable Energy Design 

Any facility development, whether it is a new 

building, a renovation, or an adaptive reuse of an 

existing facility, must include improvements in 

energy efficiency and reduction in greenhouse 

gas emissions for both the building envelope and 

the mechanical systems that support the facility 

(NPS 2006e, sec. 9.1.1.6). 

In carrying out its maintenance responsibilities, 

the National Park Service will acquire environmentally preferable and energy-efficient products. A variety of attributes will be considered 

when purchasing products, including cost, energy efficiency, biodegradability, toxicity, recovered material content, packaging, transport cost, 

and other life-cycle environmental impacts, such 

as disposal. The National Park Service will actively pursue opportunities to test and demonstrate environmentally preferable and energyefficient products, consistent with its goal of 

demonstrating sustainable practices that avoid 

or minimize environmental impacts (NPS 2006e, 

sec. 9.1.4.2). 

The National Park Service will conduct its activities in ways that use energy wisely and economically (NPS 2006e, sec. 9.1.7). Major visitor service facilities must incorporate a minimum rating of silver in the LEED system (NPS 2006e, 

sec. 9.1.1.6). 

Parking Areas 

Parking should not unacceptably intrude by 

sight, sound, or other impact on park resources. 

When parking areas are necessary, they will be 

limited to the smallest size necessary (NPS 

2006e, sec. 9.2.4). The National Park Service 

must find transportation solutions to provide 

high-quality experiences other than the 

traditional solutions to build more parking (NPS 

2006e, sec. 9.2). 

IMPACTS COMMON TO ALL 

ALTERNATIVES

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Impacts on Park Operations 

Written Standards 

NPS staff are developing new comprehensive 

standards and monitoring procedures for the 

National Mall and Memorial Parks. These 

procedures are based on grounds maintenance 

standards used by other organizations, but they 

have been customized for the particular challenges presented in Washington, D.C. This is 

consistent with NPS Management Policies 2006,

as well as best practices. The previous NPS landscape maintenance standards were out of date 

and did not comprehensively address facilities, 

the landscape, or other areas where standards 

could be useful. The goal is to develop standards 

to achieve the desired visitor experience. 

Written standards under all alternatives would 

provide a common understanding about the 

expected quality and desired level of care for 

areas within the National Mall. The standards 

cover grounds maintenance; maintenance of 

memorials, buildings, and visitor facilities; solid 

waste management and recycling; special events 

and other temporary uses; orientation, information, education, and interpretation; and customer service. Standards would also address appropriate levels of care for high maintenance vegetation, such as cherry trees that generate many 

offshoots and that require repeated pruning.

Pilot projects are being used to ensure that the 

standards are clear, understandable, and 

achievable. Staff would also be assigned to certain geographic areas so they become knowledgeable about the area and take pride in its 

upkeep. 

Developing written standards would affect most 

park operations and would support the achievement of desired standards and quality to enhance the visitor experience and protect park 

resources. Written standards would also unite 

park divisions for maintenance, resource management, park programs, partnerships, and 

education and interpretation. The impacts of 

uniform, commonly understood standards and 

criteria would result in long-term, moderate to 

516
Park Operations: Impacts Common to All Alternatives 

major, beneficial impacts in terms of achieving 

desired park conditions. 

Visual Quality Team 

The high profile location of the National Mall 

results in continuous unscheduled demands on 

staff to quickly improve areas. Demands continue to pull staff from regularly scheduled 

work, thwarting the ability to achieve desired 

standards that would enhance park conditions 

and benefit all visitors. Over the last year the 

park has instituted a visual quality team to 

identify problems and concerns. This best 

practice of monitoring and taking immediate 

action has resulted in repairs, repainting, and 

extensive resodding of areas. Most of these 

actions are readily apparent efforts to remedy 

impacts from high use levels; however they 

could be reversible, so the impact of the visual 

quality team and a quick response team on the 

ability to meet park standards and quality would 

be short-term, moderate, and beneficial. 

Staffing 

Increased staffing would be necessary under any 

alternative to achieve desired conditions. An 

increase in the operating budget would be 

sought to support staffing aligned with core 

operations and necessary to achieve desired 

conditions and industry standards. As a result of 

core operations planning that is being done 

throughout the National Park Service, staffing 

levels are to be aligned with essential operations. 

Current staffing levels are not commensurate 

with those needed to achieve desired conditions 

or standards, according to various best practices. 

The small staff in the programs office is unable 

to fully oversee special events to ensure that they 

meet permit conditions, resulting in overworked 

staff and many adverse resource impacts. Nor 

are staff able to track successful events and 

practices in order to pass that information on to 

other event organizers. In addition, all park 

staffing is near historic lows, which has affected 

park standards and quality as well as the efficiency of park operations. 

To bring maintenance activities in line with peak 

hours of visitation, park staff have begun implementing multiple custodial and trash collection 

shifts, so staff are now on site from 6 a.m. to 10 

p.m. The continued impact of this change would 

be long-term, moderate, and beneficial. Core 

operational staffing emphasis, which could vary 

by alternative, is conceptually analyzed. 

Temporary Fencing 

Over the last year the park has begun using a 

different type of fencing, in lieu of snow fencing, 

to create secured areas, to guide use along pathways, or to protect areas during rehabilitation. 

Park staff will continue to explore alternative 

fencing types that better meet quality expectations and are easy to install, maintain, and store. 

The continued impact of new fencing on a 

quality environment would be long-term, moderate to major, and beneficial while the impact 

on the efficiency of park operations would be 

long-term, major, and adverse or beneficial 

depending on the type of fencing since park staff 

would still be installing miles of temporary 

fencing for certain special events. 

Solid Waste and Recycling 

The National Park Service would continue to 

work with the Environmental Protection Agency 

and others for ongoing pilot projects and expanded recycling programs at special events. 

Since food packaging is a significant portion of 

waste (40%), the National Park Service would 

also continue working with concessioners to 

reduce excessive packaging. Developing a solid 

waste and recycling plan that would incorporate 

best practices for collection, retrieval, storage, 

and hauling would help expand recycling efforts, 

reduce waste hauled to landfills, allow green 

waste to be composted, and reuse materials as 

much as possible. 

These changes would make park sanitation and 

waste management operations much more efficient, reduce injuries, improve park conditions, 

and establish a sustainable system. The impact 

on overall park operations would be long-term, 

major, and beneficial. 

Construction 

Normal park operations would be disrupted 

during any construction associated with 

implementing the selected alternative in this 

plan, or projects common to all alternatives. The 

impacts of construction on park operations 

 517 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

would be short-term, minor to moderate, and 

adverse. 

Impacts on Sustainability 

Energy Use 

The National Park Service has established targets to reduce energy and requires national park 

system units to show environmental leadership 

and maintain high standards for sustainable 

design, energy efficiency, and reduction of 

greenhouse gases. To reach these target goals, 

the park has submitted projects to replace 

HVAC systems and will continue to replace light 

bulbs or water feature pump systems with more 

efficient components or new technologies. New, 

upgraded, or replacement facilities would result 

in increased energy use, but would meet goals to 

reduce energy use or to use renewable resources. The National Park Service is participating in the EPA Climate Friendly Parks 

Program,* as well as serving as a pilot project for 

the Department of Energy’s Audit Guideline, 

using sustainability indicators to reduce solid 

waste, water use, energy consumption, carbon 

footprint, greenhouse gases, and air pollutants. 

The goal is to use renewable energy sources and 

recycling practices, as well as to improve the 

long-term sustainability of resources. Keeping 

the Washington Monument open longer hours 

would be a long-term, negligible, adverse impact. 

Altogether these actions over time would 

increase energy efficiency and sustainability 

despite increased energy use, resulting in longterm, moderate, beneficial impacts. 

Water Use 

Aging water conveyance systems would be 

replaced through component renewal projects. 

While additional irrigation systems are proposed, the National Park Service would 

continually seek nonpotable water sources for 

irrigation as much as possible, use graywater or 

 

* In 2003 the National Park Service and the Environmental Protection Agency created a new program 

called Climate Friendly Parks. Through this program 

the two partner agencies are finding ways to reduce 

emissions from park activities. They are also educating the public about potential impacts in the parks and 

what the agencies are doing to address them. 

stormwater runoff where and when feasible, and 

reduce water loss through better or subsurface 

irrigation. Despite more irrigation, the volume of 

potable water would be reduced, and improved 

soil percolation would reduce stormwater 

runoff, resulting in long-term. moderate to 

major, beneficial impacts on water use. 

Conclusion 

Impacts common to all alternatives would be 

short- and long-term, moderate to major, and 

beneficial as a result of written standards and 

criteria, a visual quality team to identify highprofile problems and concerns that would be 

addressed promptly by a quick response team, 

staffing levels aligned with essential operations, 

less intrusive temporary fencing, a solid waste 

and recycling plan, and increased use of renewable energy sources and recycling practices. 

Construction-related impacts on the National 

Mall would generally be short-term, minor to 

moderate, and adverse. 

IMPACTS OF THE NO-ACTION 

ALTERNATIVE

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Under the no-action alternative the numerous 

park operational challenges at the National Mall 

and inefficiencies that affect sustainability and 

the ability to achieve desired park conditions 

would continue. 

Impacts on Park Operations 

Deferred Maintenance 

The National Park Service has asked all park 

units to identify ongoing regular and major 

maintenance and repairs that have not been 

done for lack of financial resources. On the National Mall this deferred maintenance backlog 

totals more than $400 million, including preservation and repair work on aging facilities from 

seawalls to irrigation systems and walks. The 

Tidal Basin seawalls are over 100 year old and 

require significant repairs, with the most severe 

conditions near the Thomas Jefferson Memorial 

and west to just south of the Franklin Delano 

Roosevelt Memorial. The maintenance backlog 

has also contributed substantially to the inability 

518
Park Operations: Impacts of the No-Action Alternative 

to meet desired standards and quality for park 

assets and resources. As described in the 

“Affected Environment” (see page 349), the 

National Mall’s deferred maintenance would 

continue to be disproportionate to the number 

of assets, and the funding gap between the 

NAMA budget and industry benchmarks, 

currently estimated at $11.8 million per year, 

would be expected to continue, meaning that the 

park would fall further behind. Impacts would 

continue to be long-term, major, and adverse. 

Assets, Infrastructure, and Amenities 

As described under the “Affected Environment,” 

the National Mall was not designed for the level 

of use it receives today; as a result, the park is 

being adversely affected. The following conditions would continue under the no-action alternative: 

• Because walks are too narrow for maintenance vehicles, as well as pedestrians, impacts would continue, such as posts along 

walkways being pushed out of plumb by 

maintenance vehicles, and damaged curbs 

and landscape impacts because maintenance and delivery vehicles need to drive 

over curbs in several locations to get access. 

• The damaged irrigation system on the Mall 

as a result of tent stakes driven into the 

ground to anchor tents would continue to 

make turf maintenance and renovation 

difficult. 

• Vandalism and misuse of stand-alone 

drinking fountains would likely continue, 

and restrooms in some locations have also 

been vandalized, with broken doors and 

locks. 

• Adverse impacts from water features (e.g., 

Constitution Gardens Lake and the Capitol 

Reflecting Pool) would continue, including 

the lack of water recirculation systems in 

shallow reflecting pools or lakes, resulting 

in algae and odors that require extensive 

resource work and additional cleaning. 

Changes in the chemical makeup of city 

water have increased algae growth. Despite 

scheduled twice yearly cleaning, these 

water features fail to meet desired standards. Additionally, these water features 

have extensive leaks that result in much 

greater use of the city’s potable water 

resources. 

• Lack of adequate staff would mean that 

maintenance tasks, such as ongoing pruning 

of cherry trees that generate many offshoots, scouting and treating for Dutch elm 

disease, and pruning for the health and 

safety of American elms, would not be performed as often as desired for optimal 

conditions. 

• A great variety of uncoordinated site furnishings, such as benches, light fixtures, and 

trash containers, would continue to detract 

from an overall identity for the National 

Mall. These various elements would also 

continue to compound maintenance 

operations, making it extremely difficult to 

achieve a uniform quality and standard. 

The overall impact on park conditions because 

of present asset conditions, inadequate amenities, and uncoordinated components would 

continue to be long-term, major, and adverse. 

Soil Conditions 

As described under “Natural Resources,” compacted soil conditions in some areas, along with 

poor quality topsoils and subsoils that were 

brought into some areas, continue to limit vigorous and normal vegetation growth, adversely 

affecting both turf and trees. Poor conditions 

increase park maintenance demands on the 

Mall, the Washington Monument grounds, and 

Constitution Gardens. Because the underlying 

problems are not being addressed, the additional 

labor to try to achieve acceptable conditions is 

only providing temporary to short-term improvements. Until soil quality and conditions 

were improved by restoring and improving soils, 

impacts on park operations would continue to 

be long-term, major, and adverse. 

Permitted Activities 

National celebrations, special events, and demonstrations would continue to affect park operational priorities, limit access, or require overtime 

that affects staffing schedules. The lack of 

venues designed to withstand the impacts of 

intensive levels of use would mean that national 

celebrations, inaugurations, and some special 

 519 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

events would continue to require substantial 

amounts of staff time in many divisions for 

planning and management, diverting time from 

other activities directed at maintaining park 

conditions. Cost recovery for special events 

would continue to cover costs of restoring or 

rehabilitating areas. The National Park Service 

would continue to absorb periodic restoration 

costs following First Amendment demonstrations. The continued impact of permitted activities would be long-term, major, and adverse. 

Staffing 

Park staff levels have been reduced over time 

and are now near low levels. Contracted services 

for specialized maintenance, such as HVAC, 

elevator service, and security systems, are used 

to make up the shortfall, but a number of gaps 

remain. For example, in the Maintenance 

Division there are fewer people doing painting, 

plumbing, grounds maintenance, large mower 

operations, and trash removal. The park programs office is very small for the volume of permitted activities and is not able to monitor all 

events. Contracting was largely provided 

through the regional office. This affects park 

operations and the ability to achieve desired 

conditions. This situation would continue under 

existing conditions. 

Based on the “Park Asset Management Plan” 

(see Table 39, page 349) and comparisons with 

industry benchmarks, the category of maintained landscapes is funded at only 38% of need. 

Waterfronts, roads, and buildings are also 

insufficiently funded (22%–41%). Additionally, 

the park has 28% of the staff needed to achieve 

the highest quality turf conditions. The park 

programs office is understaffed for current 

permitting, monitoring, tracking, and recording 

activities. Present staffing levels for education 

and interpretation mean that park educational, 

informational, and welcome standards are not 

being met. Because of the volume of visitation, 

many visitors may not see a ranger or know 

about educational opportunities. While the intent of core operations planning is to align staff 

needs with essential tasks related to the park 

purpose, the present inadequate staffing levels 

would continue to have long-term, major, 

adverse impacts on the ability to achieve park 

standards. 

Management Processes 

The permit process for demonstrations and 

special events would continue to be labor 

intensive, making the issuing, recording, and 

monitoring or tracking of permits cumbersome. 

The coordination of permitted activities among 

park divisions (maintenance, resource protection, and other park operations) would not be 

easily achieved. Insufficient staffing would continue to exacerbate these problems. Efficiencies 

for solid waste management and recycling might 

not be fully realized, adversely affecting operations. Inefficient processes would continue to 

result in long-term, major, adverse impacts because these actions affect most park staff, as well 

as park conditions that are seen by all visitors. 

Maintainability 

Narrow walks and a lack of street access would 

continue to hamper the efficient movement of 

maintenance and delivery vehicles, resulting in 

longer times to perform regular maintenance 

activities or other park operations. Trash receptacles would continue to be located in dispersed 

areas that would hamper efficient operations, 

and the manual emptying of heavy trash containers would continue to be time consuming 

and a health and safety concern for staff. Facilities that are not designed for easy maintenance 

would continue to make routine maintenance 

tasks take longer. For example, floor-mounted 

toilets are harder to clean around; paper towel 

dispensers generate a large amount of waste; and 

benches, trash containers, and wayside signs installed on unpaved surfaces require more work 

to maintain the surrounding area. Gravel walks 

require continual work, gravel that has migrated 

onto paved walks and into grates requires constant removal, and gravel in turf areas increases 

the potential for equipment to be damaged or 

people injured. The continued impacts on operational efficiency and safety would be long-term, 

moderate, and adverse. 

The wide variety of nonstandardized systems or 

components related to display fountains 

(pumps, surface and underwater lights), light 

fixtures, and site furniture would continue to be 

inefficient since a large number of parts must be 

stockpiled and stored, along with multiple maintenance manuals. The impacts on operational 

520
Park Operations: Impacts of the No-Action Alternative 

efficiency would remain long-term, minor to 

moderate, and adverse. 

Historic or custom components and site furnishings, such as light fixtures or the NPS standard Washington bench, may make repair or 

finding replacement parts difficult. For example, 

the NPS bench has not been updated to meet 

accessibility standards. The National Park 

Service has the molds for some furnishings. In 

other cases, glass globes on light fixtures have 

been replaced with more durable plastic globes. 

The difficulties in maintaining historic or 

custom features on the efficiency of park 

operations would continue to be long-term, 

minor to moderate, and adverse. 

Best Practices 

Efficiencies as a result of best practices that are 

being used at other sites cannot easily be incorporated into maintenance practices at the 

National Mall without extensive infrastructure 

changes. For example, there is no comprehensive and secure communications infrastructure 

(including high-speed communications) 

throughout the National Mall, so less efficient 

communication methods (multiple phone systems, radio) are used for park staff and for law 

enforcement. This would continue to be a longterm, moderate to major, adverse impact on park 

operations. 

Lighting outages and restroom usage are not 

electronically monitored, which could identify 

maintenance needs or support efficient scheduling. Trash containers are not designed to be 

mechanically emptied by sanitation trucks, so 

heavy trash bags are lifted by hand, a time-consuming, inefficient process that has the potential 

to result in staff injuries. Impacts would continue to be long-term, major, and adverse. 

While recycling occurs during special events, 

there are no systems to collect, retrieve, store, 

and haul recyclable materials on a daily basis. 

The impacts would continue to be long-term, 

minor to moderate, and adverse. 

Summary 

The overall impact of the no-action alternative 

as a result of the maintenance backlog, current 

infrastructure and amenities, poor quality soils, 

and insufficient staffing would be long-term, 

moderate to major, and adverse due to outdated 

processes, designs that make maintenance difficult, a great variety of nonstandardized parts, 

difficulties in maintaining historic or custom 

components, and lack of applying common best 

practices that could improve efficiency or safety. 

Impacts on Sustainability 

Under the no-action alternative a limited number of sustainable practices, as described below, 

would be used on the National Mall. 

Water Use 

Millions of gallons of potable water would continue to be used to fill the reflecting pools at the 

Lincoln Memorial and Union Square as well as 

Constitution Gardens Lake. These pools are 

drained and refilled twice annually, diverting 

treated water from public uses. The continuing 

impact on water use would be long-term, moderate to major, and adverse. 

Stormwater onsite is channeled into the municipal drainage system, rather than being filtered 

and reused in water features on the National 

Mall. This would continue to be a long-term, 

minor to moderate, adverse impact on sustainable water use. 

Energy 

Except for geothermal systems that are being 

used in two refreshment stands constructed in 

2007 and 2008 for heating, air conditioning, refrigeration, and ice making, no other systems 

onsite are taking advantage of renewable energy 

sources. Major power uses include lighting and 

ornamental fountains. The continuing impact of 

using public energy sources would generally be 

long-term, moderate to major, and adverse. 

Summary 

The overall impact of the no-action alternative 

on sustainability would continue to be longterm, moderate, and adverse because of unsustainable use of potable water and the lack of 

sustainable stormwater holding onsite or graywater reuse, as well as minimal use of renewable 

energy sources. 

 521 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Cumulative Impacts 

Past Actions 

Past projects that have affected and continue to 

affect the National Mall include the 1790s road 

systems, which have been updated and modified 

over time, but still affect public access and circulation within the National Mall, as well as operations. Roads, stormwater systems, sanitary sewers, and utilities and power systems developed in 

the late 1800s are becoming increasingly outdated, with long-term, moderate, adverse impacts on park operations. 

The National Mall, with its high-profile location, 

places unique demands on park operational 

staff. A total of 126 assets on the National Mall 

must be maintained, including individual component parts. In addition to the National Mall, 

NAMA staff also manage many other areas and 

are responsible for over 300 park assets. While 

overall maintenance needs have increased, 

staffing levels have fluctuated and are near the 

lowest levels in a decade. Four memorials (the 

Korean War Veterans, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, George Memorial, and World War II 

memorials) have been constructed since the 

1990s, and the landscape nature of some of these 

memorials requires different types of care than 

memorials that are primarily structures (such as 

the Washington Monument). Water features (at 

the George Mason, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, 

Korean War Veterans, and World War II 

memorials; the Capitol Reflecting Pool, 

Constitution Gardens Lake, German-American 

Friendship Garden, Lincoln Reflecting Pool, and 

John Paul Jones) require a great deal of seasonal 

work to maintain, and problems are compounded by both water quality and various 

operating systems. Small-scale commemorative 

features, such as the Japanese lantern, the John 

Paul Jones and John Ericcson memorials, signs, 

wayside exhibits, and plaques also increase 

workloads. Some memorials or areas are difficult 

to care for and were not designed for maintainability. For example, marble steps are more 

porous than granite and easily stain; gravel walks 

require high levels of maintenance; custom stone 

trash containers are difficult for staff to empty at 

the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial; and 

incised and inpainted lettering on pavement is 

difficult to keep readable at the Lincoln Memorial and Constitution Gardens. The cumulative 

impact of additional maintenance on park 

operations is long-term, major, and adverse. 

Present Actions 

The National Park Service is working with the 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to develop a permanent solution for the Potomac Park levee. 

The impacts of an improved flood control system for the downtown area, as well as the National Park Service, would be long-term, moderate, and beneficial because of a more sustainable 

solution, improved efficiency of park operations, 

and reduced park labor needs during storm 

events. 

Park staff have been replacing bulbs in light 

fixtures throughout the park with more energyefficient bulbs, a long-term, major, beneficial 

impact on efficient operations and sustainable 

energy use. The 2009 American Recovery and 

Reinvestment Act includes funding for redesigning the Lincoln Reflecting Pool to use less water 

and to improve its quality by using recirculating 

pumps. The use of geothermal systems in two 

NPS refreshment stands near the Lincoln 

Memorial for heating, air conditioning, 

refrigeration, and ice making has demonstrated 

that it is possible to use alternative systems to 

reduce the use of more traditional energy 

sources. These present actions have long-term, 

moderate to major, beneficial impacts on park 

operations. 

As a result of the American Recovery and 

Revitalization Act, the condition of park three 

important park assets would be improved — the 

Lincoln Reflecting Pool area, the Thomas 

Jefferson Memorial plaza, and the DC War 

Memorial. A non-potable and more sustainable 

water source for the Lincoln Reflecting Pool will 

reduce the use of potable water by more than 

half since the Lincoln Reflecting Pool is the 

largest single use of potable water. While 

additional pumping systems will be required, 

more efficient systems and energy sources will 

be sought and water recirculated, resulting in 

improved ease of maintenance. Resulting 

impacts to the park infrastructure and assets 

would be long-term, major, and beneficial, but 

deferred maintenance needs would be reduced 

by less than 20%. 

522
Park Operations: Impacts of the No-Action Alternative 

Reasonably Foreseeable Actions 

Plans are being developed for an underground 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial Center and the 

Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial. These facilities will be managed by the National Park Service, resulting in additional staffing needs for 

maintenance, along with education and information. Future memorials for Dwight D. Eisenhower and American Veterans Disabled for Life 

will be future park responsibilities. The requirement for a maintenance fund will help keep 

these facilities to the desired standard, and the 

high quality of recent memorials has made them 

easier to maintain, so the long-term impacts are 

expected to be moderate and beneficial related 

to park operations and minor and adverse 

related to staffing needs.

It can be expected that over time the aging 

infrastructure (power, street lighting, water, 

sanitary and storm sewers) will be replaced. New 

systems can be expected to be more energy 

efficient and to incorporate renewable sources 

of energy and sustainable water management 

practices. The long-term impact on park operational efficiency and sustainability on the 

National Mall would be major and beneficial. 

Normal park operations would be disrupted 

during any construction of previously approved 

projects (Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial, 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial Center, the 

National Museum of African American History 

and Culture), in addition to the Thomas Jefferson perimeter security, Potomac Park levee, 

ongoing road projects, and future memorials 

outside the Reserve. The impacts of construction on park operations would be temporary to 

long-term, minor to moderate, and adverse. 

The NCPC Monumental Core Framework Plan’s

recommendations for East Potomac Park includes the construction of a new events and 

recreation area south of the Thomas Jefferson 

Memorial, which would be undertaken in 

conjunction with consolidating and relocating 

bridges and Metro tunnels. The National Park 

Service would continue to manage and maintain 

this area. This action would require that the NPS 

regional office, maintenance yard, NAMA 

headquarters, and visitor transit facilities would 

need to be relocated or rebuilt. While this area is 

off the National Mall, it would have a major 

impact on NPS park and region operations, as 

well as operations of a park concessioner. The 

impacts of any construction or relocation would 

be short- to long-term, major, and adverse to 

park, region, and concession operations. However, the long-term impact could be beneficial 

because new facilities would be designed for 

sustainability and ease of maintenance. 

Cumulative Impacts Conclusion 

Park operations on the National Mall must 

provide excellent care for the large number of 

memorials on the National Mall. This challenge 

has been intensified by the addition of four more 

memorials since the 1990s, an aging infrastructure, hard-to-maintain facilities, reduced staffing 

levels, and unsustainable practices. This has led 

to a growing backlog of deferred maintenance, 

and recently funded projects would accomplish 

less than 20% of the deferred maintenance need. 

This current state of affairs is compounded by 

the National Mall’s high visibility location in the 

center of Washington, D.C., which results in a 

great many demands to address issues and which 

continuously interrupt routine work schedules. 

The large number of demonstrations and special 

events also affects park operations and staffing. 

The overall impacts on park operations have 

been long-term, major, and adverse. 

The impacts of present and reasonably foreseeable actions would help mitigate adverse impacts 

and enable park staff to improve operational 

efficiency and safety, and to achieve goals for 

sustainable operations. Some current projects, 

most notably the refreshment stands near the 

Lincoln Memorial, meet high standards for 

sustainability, and the Potomac Park levee 

would benefit the downtown area by providing 

greater flood protection. Future projects such as 

the Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial, the 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial Center, the 

Eisenhower Memorial, and American Veterans 

Disabled for Life Memorial would increase 

demands on park operations, whether or not 

additional operating funds are provided. The 

possible future replacement of NPS and 

concession facilities could alter park operations, 

but could also improve sustainability with a 

minimum LEED silver standard and ease of 

maintenance. Taken as a whole the impacts of 

past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions 

 523 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

on park operations would be long-term, major, 

and adverse because of ongoing demands on 

staff, despite moderate to major, beneficial 

impacts of individual facilities now and in the 

future, which would be easier to maintain and 

meet higher facility standards for energy 

efficiency and sustainability. 

Under the no-action alternative the continued 

impacts of ongoing conditions would be longterm, major, and adverse because of the deferred 

maintenance backlog, difficult-to-maintain 

systems and infrastructure, reduced staffing 

levels, and unsustainable practices. While these 

adverse impacts would be offset somewhat by 

actions common to all alternatives, which would 

enable park staff to improve operational 

efficiency and safety, and that would make some 

sustainability goals easier to achieve, cumulative 

impacts would be long-term, major, and adverse, 

with a slight adverse contribution from the noaction alternative. 

Conclusion 

Impacts on park operations under the no-action 

alternative would continue to be long-term, 

moderate to major, and adverse because of not 

meeting desired standards (including a deferred 

maintenance backlog; difficult-to-maintain 

landscapes, systems, and infrastructure; and lack 

of venues designed to accommodate intensive 

levels of use), inefficient operations, and unsustainable practices. The gap in funding between 

what is required and the current park budget 

would continue to leave the entire park funded 

at about 54% of need. Any benefits to park 

operations or sustainability from past, present, 

and future projects would continue to be overwhelmed by these continuing impacts as well as 

by additional facilities and ongoing high-priority 

demands on the park because of its highly 

prominent and visible location. Despite the 

long-term, moderate to major, beneficial impacts 

of actions common to all alternatives, the noaction alternative would continue to cause 

ongoing operational challenges. Cumulative 

impacts would be long-term, major, and adverse, 

with a slight adverse contribution from the noaction alternative. 

IMPACTS OF THE PREFERRED 

ALTERNATIVE

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Impacts on Park Operations 

Proposed actions under the preferred alternative 

would address operational issues and seek to 

improve park conditions, as described below. 

Deferred Maintenance 

As described under the no-action alternative, the 

National Mall has a maintenance backlog of 

more than $400 million for preservation and 

repairs to aging facilities, from seawalls to irrigation systems and walks. Under the preferred 

alternative some projects would address deferred maintenance needs but would go beyond 

making routine repairs to resolve the cause of 

circulation and operational problems, as well as 

issues identified during planning. These include 

the following projects: 

• New, renovated, or adaptively reused facilities would be designed to the highest LEED 

standard practicable, exceeding NPS policy 

guidelines. 

• Widened walks would improve operational 

access and efficiency. 

• The Tidal Basin seawalls would be rebuilt 

to allow wider walks. 

• The Potomac River seawalls would be replaced by a natural shoreline using native 

plants where feasible. 

• Separate bicycle trails would be added in 

many areas. 

Reducing the maintenance backlog in a manner 

that would improve assets would contribute 

substantially to overall park conditions. Impacts 

would be long-term, major, and beneficial 

because they would be obvious to most visitors 

and would enhance the visitor experience. 

Assets, Infrastructure, and Amenities 

Areas within the National Mall would be redesigned for very high levels of use to meet current 

and future needs through the life of this plan. 

Design for the ease of maintenance would be an 

important criterion for any redesigned areas, 

524
Park Operations: Impacts of the Preferred Alternative 

including Union Square, the Mall, the Tidal 

Basin, Constitution Gardens, and the Washington Monument grounds. As a result, maintenance operations on the National Mall would be 

better able to achieve quality standards and 

control undesired impacts. 

Coordinated approaches to paving, lighting, and 

furnishings would improve park conditions and 

meet the high expectations of visitors. Specific 

actions would include the following: 

• removing gravel walkways and using universally accessible and sustainable paving 

materials that would be suitable for all 

visitors and easy to maintain to high 

standards, thus creating a high-quality 

pedestrian environment 

• widening narrow walks to better accommodate pedestrian use levels, as well as maintenance, delivery, or special event access 

• restoring soils, removing social trails, and 

addressing the causes of social trails (such 

as narrow walkways, drainage puddles, or 

deteriorated surfaces) and providing surfaces appropriate to recreational uses, such 

as jogging, which would also help reduce 

the development of social trails 

• providing paved spaces that could accommodate park, police, and concession vehicles or other operational needs to eliminate 

impacts on turf areas 

• redesigning irrigation systems on the Mall 

and at other areas expected to see high 

levels of use so that the systems could not 

be damaged by tent stakes, making optimal 

turf maintenance easier 

• replacing existing drinking fountains and 

relocating them near restrooms, designing 

all facilities to accommodate very high 

levels of use and be vandal resistant, and 

using high-quality ergonomic designs, as 

well as high-quality designs to encourage 

better treatment by users 

• rehabilitating Constitution Gardens Lake to 

include water recirculation and filtration 

systems, thus improving water quality and 

reducing maintenance time, as well as 

sustainably redesigning and reducing the 

size of the Capitol Reflecting Pool at Union 

Square 

The overall impact of better designs for assets, 

infrastructure, and amenities would correct 

flaws and unforeseen conditions, creating a 

high-quality environment that could be more 

efficiently maintained. The overall impact would 

be long-term, major, and beneficial. 

Soil Conditions 

The National Park Service has already defined a 

number of projects to restore poor quality soils, 

and they would be implemented as soon as funding became available. Soils in the center grass 

panels of the Mall would be replaced with soils 

engineered to be like those used on professional 

sports fields, which are capable of withstanding 

intensive use because soils are better able to 

withstand compaction, absorb water, and 

recover more quickly. Soils in other areas would 

be restored using methods that would not 

damage trees or other mature vegetation. Areas 

to be treated would include the elm tree panels 

on the Mall, Constitution Gardens, and the 

Washington Monument grounds. Benchmark 

standards from the Sustainable Sites InitiativeTM

would help guide restoration plans. Compared 

to current conditions, the impact of restoring 

poor quality soils and improving turf conditions 

would make park operations easier to accomplish and would be long-term, major, and beneficial. 

Permitted Activities 

National celebrations, special events, and demonstrations would continue to affect park operational priorities, limit access in some areas, or 

require overtime that would affect staffing 

schedules. Under the preferred alternative 

improving and redesigning venues for demonstrations and special events would facilitate park 

operations. Actions that would better accommodate intensive use levels would include additional paved areas, improved soils to reduce 

impacts on turf, and infrastructure and new 

facilities that would be designed not only to 

meet the needs of organizers, but to facilitate 

park operations during and after demonstrations 

and special events. Establishing comprehensive 

recycling programs would help reduce the 

amount of trash generated at permitted activi-

 525 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

ties. As a result, while the adverse impact on 

park staff of scheduling and monitoring events 

would continue, actions under the preferred 

alternative would make it much easier to maintain park conditions at acceptable standards. 

The impact on park operations would be longterm, major, and beneficial. 

Staffing 

Under the preferred alternative additional 

staffing would be sought for resource management, communications, maintenance, programs 

and special events, and resource recovery teams 

to address the impacts of special events and 

national celebrations. Some activities would 

continue to be done by contract employees. 

Specialized skills would likely include event 

management, turf management, website design 

and maintenance, public affairs, contracting, 

horticulture, and irrigation. As described under 

“Impacts Common to All Alternatives,” core 

operations planning would align staff needs with 

essential tasks related to the park purpose and 

plan implementation. 

The gap in funding between what industry 

standards recommend and the park budgets 

would begin to be reduced as funding and 

staffing needs were better aligned to achieve 

desired quality standards. Chronically underfunded areas (landscapes, buildings and 

waterfront assets) would be prioritized for 

funding. Impacts on park operations would be 

long-term, major, and beneficial. 

Management Processes 

Replacing the permit process for demonstrations and special events with computer-based 

systems accessible on the Internet would 

improve efficiencies in the scheduling, issuing, 

recording, and monitoring or tracking of permits 

for demonstrations and special events. This 

would also allow permitted activities to be 

coordinated among all affected park divisions 

(maintenance, resource protection, and other 

park operations) and partner organizations. 

More frequently restoring smaller areas would 

be more efficient than trying to rehabilitate 

larger areas, which has a correspondingly greater 

effect on park use. Incorporating best practices 

in solid waste management and recycling would 

result in safer operations for staff and visitors. 

The overall impacts would be long-term, major, 

and beneficial because these actions would 

affect most park staff. 

Maintainability 

Widening walks and providing operational access points from streets would facilitate the 

movement of maintenance and delivery vehicles, 

reduce damage to curbs and walks, and make the 

performance of regular maintenance activities 

and other park operations more efficient. The 

better distribution of trash containers and the 

mechanical emptying of heavy trash receptacles 

would be more efficient and would reduce safety 

concerns for staff. Providing facilities designed 

for easy maintenance would reduce the time 

needed to perform routine tasks, such as wallmounted toilets that are easier to clean around 

and options to paper towels that would reduce 

waste. Installing site furnishings such as benches, 

trash containers, and wayside signs on paved 

surfaces would make it easier to keep up surrounding areas. Self-cleaning restrooms in some 

locations could also reduce custodial work while 

providing clean and sanitary facilities. Replacing 

gravel walks with new paving would reduce 

labor and other unwanted impacts caused by 

gravel. The impact of designing for ease of maintenance would result in long-term, moderate to 

major, beneficial impacts. 

Any new designs or redesigns would emphasize 

the use of standardized parts or systems that 

have proven successful. These actions would 

allow for more efficient stockpiling of parts and 

equipment and would reduce the need for multiple maintenance manuals, a wide variety of tools 

used only for special tasks, and many types of 

expertise. The impact on operational efficiency 

would be long-term, minor to moderate, and 

beneficial. 

Historic or custom features and furnishings at 

sites would be incorporated in newly developed 

coordinated suites of paving, lighting, and furniture. This would make it easier to keep replacement parts (such as light fixtures and benches) in 

stock, allowing repairs to be made more quickly. 

Site furnishings would meet accessibility standards. Like the no-action alternative, the park 

would retain the molds for some parts or 

historic or custom components to ensure that 

526
Park Operations: Impacts of the Preferred Alternative 

parts would always be available. Durability of 

parts as well as quality and appearance would be 

important. Improving the ability to maintain 

historic or custom features would have longterm, moderate, beneficial impacts on the 

efficiency of park operations. 

Best Practices 

Providing a comprehensive and secure communications infrastructure, including highspeed Internet communications, throughout the 

National Mall would make communications 

more efficient for park staff and law enforcement, resulting in long-term, moderate to major, 

beneficial impacts. Electronically monitoring 

lighting outages or restroom usage would 

quickly identify maintenance needs and support 

efficient scheduling. Mechanically emptying 

trash containers would be more efficient and 

would reduce the potential for staff injuries from 

hand lifting heavy trash bags, resulting in longterm, major, beneficial impacts. Developing 

recycling systems for the collection, storage, and 

hauling of recyclable materials (an action common to all alternatives) would make operations 

more sustainable. Benchmark standards of the 

Sustainable Sites InitiativeTM address landscape 

and site issues. The impact of using common 

best practices on the efficiency of operations 

and safety generally would be long-term, 

moderate to major, and beneficial. 

Summary 

Compared to the no-action alternative, the 

overall impacts of the preferred alternative as a 

result of addressing deferred maintenance, 

providing easily maintained infrastructure and 

amenities, better handling permitted activities, 

and assigning sufficient staffing to core activities 

would be long-term, major, and beneficial, 

making it much easier to achieve and maintain 

quality conditions on the National Mall. 

The overall impact of the preferred alternative 

on efficiency and safety of park operations 

would be long-term, moderate to major, and 

beneficial due to updated processes, ease of 

maintenance, increased use of standardized 

parts, better ability to maintain historic or 

custom components, and using common best 

practices to improve efficiency or safety. 

Impacts on Sustainability 

The preferred alternative, in addition to the 

actions that are common to all alternatives, 

would seek to make operations on the National 

Mall more sustainable in terms of water use and 

renewable energy. 

Water Use 

Compared to the no-action alternative, the preferred alternative would incorporate a comprehensive sustainable water management plan 

throughout the National Mall to reduce the use 

of potable water, seek nonpotable water sources 

for ornamental water features, and provide 

onsite water filtering and cleansing so that gray 

water, water from dewatering activities at nearby 

buildings, and storm water could be reused 

where feasible. Specific elements of the plan 

would include the following: 

• reducing the size of the Capitol Reflecting 

Pool at Union Square and ensuring that 

recycled or nonpotable water could be used 

in any new ornamental water features 

• rehabilitating Constitution Gardens Lake to 

make it self-sustaining 

No longer using millions of gallons of potable 

water where feasible would reduce demands on 

municipal water supplies and set a standard for 

sustainable park operations. 

A naturalized Potomac River shoreline would 

restore wetland characteristics to the river and 

would be more sustainable than dry-laid walls, a 

long-term, major, beneficial impact on park 

operations. 

Under the preferred alternative the impacts of 

more sustainable water use on National Mall 

would be long-term, moderate to major, and 

beneficial. 

Renewable Energy 

Under the preferred alternative all new, renovated, or adaptively reused facilities would meet 

the highest LEED standard practicable, exceeding NPS policies. Seeking visible renewable 

energy sources for lighting and ornamental 

fountains would reduce energy costs over the 

long term and would offer opportunities for 

public education about renewable energy and 

 527 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

sustainability. As a result, the impact on renewable energy would generally be long-term, 

moderate to major, and beneficial. 

Summary 

Compared to the no-action alternative, the overall impact of the preferred alternative on sustainability would generally be long-term, major, and 

beneficial because of reduced use of potable 

water for water features, a sustainable river edge, 

a comprehensive approach to water use and 

management, and a greater reliance on renewable energy sources. 

Cumulative Impacts 

The impacts of past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions would be the same as those 

described under the no-action alternative and 

would be long-term, major, and adverse. Actions 

under the preferred alternative and actions 

common to all alternatives would have longterm, major, beneficial impacts because of a 

reduced backlog of deferred maintenance, 

improved park conditions, increased maintainability of mechanical systems and infrastructure, 

improved operational access, a streamlined 

permitting process for demonstrations and 

special events, appropriate staffing levels aligned 

to core operations, and exceedance of sustainability standards for development, renewable 

energy, and water use. These impacts, combined 

with the impacts of past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions, would result in long-term, 

moderate, beneficial cumulative impacts. 

Conclusion 

Compared to the no-action alternative, the overall impacts of the preferred alternative on park 

operations would be long-term, major, and 

beneficial as a result of improved park conditions, a reduced deferred maintenance backlog, 

increased maintainability of mechanical systems 

and infrastructure, improved operational access, 

a streamlined permitting process for demonstrations and special events, a reduced funding gap 

between desired conditions and park budgets, 

appropriate staffing levels aligned to core 

operations, and exceedance of sustainability 

standards for development, renewable energy, 

and water use. While the overall impacts of the 

past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions 

would be long-term, major, and adverse, when 

combined with the substantial long-term, major, 

beneficial impacts of the preferred alternative, 

cumulative impacts would be long-term, 

moderate, and beneficial. 

IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE A 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Alternative A, which focuses on the historic 

landscape and education, would address some 

of the National Mall’s numerous park operational challenges and inefficiencies that challenge sustainability and the ability to achieve 

desired conditions. 

Impacts on Park Operations 

Compared to the no-action alternative, under 

alternative A significant obstacles to achieving 

desired park conditions on the National Mall 

would remain. 

Deferred Maintenance 

Under alternative A, similar to the no-action 

alternative, deferred maintenance projects 

would be addressed by repairing malfunctioning 

parts rather than addressing fundamental problems in some infrastructure systems. The Tidal 

Basin seawalls would be rebuilt, but the walks 

would still be too narrow for current levels of 

use. The dry-laid Potomac River seawalls would 

be rebuilt, requiring ongoing maintenance. 

Reducing the backlog without improving assets 

or resolving circulation problems would not 

contribute substantially to overall park conditions, resulting in long-term, minor to moderate, 

beneficial impacts. 

Assets, Infrastructure, and Amenities 

Under alternative A walkways would remain too 

narrow for current volumes of use in many 

areas, but maintenance access would be provided, and social trails would be obliterated and 

controlled by using methods such as edging, 

curbs, or post-and-chain fencing or some other 

type of barrier. The maintenance of park areas 

would be improved, but damage would continue 

to be caused by maintenance vehicles traveling 

on routes that are too narrow to accommodate 

528
Park Operations: Impacts of Alternative A 

them. Replacing drinking fountains as needed 

would ensure that these amenities would be 

usable, but they would remain in locations away 

from other visitor amenities, and they would 

continue to be subject to vandalism and misuse, 

which makes maintenance more time-consuming. 

The improvement of other park assets, infrastructure, and amenities under this alternative 

would facilitate maintenance and improve park 

conditions. Actions would include the following: 

• redesigning the irrigation system on the 

Mall and at other high-use areas so that it 

could not be damaged by tent stakes 

• replacing restrooms and adding more 

restrooms to help meet needs 

• ensuring that new facilities would be energy 

efficient and sustainable as well as vandal 

resistant 

• rehabilitating and improving designed 

water features to reduce algae and odors 

(providing recirculating pumps in the 

reflecting pools at the Lincoln Memorial 

and the Capitol and adding more pumps at 

Constitution Gardens Lake) 

• coordinating site furnishings such as 

benches, light fixtures, and trash containers 

to establish a cohesive and unifying identity, quality, and standard for the National 

Mall 

• making amenities easier to maintain 

because of standardized parts 

Compared to the no-action alternative, the impact of maintaining assts, infrastructure, and 

amenities to improve park conditions under 

alternative A would be long-term, moderate to 

major, and beneficial.

Soil Conditions 

The National Park Service has already defined a 

number of projects to restore poor quality soils, 

and they would be implemented as soon as funding became available. Soils in the center grass 

panels of the Mall would be replaced with soils 

engineered to be like those used on professional 

sports fields, which are capable of withstanding 

intensive use because soils are better able to 

withstand compaction, absorb water, and 

recover more quickly. Soils in other areas would 

be restored using methods that would not 

damage trees or other mature vegetation. Areas 

to be treated would include the elm tree panels 

on the Mall, Constitution Gardens, and the 

Washington Monument grounds. Benchmark 

standards from the Sustainable Sites InitiativeTM

would help guide restoration plans. Compared 

to current conditions, the impact of restoring 

poor quality soils and improving turf conditions 

would be long-term, major, and beneficial. 

Permitted Activities 

National celebrations, special events, and demonstrations would continue to affect park operational priorities, limit access, or require overtime 

that would affect staffing schedules and routine 

maintenance operations. A substantial amount 

of staff planning and time from many divisions 

would continue to be required for national 

celebrations, inaugurations, and some special 

events. Without infrastructure designed to 

accommodate permitted activities (such as hardsurface venues with utilities), impacts on park 

operations would continue to be long-term, 

major, and adverse under alternative A. 

Staffing 

Under alternative A staffing would focus on 

improving resource conditions, with additional 

staff for resource management, education, 

communications and web technology, and 

public information. Specialized skills would 

include preservation, turf management, 

horticulture, and irrigation. Core operations 

planning would align staff needs with the 

performance of essential tasks related to the 

park purpose and the emphasis of this 

alternative on historic preservation. 

The gap in funding between what industry 

standards recommend and the park budgets 

would begin to be reduced as funding and 

staffing needs were better aligned to achieve 

desired quality standards. Chronically 

underfunded areas (landscapes, buildings and 

waterfront assets) would be prioritized for 

funding. Park staff levels would be realigned to 

meet standards and focus on essential tasks. 

Impacts would be long-term, major, and 

beneficial. 

 529 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Management Processes 

As described under the preferred alternative, 

replacing the outdated and labor intensive permit process for demonstrations and special 

events with computer-based systems and Internet access would make scheduling, permitting, 

and monitoring or tracking permits for demonstrations and special events more efficient. It 

would also allow permitted activities to be 

coordinated among various park divisions, 

including maintenance, resource protection, and 

other park operations. Following best practices 

for solid waste management and recycling 

processes would result in safer, more efficient 

operations. The long-term impacts would be 

major and beneficial because these actions 

would affect most park staff, and the result 

would be obvious to visitors. 

Maintainability 

Providing vehicle access points would improve 

the efficient movement of maintenance and 

delivery vehicles, reducing the time needed to 

perform regular maintenance activities or other 

park operations. New solid waste and recycling 

systems would be adopted, and trash receptacles 

would be located so as to facilitate collection 

and reduce manual emptying of heavy trash 

receptacles. Routine maintenance tasks would 

be made more efficient through facility design, 

such as wall-mounted toilets that would be easier to clean around, alternatives to paper towels, 

and site furnishings such as benches, trash containers, and wayside signs installed on paved 

surfaces. Maintaining gravel walks under this 

alternative would require continued labor-intensive maintenance, including keeping gravel on 

pathways and off turf areas. Compared to the 

no-action alternative, impacts on efficient and 

safe operations would be long-term, moderate, 

and beneficial. 

Under alternative A continued maintenance of a 

wide variety of nonstandardized systems, ornamental water features (pumps and lighting), light 

fixtures, and site furniture would require stocking a wide variety of parts, multiple maintenance 

manuals, and specific tools, along with retaining 

staff expertise to maintain the systems. The 

impact on operational efficiency would remain 

long-term, minor to moderate, and adverse. 

Similar to the preferred alternative, some historic or custom components and site furnishings 

would be included in newly developed coordinated suites of site or park furniture. This would 

make it easier to keep replacement parts (such as 

light fixtures and benches) in stock, allowing 

repairs to be made more quickly. Site furnishings 

would meet accessibility standards. As described 

under the no-action alternative, the park would 

retain the molds for some parts or historic or 

custom components. Compared to the noaction alternative, alternative A would improve 

the ability to maintain historic or custom 

features, resulting in long-term, moderate, 

beneficial impacts on the efficiency of park 

operations. 

Best Practices 

Under alternative A, like the preferred alternative, a comprehensive and secure communications infrastructure (including high speed Internet communications) would be developed 

throughout the National Mall, resulting in more 

efficient communication methods for park staff 

and law enforcement. This would result in a 

long-term, moderate to major, beneficial impact. 

However, no measures would be taken to electronically monitor lighting outages or restroom 

usage to identify maintenance needs or support 

efficient scheduling, a long-term, minor, adverse 

impact on efficiency. New solid waste and recycling systems to collect, retrieve, store, and 

haul waste would be common to all alternatives. 

Compared to the no-action alternative, using 

some best practices would improve the efficiency of operations and safety, with long-term, 

minor to moderate, beneficial impacts. 

Summary 

The impact of alternative A on park operations 

would generally be long-term, moderate, and 

beneficial due to addressing the deferred maintenance backlog, remedying a limited number of 

infrastructure and amenity problems, providing 

skilled staffing, updated processes, removing 

some design obstacles to efficient operations, 

and implementing some best practices for 

efficiency. However, these benefits would be 

offset by the continuing long-term, major, 

adverse impact of not improving the management of permitted activities. 

530
Park Operations: Impacts of Alternative B 

Impacts on Sustainability 

Under alternative A some new, renovated, or 

adaptively reused facilities would meet NPS 

energy use and sustainability policies. 

Water Use 

Similar to the no-action alternative, treated 

potable water would continue to be used to fill 

the Lincoln and Capitol reflecting pools and 

Constitution Gardens Lake. These pools are 

drained and refilled twice annually, resulting in 

the use of millions of gallons of municipal water. 

Impacts on the wise and sustainable use of water 

sources would be long-term, moderate to major, 

and adverse. Stormwater systems would continue to move water offsite, a long-term, minor 

to moderate, adverse impact on sustainable 

water approaches. 

Energy 

Under alternative A as additional facilities such 

as restrooms were built, or facilities were renovated, rehabilitated, or adaptively used (such as 

the Lockkeeper’s House), renewable energy 

sources would be incorporated to meet NPS 

policy requirements and LEED standards. 

Resulting impacts on renewable energy would 

be long-term, minor to moderate, and beneficial. 

Summary 

Compared to the no-action alternative, the overall impacts of alternative A on sustainability 

would be long-term, minor, and beneficial 

because only a few new or rehabilitated 

buildings would meet renewable energy or 

sustainability requirements and unsustainable 

water uses would continue. 

Cumulative Impacts 

The impacts of past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions would be the same as those 

described under the no-action alternative and 

would be long-term, major, and adverse. These 

adverse impacts would be offset by the impacts 

of present and reasonably foreseeable actions 

and actions, as well as the impacts common to all 

alternatives, that would enable park staff to 

improve operational efficiency and safety, and 

would also make sustainable goals easier to 

achieve. 

Compared to the no-action alternative, the 

impacts of alternative A on park operations, 

when combined with the impacts of past, 

present, and reasonably foreseeable actions, 

would result in long-term, moderate, adverse 

cumulative impacts because while park 

operations would be improved and deferred 

maintenance addressed, more sustainable 

solutions would not be developed for high-use 

areas or water features. The contribution of 

alternative A to cumulative impacts would be 

considerable and adverse. 

Conclusion 

Impacts under alternative A would be long-term, 

moderate, and adverse because impacts of high 

use would not be fully addressed, such as developing more sustainable venues for demonstrations, national celebrations, and special events 

or seeking sustainable water sources for large 

water features. However, actions common to all 

action alternatives would result in long-term, 

moderate to major, beneficial impacts because of 

better maintenance of desired park conditions 

(including the restoration of poor quality soils 

and improved turf conditions), a reduced deferred maintenance backlog, a reduced funding 

gap between desired conditions and park 

budgets, some more efficient park operations, 

and some use of renewable energy sources. 

These impacts, when combined with the impacts 

of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable 

actions, would result in long-term, moderate, 

adverse cumulative impacts because while park 

operations would be improved and deferred 

maintenance addressed, more sustainable 

solutions would not be developed for high-use 

areas or water features. The contribution of 

alternative A to cumulative impacts would be 

considerable and adverse. 

IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE B 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Alternative B would seek to accommodate high 

levels of use in ways that would allow park areas 

to recover quickly. Like the preferred alternative, alternative B would address many park 

 531 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

operational challenges, inefficiencies, and safety 

concerns to achieve desired conditions. 

Impacts on Park Operations 

Proposed actions under alternative B, like the 

preferred alternative, would address operational 

issues and seek to improve park conditions, as 

described below. 

Deferred Maintenance 

As described under the no-action alternative, the 

National Mall has a maintenance backlog of 

more than $400 million for preservation and 

repairs to aging facilities, from seawalls to irrigation systems and walks. Under alternative B, 

similar to the preferred alternative, some projects would address deferred maintenance needs 

but would go beyond making routine repairs to 

resolve the cause of circulation and operational 

problems. Projects would include the following: 

• widening walks to improve operational 

access and efficiency 

• rebuilding the seawalls of the Tidal Basin to 

accommodate wider walks or be above high 

tide 

• replacing the Potomac River dry-laid 

seawalls with taller, structural walls 

Reducing the maintenance backlog in a manner 

that would improve assets would contribute 

substantially to the ability to meet desired 

conditions for park assets and resources. Impacts would be long-term, major, and beneficial. 

Assets, Infrastructure, and Amenities 

Areas within the National Mall would be redesigned for very high levels of use to meet present 

and future needs during the life of this plan. Ease 

of maintenance would be an important criterion 

for any redesign of areas such as Union Square, 

the Mall, the Tidal Basin, Constitution Gardens, 

and the Washington Monument grounds. As 

described for the preferred alternative, maintenance operations on the National Mall would be 

better able to achieve quality standards and 

control undesired impacts. 

Coordinated approaches to paving, lighting, and 

furnishings would improve park conditions and 

meet the high expectations of visitors. As described for the preferred alternative, specific 

actions would include the following: 

• removing gravel walkways and using 

universally accessible paving materials 

suitable for all visitors and easy to maintain 

to high standards, thus creating a highquality pedestrian environment 

• widening narrow walks to better accommodate pedestrian use levels, along with 

designing them to accommodate maintenance, delivery, or special event access 

• restoring soils, removing social trails, and 

addressing the causes of social trails (such 

as narrow walkways, drainage puddles, or 

deteriorated surfaces) and providing surfaces appropriate to recreational uses, such 

as jogging, to help address the development 

of social trails 

• providing paved spaces to accommodate 

park, police, or concession vehicles to 

eliminate impacts from vehicles having to 

be parked on turf areas 

• redesigning irrigation systems on the Mall 

and at other areas expected to see high 

levels of use so that the systems could not 

be damaged by tent stakes, making it easier 

for optimal turf maintenance 

• replacing existing drinking fountains and 

relocating them so they are near restrooms, 

designing all facilities to accommodate very 

high levels of use and be vandal resistant, 

and using high-quality ergonomic designs, 

as well as high-quality designs to encourage 

better treatment by users 

• rehabilitating the Lincoln Reflecting Pool 

and the Constitution Gardens Lake to 

include water recirculation systems to 

improve water quality and reduce maintenance time (however, unlike the preferred alternative, potable water would 

continue to be used) 

The overall impact of better designs for assets, 

infrastructure, and amenities would correct 

flaws in previous designs and create a highquality environment that could be more 

efficiently maintained to meet visitor 

expectations. The overall impact would be longterm, major, and beneficial. 

532
Park Operations: Impacts of Alternative B 

If it was determined that an underground parking garage would be feasible based on engineering, security, geotechnical, and economic studies, visitor-related impacts would be analyzed as 

during subsequent environmental studies. 

Soil Conditions 

The National Park Service has already defined a 

number of projects to restore poor quality soils, 

and they would be implemented as soon as funding became available. Soils in the center grass 

panels of the Mall would be replaced with soils 

engineered to be like those used on professional 

sports fields. Soils in other areas would be restored using methods that would not damage 

trees or other mature vegetation. Areas to be 

treated would include the elm tree panels on the 

Mall, Constitution Gardens, and the Washington Monument grounds. Benchmark standards 

from the Sustainable Sites InitiativeTM would 

help guide restoration plans. Compared to 

current conditions, the impact of restoring poor 

quality soils and improving turf conditions 

would be long-term, major, and beneficial. 

Permitted Activities 

National celebrations, special events, and 

demonstrations would continue to affect park 

operational priorities, limit access, or require 

overtime that would affect staffing schedules. 

However, under alternative B, like the preferred 

alternative, some venues would be substantially 

redesigned and improved to facilitate park 

operations. These would include additional 

paved areas where high use could be concentrated, improved soil conditions to withstand 

intensive use levels, and infrastructure and new 

facilities designed to meet the needs of event 

organizers as well as maintenance operations 

during and after demonstrations and special 

events. Establishing comprehensive recycling 

programs would help reduce the amount of 

trash generated at permitted activities. As a 

result, while the adverse impact on park staff of 

scheduling and monitoring events would continue, actions under alternative B would make it 

much easier to maintain park conditions at 

acceptable standards. The impact on park 

operations would be long-term, major, and 

beneficial. 

Staffing 

Under alternative B, like the preferred alternative, additional staffing would be sought for 

resource management, communications, 

maintenance, programs and special events, and 

resource recovery teams to address the impacts 

of special events and national celebrations. 

Specialized skills would likely include turf 

management, horticulture, and irrigation. As 

described under “Impacts Common to All 

Alternatives,” core operations planning would 

align staff needs with essential tasks related to 

the park purpose and plan implementation. 

Impacts on park operations would be long-term, 

major, and beneficial. 

The gap in funding between what industry 

standards recommend and the park budgets 

would begin to be reduced as funding and 

staffing needs were better aligned to achieve 

desired quality standards. Chronically underfunded areas (landscapes, buildings and 

waterfront assets) would be prioritized for 

funding. Impacts on park operations would be 

long-term, major, and beneficial. 

Management Processes 

As described under the preferred alternative and 

alternative A, replacing the permit process for 

demonstrations and special events with Internet 

based systems would improve efficiencies in the 

scheduling, issuing, recording, and monitoring 

or tracking of permits. This would also allow 

permitted activities to be coordinated among all 

affected park divisions (maintenance, resource 

protection, and other park operations). Incorporating best practices in solid waste management and recycling would result in safer operations for staff and visitors. The overall impacts 

would be long-term, major, and beneficial because these actions would affect most park staff. 

Maintainability 

Actions to improve operational efficiency and 

safety would be similar to those described for 

the preferred alternative and would include the 

following: 

• widening walks and providing operational 

access points from streets to facilitate the 

movement of maintenance and delivery 

vehicles, reduce damage to curbs and walks, 

 533 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

and make the performance of regular maintenance activities and other park operations 

more efficient 

• better distributing trash containers and mechanically emptying heavy trash receptacles 

• providing facilities designed for easy maintenance to reduce the time needed to perform routine tasks (such as wall-mounted 

toilets and options to paper towels that 

would reduce waste) 

• installing site furnishings such as benches, 

trash containers, and wayside signs on 

paved surfaces to make it easier to keep up 

surrounding areas (unlike the preferred 

alternative, alternative B would not propose 

the use of self-cleaning restrooms) 

• replacing gravel walks with new paving to 

reduce labor and other unwanted impacts 

• emphasizing the use of standardized parts 

or equipment that have proven successful 

in any new designs or redesigns, thus allowing for more efficient stockpiling of parts 

and equipment and reducing the need for 

multiple maintenance manuals, a wide 

variety of tools used only for special tasks, 

and many types of expertise 

• incorporating historic or custom features 

and furnishings into coordinated suites of 

paving, lighting, and furniture, thus making 

it easier to keep replacement parts (such as 

light fixtures and benches) in stock and 

allowing repairs to be made more quickly 

• ensuring that site furnishings meet accessibility standards, and retaining the molds for 

some parts or historic or custom components to ensure that parts would always 

be available 

As described for the preferred alternative, the 

impact of designing for ease of maintenance 

would result in long-term, moderate to major, 

beneficial impacts on park operations. Emphasizing the use of standards parts and systems 

would result in long-term, minor to moderate, 

beneficial impacts. Improving the ability to 

maintain historic or custom features would have 

long-term, moderate, beneficial impacts. 

Best Practices 

The adoption of best practices under alternative 

B, similar to the preferred alternative, would 

positively affect park operations by 

• providing a comprehensive and secure 

communications infrastructure, including 

high-speed Internet communications, 

throughout the National Mall, making 

communications more efficient for park 

staff and law enforcement 

• electronically monitoring lighting outages 

or restroom usage to quickly identify 

maintenance needs and support efficient 

scheduling 

• mechanically emptying trash containers, 

reducing the potential for staff injuries from 

hand lifting heavy trash bags 

• developing recycling systems for the collection, storage, and hauling of recyclable materials, an action common to all alternatives 

The impact of using common best practices on 

the efficiency of operations and safety generally 

would be long-term, moderate to major, and 

beneficial, the same as the preferred alternative. 

Summary 

The overall impacts of alternative B would be 

similar to the preferred alternative as a result of 

addressing deferred maintenance, providing 

easily maintained infrastructure and amenities, 

better handling permitted activities, assigning 

sufficient staffing to core activities, and using 

common best practices to improve efficiency. 

Compared to the no-action alternative, impacts 

would be long-term, moderate to major, and 

beneficial, making it much easier to achieve and 

maintain desired conditions on the National 

Mall. 

Impacts on Sustainability 

Alternative B, in addition to the actions that are 

common to all, would make some progress 

toward using resources more sustainably. 

Water Use 

As described under the no-action alternative, 

millions of gallons of potable water would continue to be used to fill the reflecting pools at the 

534
Park Operations: Impacts of Alternative C 

Lincoln Memorial and Union Square as well as 

Constitution Gardens Lake, wasting a valuable 

resource. These pools are drained and refilled 

twice annually. This use of potable water would 

continue to result in long-term, moderate to 

major, adverse impacts on sustainable water use. 

Stormwater would be channeled offsite through 

the municipal drainage system, precluding options of using this water onsite to meet needs 

such as irrigation and filling pools; this would 

result in long-term, minor to moderate, adverse 

impacts on sustainable water use. 

Energy 

Under alternative B all new, renovated, or 

adaptively reused facilities would meet the 

LEED standards, with long-term, moderate to 

major, beneficial impacts on renewable energy. 

Underground Visitor Parking 

Building additional underground parking under 

this alternative would not be a sustainable 

solution and would be contrary to the stated 

policies of the National Capital Planning 

Commission and the D.C. city government to 

encourage alternative modes of access in the 

downtown area.

Summary 

Compared to the no-action alternative, alternative B would make greater use of sustainable 

solutions for new, renovated, or adaptively 

reused facilities, as well as paid parking on the 

National Mall. However, underground parking 

garages would be inconsistent with federal and 

local governmental policies to encourage sustainability, including greater use of alternative 

means of access, resulting in long-term, 

moderate, adverse impacts. The overall impact 

on sustainability would be long-term, moderate, 

and both beneficial and adverse. 

Cumulative Impacts 

The impacts of past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions would be the same as those 

described under the no-action alternative and 

would be long-term, major, and adverse. Impacts 

under alternative B and actions common to all 

alternatives would be long-term, major, and 

beneficial because of improved park conditions, a 

reduced deferred maintenance backlog, increased maintainability of mechanical systems 

and infrastructure, improved operational access, 

a streamlined permitting process for demonstrations and special events, staffing aligned with 

core missions, and some sustainable practices. 

However, while the construction of underground 

parking garages would increase parking capacity 

on the National Mall, this solution would not be 

consistent with sustainability policies of the National Park Service and other federal and local 

agencies. Cumulative impacts would be longterm, moderate, and adverse, with a large adverse 

contribution from alternative B. 

Conclusion 

Compared to the no-action alternative, the overall 

impacts of alternative B on park operations would 

be long-term, major, and beneficial as a result of 

improved park conditions, a reduced deferred 

maintenance backlog, increased maintainability of 

mechanical systems and infrastructure, improved 

operational access, a streamlined permitting 

process for demonstrations and special events, a 

reduced funding gap between desired conditions 

and park budgets, appropriate staffing levels 

aligned to core operations, and greater reliance on 

renewable energy sources. However, unlike the 

preferred alternative and alternative C, no 

measures would be taken to make water use more 

sustainable or to support local goals to encourage 

greater use of alternative modes of access. The 

impacts of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions, in combination with those of 

alternative B, would result in long-term, moderate, 

adverse cumulative impacts as a result of treated 

water use and underground parking garages that 

would not meet sustainability goals. Alternative B 

would make a large adverse contribution to 

cumulative impacts. 

IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE C 

Direct and Indirect Impacts 

Alternative C, like the preferred alternative, 

would make substantial progress to address 

numerous park operational challenges and 

inefficiencies that would affect sustainability and 

the ability to achieve desired conditions on the 

National Mall. 

 535 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Impacts on Park Operations 

Actions under alternative C, similar to those 

under the preferred alternative, would address 

operational issues and seek to improve park 

conditions, as described below. 

Deferred Maintenance 

As described under the no-action alternative, the 

National Mall has a maintenance backlog of 

more than $400 million for preservation and 

repairs to aging facilities, from seawalls to irrigation systems and walks. Under alternative C, 

like the preferred alternative, some projects 

would address deferred maintenance needs but 

would go beyond making routine repairs to 

resolve the cause of circulation and operational 

problems. These include the following projects: 

• incorporating the highest LEED standard 

practicable into new, renovated, or adaptively reused facilities, exceeding NPS 

policy guidelines 

• incorporating Sustainable Site InitiativeTM

benchmarks into landscape maintenance 

standards 

• widening walks to improve operational 

access and efficiency 

• rebuilding the seawalls of the Tidal Basin to 

accommodate wider walks 

• replacing the Potomac River dry-laid seawalls with a natural shoreline using native 

plants where feasible 

• adding separate bicycle trails 

Reducing the maintenance backlog in a manner 

that would improve assets would contribute 

substantially to the ability to meet desired 

conditions for park assets and resources. Impacts would be long-term, major, and beneficial. 

Assets, Infrastructure, and Amenities 

Under alternative C areas within the National 

Mall would be redesigned as a sustainable urban 

park. Ease of maintenance would be an important criterion for any redesign of areas such as 

Union Square, the Mall, the Tidal Basin, Constitution Gardens, and the Washington Monument grounds. As described for the preferred 

alternative, maintenance operations on the 

National Mall would be better able to achieve 

quality standards and control undesired impacts. 

Coordinated approaches to paving, lighting, and 

furnishings would improve park conditions and 

would meet the high expectations of visitors. As 

described for the preferred alternative, specific 

actions would include the following: 

• removing gravel walkways and using 

universally accessible, sustainable paving 

materials suitable for all visitors and easy to 

maintain to high standards, thus creating a 

high-quality pedestrian environment 

• widening narrow walks to better accommodate pedestrian use levels, along with 

designing them to accommodate maintenance, delivery, or special event access 

• restoring soils, removing social trails, and 

addressing the causes of social trails (such 

as narrow walkways, drainage puddles, or 

deteriorated surfaces), and providing 

surfaces appropriate to recreational uses, 

such as jogging, to help address the 

development of social trails 

• providing paved spaces to accommodate 

park, police, or concession vehicles to 

eliminate impacts from vehicles having to 

be parked on turf areas 

• redesigning irrigation systems on the Mall 

and at other areas expected to see high 

levels of use so that the systems could not 

be damaged by tent stakes, making it easier 

for optimal turf maintenance 

• replacing existing drinking fountains and 

relocating them so they are near restrooms, 

designing all facilities to accommodate very 

high levels of use and be vandal resistant, 

and using high-quality ergonomic designs, 

as well as high-quality designs to subtly 

encourage better treatment by users 

• rehabilitating the Lincoln Reflecting Pool 

and the Constitution Gardens Lake to 

include water recirculation systems to 

improve water quality and reduce mainteance time 

• redesigning the Capitol Reflecting Pool at 

Union Square to be shallower and drainable 

for special events and demonstrations 

536
Park Operations: Impacts of Alternative C 

The overall impact of better designs for assets, 

infrastructure, and amenities would correct 

flaws and unforeseen conditions and create a 

high-quality environment that could be more 

efficiently maintained to meet visitor expectations. The overall impacts would be long-term, 

major, and beneficial. 

Soil Conditions 

The National Park Service has already defined a 

number of projects to restore poor quality soils, 

and they would be implemented as soon as funding became available. Soils in the center grass 

panels of the Mall would be replaced with soils 

engineered to be like those used on professional 

sports fields. Soils in other areas would be restored using methods that would not damage 

trees or other mature vegetation. Areas to be 

treated would include the elm tree panels on the 

Mall, Constitution Gardens, and the Washington Monument grounds. Benchmark standards 

from the Sustainable Sites InitiativeTM would 

help guide restoration plans. Compared to 

current conditions, the impact of restoring poor 

quality soils and improving turf conditions 

would be long-term, major, and beneficial. 

Permitted Activities 

National celebrations, special events, and demonstrations would continue to affect park operational priorities, limit access, or require overtime that would affect staffing schedules. However, under alternative C, like the preferred 

alternative and alternative B, some venues would 

be substantially redesigned and improved to 

facilitate park operations. Actions would include 

additional paved areas where high use could be 

concentrated, improved soil conditions to withstand intensive use levels, and infrastructure and 

new facilities designed to meet the needs of 

event organizers as well as maintenance operations during and after demonstrations and special events. Establishing comprehensive recycling programs would help reduce the amount of 

trash generated at permitted activities. As a 

result, while the adverse impact on park staff of 

scheduling and monitoring events would continue, actions under alternative C would make it 

much easier to maintain acceptable standards. 

The impact on park operations would be longterm, major, and beneficial. 

Staffing 

Under alternative C staffing would be focused 

more on recreational and educational programs 

and imparting stewardship and sustainability 

messages, instead of addressing the impacts of 

high levels of use. As described under “Impacts 

Common to All Alternatives,” core operations 

planning would align staff needs with essential 

tasks related to the park purpose and alternative 

C, an action that would have long-term, minor to 

moderate, beneficial impacts on the ability to 

achieve desired park conditions. 

The gap in funding between what industry 

standards recommend and the park budgets 

would begin to be reduced as funding and 

staffing needs were better aligned to achieve 

desired quality standards. Chronically underfunded areas (landscapes, buildings and 

waterfront assets) would be prioritized for 

funding. Impacts on park operations would be 

long-term, major, and beneficial. 

Management Processes 

As described under the preferred alternative and 

alternative A, replacing the permit process for 

demonstrations and special events with computer-based systems and Internet access would 

improve efficiencies in the scheduling, issuing, 

recording, and monitoring or tracking of permits. This would also allow permitted activities 

to be coordinated among all affected park divisions (maintenance, resource protection, and 

other park operations). More frequently 

restoring smaller areas would be more efficient 

than trying to rehabilitate larger areas, which 

would have a corresponding greater effect on 

park use. Incorporating best practices in solid 

waste management and recycling would result in 

safer operations for staff and visitors. The 

overall impacts would be long-term, major, and 

beneficial because these actions would affect 

most park staff. 

Maintainability 

Actions to improve operational efficiency and 

safety would be similar to those described for 

the preferred alternative and would include: 

• widening walks and providing operational 

access points from streets to facilitate the 

movement of maintenance and delivery 

 537 
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

vehicles, reduce damage to curbs and walks, 

and make the performance of regular maintenance activities and other park operations 

more efficient 

• better distributing trash containers and mechanically emptying heavy trash receptacles 

• providing facilities designed for easy maintenance to reduce the time needed to perform routine tasks (such as wall-mounted 

toilets and options to paper towels that 

would reduce waste) 

• installing site furnishings such as benches, 

trash containers, and wayside signs on 

paved surfaces to make it easier to keep up 

surrounding areas 

• using self-cleaning restrooms in a number 

of areas, which would reduce custodial 

work while providing clean, sanitary 

facilities 

• replacing gravel walks with new paving to 

reduce labor and other impacts from gravel 

• emphasizing the use of standardized parts 

or equipment that have proven successful 

in any new designs or redesigns, thus allowing for more efficient stockpiling of parts 

and equipment and reducing the need for 

multiple maintenance manuals, a wide 

variety of tools used only for special tasks, 

and many types of expertise 

• incorporating historic or custom features 

and furnishings into coordinated suites of 

paving, lighting, and furniture, thus making 

it easier to keep replacement parts (such as 

light fixtures and benches) in stock and 

allowing repairs to be made more quickly 

• ensuring that site furnishings meet accessibility standards, and retaining the molds for 

some parts or historic or custom components to ensure part availability 

As described for the preferred alternative, the 

impact of designing for ease of maintenance 

would result in long-term, moderate to major, 

beneficial impacts on park operations. Emphasizing the use of standard parts and systems 

would result in long-term, minor to moderate, 

beneficial impacts. Improving the ability to 

maintain historic or custom features would have 

long-term, moderate, beneficial impacts. 

Best Practices 

The adoption of best practices under alternative 

C, similar to the preferred alternative, would 

positively affect park operations by 

• providing a comprehensive and secure 

communications infrastructure, including 

high-speed Internet communications, 

throughout the National Mall, making 

communications more efficient for park 

staff and law enforcement 

• electronically monitoring lighting outages or 

restroom usage to quickly identify maintenance needs and support efficient scheduling 

• mechanically emptying trash containers, 

reducing the potential for staff injuries from 

hand lifting heavy trash bags 

• developing recycling systems for the collection, storage, and hauling of recyclable materials, an action common to all alternatives 

The impact of using common best practices on 

the efficiency of operations and safety generally 

would be long-term, moderate to major, and 

beneficial, the same as the preferred alternative. 

Summary 

The overall impacts of alternative C would be 

similar to the preferred alternative and alternative B due to addressing deferred maintenance, 

providing easily maintained infrastructure and 

amenities, better handling permitted activities, 

updated processes, and using common best 

practices to improve efficiency. However, staffing would be focused on recreational and educational programs, rather than on addressing the 

impacts of high levels of permitted uses. Nevertheless, impacts would be long-term, moderate 

to major, and beneficial, making it much easier 

to achieve and maintain quality conditions on 

the National Mall. 

Impacts on Sustainability 

Alternative C, in addition to the actions that 

would be common to all, would make substantial progress toward making the National Mall 

more sustainable in terms of water use and 

renewable energy. 

538
Park Operations: Impacts of Alternative C 

Water Use 

Compared to the no-action alternative, alternative C would incorporate a comprehensive sustainable water management plan throughout the 

National Mall to reduce the use of potable 

water. This would include finding other nonpotable sources for ornamental water features, 

such as onsite filtering and cleansing so that gray 

water, water from dewatering activities at nearby 

buildings, or storm water could be used where 

feasible. These actions, as described below, 

would substantially reduce the use of potable 

water in water features: 

• redesigning the Capitol Reflecting Pool at 

Union Square as a shallow reflecting pool 

that could be drained for special events or 

demonstrations, thus drawing attention to 

sustainable water management practices 

• rehabilitating Constitution Gardens Lake to 

make it more self-sustaining 

Finding sustainable sources of water for these 

features would not only save millions of gallons 

of potable water, thus benefiting municipal 

water supplies, it would also provide an educational opportunity for the National Park Service 

to demonstrate environmental stewardship. 

A naturalized Potomac River shoreline would 

restore wetland characteristics and be more 

sustainable than dry-laid walls, a long-term, 

major, beneficial impact. 

The impact of more sustainable water use on 

National Mall would be long-term, moderate to 

major, and beneficial. 

Energy 

Under alternative C, like the preferred alternative, all new, renovated, or adaptively reused 

facilities would meet the highest LEED standards practicable, exceeding NPS policies. In 

addition, seeking visible renewable energy 

sources for lighting and ornamental fountains 

would allow the National Park Service to present educational programs about renewable 

energy and sustainability. As a result, the impact 

on renewable energy would generally be longterm, moderate to major, and beneficial. 

Summary 

Compared to the no-action alternative, alternative C, like the preferred alternative, would 

maximize sustainable solutions for water use and 

renewable energy on the National Mall, setting 

an excellent example for using sustainable 

practices. The overall impacts on sustainability 

would generally be long-term, major, and 

beneficial because of much more sustainable 

water use and more renewable energy. 

Cumulative Impacts 

The impacts of past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions would be the same as those 

described under the no-action alternative and 

would be long-term, major, and adverse. The 

impacts of alternative C would be long-term, 

major, and beneficial because of improved park 

conditions, a reduced deferred maintenance 

backlog, increased maintainability of mechanical 

systems and infrastructure, staffing aligned to 

support core missions, a streamlined permitting 

process for demonstrations and special events, 

and take advantage of sustainable practices. 

Resulting cumulative impacts would be longterm, moderate, and beneficial, with a substantial beneficial contribution from alternative C. 

Conclusion 

Compared to the no-action alternative, the overall impacts of alternative C on park operations 

would be long-term, major, and beneficial as a 

result of improved park conditions, a reduced deferred maintenance backlog, increased maintainability of mechanical systems and infrastructure, 

improved operational access, a streamlined 

permitting process for demonstrations and 

special events, a reduced funding gap between 

desired conditions and park budgets, appropriate 

staffing levels aligned to core operations, and 

exceedance of sustainability standards for 

development, renewable energy, and water use. 

While the overall impacts of the past, present, 

and reasonably foreseeable actions would be 

long-term, major, and adverse, when combined 

with the substantial long-term, major, beneficial 

impacts of alternative C, cumulative impacts 

would be long-term, moderate, and beneficial. 

 539 
OTHER NEPA IMPACT ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS

UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS

Some vegetation would be lost as a result of 

widening and paving walkways or constructing 

hard surfaces for demonstration and special 

events under the preferred alternative and 

alternatives B and C. While this would be an 

unavoidable adverse impact, very little vegetation is expected to be lost under any of the 

alternatives. 

Creating wider walkways around the Tidal Basin 

under the preferred alternative and alternative B 

would slightly reduce the size of the basin. 

Removing the north arm of the Tidal Basin 

under alternative C would be an avoidable loss. 

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHORTTERM USES OF THE ENVIRONMENT 

AND LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY

All of the actions considered in this document 

would continue uses of the environment that 

were established over 200 years ago, and there 

would be no short-term uses of the environment 

that would adversely affect long-term 

productivity. 

Long-term productivity of soils would be 

enhanced with reduced soil compaction under 

all action alternatives. Decreased use of potable 

water under the preferred alternative and 

alternative C would enhance water resources. 

IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE 

RESOURCE COMMITMENTS

Irreversible commitments are those that cannot 

be reversed, except perhaps in the extreme long 

term. No irreversible resource commitments 

have been identified under any alternative for 

the National Mall plan. 

In contrast, irretrievable commitments are those 

that are lost for a period of time, perhaps a long 

period of time. 

Under the preferred alternative and alternatives 

B and C the walls of the Tidal Basin would potentially be relocated and the Tidal Basin made 

smaller in order to accommodate improved 

circulation for vehicles, pedestrians, and bicycles. Also, pedestrian and bicycle space could be 

added by either widening bridges, making lane 

changes, or constructing additional bridges. 

These circulation changes would be irretrievable 

commitments. 

Filling the north bay of the Tidal Basin under 

alternative C would result in the irretrievable 

loss of this constructed water feature. 

If continued soil compaction on the Mall under 

the no-action alterative resulted in the loss of 

American elm trees and a less consistent tree 

canopy, the impact would be irretrievable 

because of the effect on planned historic vistas. 

It could take 80 years or more to reestablish 

present conditions. 

Energy used during construction would be 

irretrievable. 

 540
CONSULTATION

AND

COORDINATION

DRAFT 

NATIONAL MALL PLAN / 

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT

THE NATIONAL MALL

A T L A N T I C

CONTENTS: CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION 

CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION ........................................................................................... 541

The Planning Process and Public Engagement.............................................................................................543

Public Involvement ..................................................................................................................................543

Context for the Planning Effort.....................................................................................................543

Development of Alternatives .........................................................................................................544

Cooperating Agency Meetings ...............................................................................................................545

Cultural Resource Consultation.............................................................................................................546

Stakeholder and Informational Briefings..............................................................................................547

Design and Planning Professional Association Assessment ...............................................................548

List of Reviewing Agencies and Organizations ....................................................................................548

Federal Agencies..............................................................................................................................548

U.S. Congress ...................................................................................................................................548

District / Regional / State Agencies ...............................................................................................548

Businesses and Organizations ........................................................................................................548

List of Preparers................................................................................................................................................550

Consultants and Contributors................................................................................................................551

Denver Service Center ....................................................................................................................551

National Mall and Memorial Parks...............................................................................................551

National Capital Regional Office...................................................................................................552

Center for Urban Ecology ..............................................................................................................552

Department of the Interior, Office of the Solicitor, Division of Parks and Wildlife ..............552

Photo Credits............................................................................................................................................552

TABLES 

Table 41: Actions Requiring Additional Compliance under the National Historic Preservation Act, 

Section 106................................................................................................................................. 547 

i
This page has been left blank intentionally. 
CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION 

541
This page has been left blank intentionally. 
THE PLANNING PROCESS AND PUBLIC 

ENGAGEMENT

The National Park Service announced the intent 

to prepare a management plan for the National 

Mall and Pennsylvania Avenue National Historic Park at a press conference on November 1, 

2006, after a newsletter had been released describing the intent of the project. Subsequently, a 

Federal Register notice was printed on January 

16, 2007, about the planning effort, stating the 

plan would provide a long-term vision for use 

and management for both park areas. On September 6, 2007, a notice was printed in the 

Federal Register stating that an environmental 

impact statement would be prepared as part of 

the planning process. It was subsequently 

determined that because the issues facing these 

areas are somewhat different, a separate 

environmental document will be prepared for 

Pennsylvania Avenue. 

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT

The public involvement process has paralleled 

the planning process and can be described as 

occurring in two phases. The first phase involved establishing the context for the plan, 

which included stating the purpose and significance of the National Mall, establishing the need 

for the plan through public scoping, and developing plan objectives. The second phase was the 

development of the alternatives, including the 

preferred alternative, that would be analyzed in 

the environmental impact statement. The 

newsletters, public meetings, and interagency 

cooperation involved in the planning process are 

further described below. 

To reach diverse publics, extensive contacts 

have been made with the print and broadcast 

media. The planning effort has been covered by 

all media and in editorials and letters to the 

editor. An opinion editorial article by former 

NPS Director Mary Bomar encouraged 

participation in the planning effort and was 

printed in newspapers across the country. A 

number of magazines have also highlighted the 

planning effort, including Architectural Digest, 

Landscape Architecture, National Park 

Foundation, and Scholastic Magazine. Most 

media outlets have provided the planning 

website address for additional information. 

All newsletters, along with other background 

information, were posted online at www.nps 

.gov/nationalmallplan. 

Context for the Planning Effort 

The planning effort for the National Mall has 

emphasized open and inclusive communications 

to engage the public and to understand their 

desires and concerns. The National Park Service 

has issued four newsletters at various stages of 

the planning process to keep people informed 

about what is happening. 

Newsletter 1 

The first newsletter, which was distributed in the 

fall of 2006 by mail and electronically, introduced the project and described the significance 

of the National Mall, as well as Pennsylvania 

Avenue National Historic Park, and how these 

places are used. The newsletter asked people to 

use the related National Mall planning website 

to comment on 15 open-ended questions about 

issues and concerns with public use on the 

National Mall and at Pennsylvania Avenue 

National Historic Park. 

National Mall Symposium 

The first newsletter invited the public to a symposium about the future use and management of 

the National Mall at the U.S. Navy Memorial. 

The symposium took place November 13–15, 

2006, with the public included on November 15. 

Over 100 people attended. Speakers featured 

nationally recognized experts in architecture, 

landscape architecture, history, law enforcement, planning, and government. Discussions 

focused on the history and significance of the 

National Mall, protecting its resources, and best 

practices in managing similar areas. 

As background information for symposium 

participants and for posting on the plan website, 

papers were done on the history of the National 

 543
CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

Mall, planning, legal considerations (including 

First Amendment jurisprudence and commercial 

activities), and best management practices for 

landscape maintenance. 

Public Scoping Meetings and Comments 

The public comment period announced for the 

first newsletter extended from November 1, 

2006, to March 16, 2007. In addition to the 

online survey, three public scoping meetings 

were held, on February 24, March 8, and March 

10, 2007, in Washington, D.C. Background 

information was presented in a short video, with 

large display boards to show the planning area 

and to highlight issues. Study area maps were 

available on line and copies were provided. A 

total of about 60 people attended the meetings. 

In all, more than 5,000 people from all 50 states 

and the District of Columbia provided on-line 

comments on the 15 scoping questions for the 

National Mall plan / environmental impact 

statement. Around 4,000 comments were variations of a form letter, and the 1,000 remaining 

communications offered more than 2,900 separate comments. Topics receiving the most comments included the landscape condition, visitor 

facilities, and orientation and information needs. 

George Mason University was contracted to 

analyze the comments and prepare a report 

(NPS 2007d), which was posted on the National 

Mall planning website. Respondents expressed a 

deep desire to sustain the openness and accessibility of the National Mall as well as upgrading 

the greenspace. 

Newsletter 2 

The second newsletter, released in the summer 

of 2007, summarized the public concerns and issues that were raised in response to the first 

newsletter. Concerns and issues included the 

appearance and landscape, facilities, services, 

activities, and regulations pertaining to crowd 

control, security, and public safety. The 

newsletter also introduced 21 planning 

principles to guide the plan, which were developed in cooperation with other federal and 

city agencies with planning responsibilities for 

the District of Columbia (see “Cooperating 

Agency Meetings” below). These principles, 

along with the statements of purpose and 

significance, formed the basis for the plan objectives presented in this document (see page 4). 

Development of Alternatives 

Newsletter 3 — Planning Workbook 

The third newsletter was released in late fall 

2007. It presented a range of draft conceptual 

alternatives for the future use and management 

of the National Mall. A no-action alternative 

that would continue current management 

direction was also described. Readers were 

asked to comment on the alternative concepts, 

and the feedback was used to begin developing a 

preferred alternative. A public comment form 

with 18 questions was posted on the planning 

website. The questions related to each area of 

the National Mall, asked for other ideas, and 

asked what ideas should be combined to become 

a preferred alternative. Public meetings were 

held at the Old Post Office Building in 

Washington D.C. on January 8, 9, and 12, 2008. 

The public comment period lasted from December 15, 2007, to February 15, 2008. During this 

period 17,758 comments were received; of these, 

13,836 comments pertained to First Amendment 

rights, and there was widespread misunderstanding that the National Mall plan would 

change these fundamental rights. The website 

was updated to reflect and reinforce the 

commitment to First Amendment rights, as 

based on the Constitution and reaffirmed in 

legal decisions over the years. A second prominent area of response came from bicyclists. 

Public comments were again analyzed by George 

Mason University, and a report was prepared 

(NPS 2008e). 

Development of a Preferred Alternative 

through Choosing by Advantages 

The draft preliminary alternatives that were 

presented to the public in newsletter 3 were 

refined, and a process known as “Choosing by 

Advantages” (CBA) was used to identify the 

most effective actions that would then be combined into a preliminary preferred alternative. 

The planning team, park staff, and cooperating 

agencies participated in this process during a 

series of workshops in the winter and spring of 

544
The Planning Process and Public Engagement: Cooperating Agency Meetings 

2008. Additional refinements were made, and a 

preliminary preferred alternative was developed 

that contained elements of all the alternatives 

and included additional ideas brought up by the 

public, consulting parties, cooperating agencies, 

and the ongoing examination of best practices 

used at other sites. 

The CBA process focuses decision-making on 

the advantages of differences among alternatives 

and helps ensure that decisions consider the 

park’s purpose, significance, issues, public and 

stakeholder viewpoints, and other relevant topics. The process assesses the advantages of 

differences and rates and ranks the importance 

of factors of groups of decisions. Standard 

factors that were considered included providing 

for public health, safety, and security; protecting 

cultural and natural resources; improving visitor 

experiences and enjoyment (education, information, access and circulation, and visitor amenities); improving park operations; and providing 

other benefits, such as for partnerships, concessioners, and the local economy. For the National 

Mall it is also important to improve the ability of 

the National Park Service to serve its unique 

civic role in addressing the full range of special 

events, including national celebrations, First 

Amendment gatherings, and special events. 

The process is designed to make sure that nonmonetary factors are considered, and that planning level cost estimates* are also considered to 

maximize advantages to the government while 

keeping costs as low as possible. Planning cost 

estimates allowed the development of a preferred alternative that was less costly than other 

action alternatives while combining elements of 

all the alternatives to bring the highest level of 

advantage points. 

The planning team and cooperating agencies 

determined that the most important factor for 

this planning effort is to provide a quality American experience. This includes enhancing 

visitors’ abilities to understand and participate in 

 

* Planning level cost estimates are rough estimates that 

allow ideas to be compared to make decisions about 

alternative courses of action. Planning level cost 

estimates are not to be used for estimating projects for 

construction. 

First Amendment and/or civic activities, to have 

a welcoming experience, to understand core 

American values and history expressed by the 

memorials, to be able to enjoy the National 

Mall’s beauty and vistas both by day and at 

night, and to be inspired. The second most important factor was the ability to improve natural 

resource conditions. It is important to note that 

all of the alternatives would protect cultural 

resources, so this factor ranked lower in terms of 

distinguishing differences between the alternatives. 

Newsletter 4 — Preliminary Preferred 

Alternative 

The preliminary preferred alternative was described for the public in newsletter 4, which was 

released in February 2009. People were asked to 

make comments on-line, and the comment 

period lasted from March 1 to May 15, 2009. In 

addition, two public meetings were held, on 

March 11 and 14, in Washington, D.C. This 

newsletter also explained that because the issues 

facing the National Mall and Pennsylvania 

Avenue are somewhat different, and in order not 

to lose focus of the importance of Pennsylvania 

Avenue, a separate environmental document 

will be prepared for Pennsylvania Avenue. 

COOPERATING AGENCY MEETINGS

In April 2006 the National Park Service invited 

the following federal and D.C. agencies to 

cooperate in the preparation of a National Mall 

plan. 

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation 

Architect of the Capitol 

D.C. Department of Transportation 

D.C. Office of Planning 

D.C. Historic Preservation Office 

The Federal Reserve Bank 

General Services Administration 

National Archives 

National Capital Planning Commission 

National Gallery of Art 

Smithsonian Institution 

U.S. Bureau of Engraving and Printing 

U.S. Commission of Fine Arts 

U.S. Department of Agriculture 

U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum 

U.S. Park Police 

 545
CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

U.S. Secret Service, Department of Homeland 

Security 

Washington Area Metropolitan Transit 

Authority 

One result of this process was the cooperative 

development of planning principles, which in 

addition to overarching principles, addressed 

the National Mall’s urban context and identity, 

future memorials, historic plans and resources, 

views and vistas, design standards, lighting, 

information, civic space, educational opportunities, pedestrian experiences, transportation, 

maintenance operations, law enforcement, 

business services, and health, safety, and security. The principles were printed in newsletter 2, 

and as previously described, they formed the 

basis of the plan objectives. 

Throughout the planning process the National 

Park Service has been cooperating with the National Capital Planning Commission, the Commission of Fine Arts, the D.C. Office of Planning, 

and the Architect of the Capitol to discuss 

projects and how they interrelate. One result of 

this cooperative effort was the development of 

Planning Together for Central Washington, a 

pamphlet explaining the agencies’ various 

planning efforts and common objectives. 

Additional meetings were held to discuss planning principles (presented in newsletter 2), 

standards, event management, and the preliminary range of alternatives. CBA workshops were 

also held to develop the preliminary preferred 

alternative. 

CULTURAL RESOURCE CONSULTATION

Approximately 60 organizations with an interest 

in the National Mall plan or historic preservation were asked to be consulting parties under 

the National Historic Preservation Act section 

106 process. The following organizations responded that they would like to participate: 

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation 

American Civil Liberties Union of the 

National Capital Area 

American Institute of Architects 

American Society of Landscape Architects 

Commission of Fine Arts 

Committee of 100 on the Federal City 

Cultural Tourism DC 

District of Columbia Historic Preservation 

Office 

D.C. Preservation League 

Dwight D. Eisenhower Memorial 

Commission 

Eastern National 

Equal Honor for All 

Friends of the National World War II 

Memorial 

Guest Services, Inc 

The Guild of Professional Tour Guides 

Landmark Services, Inc. 

Martin Luther King, Jr. National Memorial 

Project Foundation, Inc. 

National Association for Olmsted Parks 

National Capital Planning Commission 

National Coalition to Save Our Mall 

National Mall Conservancy 

National Parks Conservation Association 

National Trust for Historic Preservation 

Organization of American States 

Smithsonian Institution 

Society of Architectural Historians – 

Latrobe Chapter 

Trust for the National Mall 

Washington DC Convention and Tourism 

Corporation 

Willard Hotel 

Downtown Business Improvement District 

Beginning in January 2008, consulting parties 

worked with the National Park Service, the 

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and 

the D.C. Historic Preservation Office to examine 

the ramifications of planning alternatives on 

cultural landscapes, the NPS List of Classified 

Structures, historic districts, on sites listed on or 

eligible for listing on the National Register of 

Historic Places. 

The consultation process is ongoing, and at least 

10 meetings or opportunities to participate were 

held by April 1, 2009. A bus tour was provided in 

May 2007 to familiarize participants with planning issues. Background materials, maps, and 

studies were posted on the website and handed 

out at meetings. Consulting parties provided 

comments in April 2008 on the range of alternatives, with the National Park Service responding 

to the comments and incorporating ideas into a 

preliminary preferred alternative. Following 

internal briefings on the preliminary preferred 

alternative, the section 106 process was begun 

546
The Planning Process and Public Engagement: Stakeholder and Informational Briefings 

again in March 2009, with a focus on the impacts 

of a preliminary preferred alternative. 

This Draft Environmental Impact Statement

defines what would occur where and serves as 

an overarching organizational document for 

future project implementation that will generally 

include standard procedures of site-specific 

design, commission reviews, public engagement, 

and historic preservation consultation. Some 

specific actions could be called out in the 

programmatic agreement. Future compliance in 

accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act will be needed on certain proposed 

actions, as identified in Table 41. 

TABLE 41: ACTIONS REQUIRING ADDITIONAL 

COMPLIANCE UNDER THE NATIONAL HISTORIC 

PRESERVATION ACT, SECTION 106 

Highlighted areas require additional compliance. 

Ongoing NPS Actions 

Rehabilitate Lincoln Reflecting Pool, pave elm 

walkways, complete security perimeter 

Yes, ongoing

Complete Thomas Jefferson security perimeter Yes, ongoing

Construct Vietnam Veterans Memorial Center Yes, ongoing

Construct Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial Yes, ongoing

Replace sign system Yes, ongoing

Washington Monument security screening Yes, ongoing

Renovate Lincoln Memorial restrooms, relocate 

bookstore, and rehabilitate / replace exhibits 

No, not 

needed 

Rehabilitate D.C. War Memorial and restore 

grounds 

No, not 

needed 

Correct problems at Thomas Jefferson plaza No, not 

needed 

National Mall Actions 

Develop coordinated palette of paving 

materials, crosswalks, and site furnishings* 

Yes 

Develop bike routes Yes 

Specific Areas 

Union Square 

Redesign Union Square Yes 

Mall

Develop welcome plaza / 12th Street corridor Yes 

Rehabilitate soil, grass, irrigation for center 

panels 

No 

Install curbs, protection for elm tree panels Yes 

Provide restrooms Yes 

Provide civic infrastructure Yes 

Pave walkways, enhance pedestrian 

environments* 

Yes 

Provide additional lighting Yes 

Install parking meters / kiosks Yes 

Provide underground parking garage Yes 

Washington Monument 

Construct visitor facility / multipurpose facility Yes 

Provide civic infrastructure (utilities, etc.) Yes 

World War II Memorial No 

Constitution Gardens

Relocate Lockkeeper’s House Yes 

Construct multipurpose area or food service 

facility 

Yes 

Rehabilitate lake No 

Rehabilitate / redesign walk areas* Yes 

Remove / rehabilitate concession facility Yes 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial 

Rehabilitate existing walkways; provide seating Yes 

Lincoln Memorial 

Add restroom near south concession stand Yes 

Korean War Veterans Memorial 

Revise walks Yes 

Ash Woods 

Replace / relocate restroom Yes 

Replace USPP stables / add new road entry Yes 

Potentially add new concession facility Yes 

Revise road/walks* Yes 

Tidal Basin Area 

Rebuild Tidal Basin walls, widen walks and 

bridges, and provide pedestrian amenities* 

Yes 

Install pedestrian lighting Yes 

Provide concession food service / restrooms Yes 

Provide new recreation equipment rental 

facility 

Yes 

Provide bike lanes Yes 

West Potomac Park Riverfront Area 

Add bike lanes Yes 

Rehabilitate shoreline Yes 

Redesign parking Yes 

Add walks Yes 

George Mason Memorial 

Rehabilitate Fountain 4 No 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial 

Potentially provide concession facility Yes 

Improve ballfields No 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial 

Provide civic infrastructure Yes 

Add restroom Yes 

Provide concession facility Yes 

NOTE: All design and construction projects undergo review by the U.S. 

Commission of Fine Arts whether or not additional compliance is 

required. 

STAKEHOLDER AND INFORMATIONAL 

BRIEFINGS

Throughout the planning process meetings have 

been held with various federal and city agencies 

about the planning effort, including the 

following: 

American Institute of Architects 

American Planning Association 

American Society of Landscape Architects 

Catholic University (urban planning and 

architecture classes) 

Cesar Chavez High School 

Clemson University 

Denver Urban Explorers Association 

Downtown D.C. Business Improvement 

District 

Eastern National (cooperating association) 

Foggy Bottom Neighborhood Association 

 547
CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

Friends of the National World War II 

Memorial 

Guild of Professional Tour Guides of 

Washington, D.C. 

Guest Services, Inc. 

Harvard Graduate School of Design / 

University of Virginia 

Landmark Services Inc. (Tourmobile 

operator) 

Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial Foundation 

Maturals, senior class at Community College, 

Northern Virginia 

National Museum of African American 

History and Culture 

National Parks Conservation Association 

National Park Foundation 

Penn Quarter Neighborhood Association 

Streetscape Committee 

Summit Foundation 

Trust for the National Mall 

U.S. Navy Memorial Foundation 

Washington Convention and Tourism 

Corporation / Destination DC 

Washington, D.C., Mayor’s Summer Youth 

Program 

Washington Historical Society 

William and Mary College, Semester in D.C. 

DESIGN AND PLANNING PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION 

ASSESSMENT

The American Society of Landscape Architects 

convened a blue-ribbon panel of architects, 

planners, and landscape architects to examine 

“Reviving America’s Front Yard” on March 19–

20, 2009. The National Park Service provided 

background materials, a presentation, and a 

tour. Conclusions were announced at a press 

conference. The panel led to a semester-long 

design exploration focused on the National Mall 

by the Harvard Graduate School of Design and 

the University of Virginia. 

LIST OF REVIEWING AGENCIES AND 

ORGANIZATIONS

The following governmental agencies, businesses, and organizations will be sent copies of 

the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for 

review and comment. 

Federal Agencies 

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation 

Commission of Fine Arts 

Council on Environmental Quality 

Department of Agriculture 

Department of Defense, Arlington National 

Cemetery 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Federal Reserve 

National Gallery of Art 

National Capital Planning Commission 

Smithsonian Institution 

U.S. Congress 

Architect of the Capitol 

District / Regional / State Agencies 

D.C. Department of Parks and Recreation 

D.C. Department of Transportation 

D.C. Office of Planning 

D.C. Historic Preservation Office 

Virginia State Historic Preservation Office 

Washington Metropolitan Area Transit 

Authority 

Businesses and Organizations 

American Civil Liberties Union of the National 

Capital Area 

American Institute of Architects 

American Planning Association 

American Society of Landscape Architects 

Capitol Hill Business Improvement District 

City Parks Alliance 

Committee of 100 on the Federal City 

Cultural Tourism DC 

D.C. Preservation League 

Downtown D.C. Business Improvement District 

Downtown Business Improvement District 

Eastern National 

Equal Honor for All 

Foggy Bottom Neighborhood Association 

Friends of the National World War II Memorial 

Golden Triangle Business Improvement District 

Guest Services, Inc. 

Guild of Professional Tour Guides of 

Washington, D.C. 

Landmark Services, Inc. 

Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial Project 

Foundation, Inc. 

548
The Planning Process and Public Engagement: List of Reviewing Agencies and Organizations 

National Association for Olmsted Parks 

National Coalition to Save Our Mall 

National Mall Conservancy 

National Parks Conservation Association 

National Trust for Historic Preservation 

Organization of American States 

Penn Quarter Neighborhood Association 

Penn Quarter Business Community 

Society of Architectural Historians — Latrobe 

Chapter 

Streetscape Committee 

Trust for the National Mall 

U.S. Navy Memorial Foundation 

Washington Area Bicycle Association 

Washington DC Convention and Tourism 

Corporation 

Washington Historical Society 

Willard Hotel 

 549
LIST OF PREPARERS

NPS PLANNING TEAM

Name/Position Education/Experience Contribution to Planning Effort 

National Park Service 

Susan Spain 

Project Executive for the National 

Mall Plan 

Planning Division, Denver Service 

Center, National Park Service 

B.S., Landscape Architecture, B.A., 

Studio Arts/Humanities, 

University of Minnesota. 

20 years with the National Park 

Service in planning, design, and 

project management; 12 years 

in private practice, landscape 

architect and planner. 

All facets of planning, document 

production, and public involvement. Wrote conservation zoning, visitor experience, 

demonstrations and special 

events, access and circulation, 

park operations sections. 

Craig Cellar 

Cultural Resources Management 

Specialist 

Planning Division, Denver Service 

Center, National Park Service 

B.A., Anthropology/History, 

University of Nebraska. 

36 years with the National Park 

Service 

Cultural resource sections for 

affected environment and 

environmental impacts. 

Ruth Eitel, Visual Information 

Specialist 

Denver Service Center, National 

Park Service 

B.F.A., Pittsburg State University, 

Pittsburg, Kansas 

32 years with the National Park 

Service 

Created all maps, designed 

newsletters, oversaw printing. 

Mary McVeigh 

Planning Division, Denver, Service 

Center, National Park Service 

B.A., Technical Communications, 

Metropolitan State College, 

Denver, CO 

25 years planning with the 

National Park Service 

Assisted with public involvement 

tasks, alternative development, 

and the CBA workshop. Wrote 

portions of the visitor 

experience and impact 

sections. 

Matthew Safford 

Natural Resource and GIS 

Specialist 

Planning Division, Denver Service 

Center, National Park Service 

B.S., Zoology, Colorado State 

University 

28 years in the Department of 

Interior, 8 years with the 

Denver Service Center. 

Natural resource sections, GIS 

mapping and analysis. 

Tom Thomas 

Cultural Resource Specialist 

Ph.D., History, University of 

Colorado 

18 years with the National Park 

Service 

Cultural resource sections for 

affected environment and 

environmental impacts. 

Consultants 

Maggie Daniels 

Associate Professor of Tourism 

and Events Management 

School of Recreation, Health and 

Tourism 

George Mason University 

Ph.D., Clemson University 

Extensive fieldwork in the areas of 

tourism planning and policy, 

supple resource promotion, 

and event management related 

to regional economic development. Author of over 50 published papers, book chapters, 

professional presentations, and 

technical reports. 

Conducted newsletter comment 

analysis, and visitor surveys 

and analysis. Wrote socioeconomic sections. 

Laurie K. Harmon 

Registered Landscape Architect 

Assistant Professor and Coordinator; Parks, Recreation, and 

Leisure Studies Program 

George Mason University 

Ph.D., Pennsylvania State 

University. 

Research focuses on mechanisms 

affecting and outcomes related 

to people’s interactions with 

natural resource based places. 

Conducted research and helped 

write socioeconomic sections. 

550
List of Preparers: Consultants and Contributors 

Name/Position Education/Experience Contribution to Planning Effort 

Minkyung Park 

Assistant Professor; Tourism and 

Events Management 

George Mason University 

Ph.D., Texas A&M University 

Social/cultural impacts of tourism 

development as well as cultural 

heritage tourism. Formerly research manager with the Maryland Office of Tourism Development, Department of Business and Economic 

Development. 

Conducted research and helped 

write socioeconomic sections. 

Russell Brayley 

Coordinator, Tourism and Events 

Management Program, 

George Mason University 

Ph.D., Texas A&M University. 

Experience developing outdoor 

recreation management plans, 

and worked with the socioeconomic division of the Canadian 

Parks Service designing and 

conducting visitor surveys. 

Conducted research and helped 

write socioeconomic sections. 

Greg Sorensen, Senior Technical 

Writer / Editor 

URS Corporation 

B.A., International Affairs, 

University of Colorado 

34 years experience writing and 

editing (24 years with the 

National Park Service, 10 years 

with URS Corporation) 

Developed newsletters; edited and 

formatted draft environmental 

impact statement; researched 

and wrote sections for access 

and circulation, visitation 

patterns and trends. 

CONSULTANTS AND CONTRIBUTORS

Denver Service Center 

David Kreger, Planning Branch Chief/Technical 

Specialist for NEPA 

Greg Cody, Technical Specialist for Cultural 

Resources 

Kerri Cahill, Technical Specialist for User 

Capacity 

Deryn Ruth Goodwyn, Community Planner 

Lindsey Kordis, Park Ranger 

Leslie Peterson, Program Analyst/Contracting 

Officer’s Representative 

Lori Yokomizo, Web Developer 

National Mall and Memorial Parks 

Management Team 

John Piltzecker, Superintendent 

Vikki Keys, Former Superintendent, Retired 

Peggy O’Dell, Former Superintendent 

Lisa Mendelson-Ielmini, Former Acting 

Superintendent 

Dr. Stephanie Toothman, Former Acting 

Superintendent 

Steve Lorenzetti, Deputy Superintendent, 

Planning 

Karen Cucurullo, Acting Deputy Superintendent, Operations / Special Assistant for 

Partnerships 

Barbara Ruth, Acting Chief of Administration/ 

Financial Management Officer 

Sean Kennealy, Chief of Maintenance 

Lance Hatten, Chief of Education and 

Interpretation 

Rick Merryman, Chief of Park Programs, 

Retired 

Leonard Lee, Acting Chief of Park Programs 

Perry Wheelock, Chief of Resource 

Management 

Division of Maintenance 

Jorge Alvarez, Deputy Chief of Maintenance 

Steve Sims, Civil Engineer 

Alice McLarty, Landscape Architect 

Roger Buchanan, Facilities Operations Specialist 

Martha Ellis, Grounds Maintenance Foreman 

Partnership Office 

Alexa Viets, Transportation Analyst 

Ed Petru, Volunteer Coordinator/Recycling 

Gordy Kito, Concession Specialist 

 551
CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

Division of Administration 

Brad Conway, Supervisory IT/GIS Specialist 

Brian Hall, Webmaster 

Division of Resource Management 

Jennifer Talken-Spaulding, Cultural Resource 

Program Manager 

Mary Willeford Bair, Natural Resource 

Specialist 

Division of Park Programs 

Robbin Owen, Park Ranger 

Division of Education and Interpretation 

Rosanna Weltzin, Deputy Chief 

National Capital Regional Office 

Peggy O’Dell, Regional Director 

Joseph Lawler, Regional Director, Retired 

Lisa Mendelson-Ielmini, Deputy Regional 

Director/Acting Superintendent 

John Parsons, Associate Regional Director - 

Lands, Resources and Planning, Retired 

Peter May, Associate Regional Director — 

Lands, Resources and Planning 

Rob DeFeo, Horticulturist 

Bill Line, Chief Communications Officer 

Maureen Joseph, Regional Historical Landscape 

Architect 

Center for Urban Ecology 

Dr. Jim Sherald, Chief 

Department of the Interior, Office 

of the Solicitor, Division of Parks 

and Wildlife 

Randolph J. Myers, Permitted Activities 

Josefa O’Malley, Commemorative Works and 

D.C. Planning 

OTHER CONSULTANTS

Irina Jamison, Project Manager, Alpha 

Corporation 

PHOTO CREDITS

Photographs of the 2009 presidential inaugural 

ceremonies on page 308 are courtesy of the 

National Park Service, Office of Public Affairs 

(David Barna, Terry Adams, and Chris Alford). 

Except where otherwise credited, all other 

photographs are by Greg Sorensen. 

552
APPENDIXES

DRAFT 

NATIONAL MALL PLAN / 

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT

THE NATIONAL MALL

CONTENTS: APPENDIXES / GLOSSARY / 

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY / INDEX 

APPENDIXES ................................................................................................................................ 553

Appendix A: The National Mall and Memorial Parks: Foundation Statement........................................555

Appendix B: Best Practices ..............................................................................................................................558

Appendix C: National Register Properties on the National Mall ..............................................................563

Appendix D: Park Facilities Guidance...........................................................................................................571

Appendix E: Draft Statement of Findings for Floodplains .........................................................................576

Glossary..............................................................................................................................................................580

Selected Bibliography.......................................................................................................................................585

Index...................................................................................................................................................................593

i
This page has been left blank intentionally. 
APPENDIXES 

553
This page has been left blank intentionally. 
555

APPENDIX A: THE NATIONAL MALL AND 

MEMORIAL PARKS: FOUNDATION STATEMENT

The National Mall and Memorial Parks, an organizational unit of the National Park Service’s National Capital Region, manages several areas within 

Washington, D.C., including the National Mall, 

Pennsylvania Avenue National Historic Park, 

Ford’s Theater National Historic Site, and numerous circles and squares throughout the city 

containing monuments, memorials, and fountains, 

such as those at DuPont, Logan, and Washington 

circles. To develop foundation elements for the 

National Mall plan, the first step was to understand 

the purpose and significance of the National Mall 

and Memorial Parks. The following purpose and 

significance statements were derived from court 

decisions; congressional statements; the laws, 

regulations, and policies that guide the National 

Park Service; and other laws and plans for 

Washington, D.C. 

PURPOSE

The following are the purposes of the National 

Mall and Memorial Parks: 

• Preserve, interpret, and manage federal park 

lands in the national capital on the land 

delineated by the L’Enfant plan and the 1902 

Senate Park Improvement Plan (commonly 

referred to as the McMillan plan), including 

green spaces, vistas, monuments, memorials, 

statues, historic sites, cultural landscapes, and 

natural and recreation areas. 

• Preserve places where important events in 

U.S. history occurred (e.g., Ford’s Theater, the 

Petersen House, Pennsylvania Avenue). 

• Provide opportunities for visitor contemplation, celebration, commemoration, citizen 

participation, recreation, and demonstration, 

where the full expression of the constitutional 

rights of speech and peaceful assembly occur. 

• Maintain space for the symbols and icons of 

our nation and its ideals (e.g., equality, 

freedom, and democracy). 

• “Washington, D.C. is more than the seat of 

government and residence of nearly one 

million citizens. It is a second home to every 

American, and the symbol of this nation to the 

world.” 

SIGNIFICANCE

The National Mall and Memorial Parks are significant for the following reasons: 

• The areas under NPS stewardship are some of 

the oldest public lands in our nation, dating 

from 1791 when the District was established; 

the L’Enfant plan guided the creation and 

development of park areas. 

• Much of the area managed by the National 

Mall and Memorial Parks reflects the physical 

expression of the historic L’Enfant and 

McMillan plans for the federal city. 

◦ The L’Enfant plan of the capital represents the states as bound together by the 

constitutional authority. 

• The areas managed by the National Mall and 

Memorial Parks are vital components of the 

historic federal city — the singular designed 

urban core that from inception has physically 

expressed its political role as the American 

national capital city and seat of government. 

◦ The park retains the major design features of the historic plan of Washington, 

the sole American example of a comprehensive baroque city plan with a coordinated system of radiating avenues, parks, 

and vistas laid over an orthogonal grid, 

which was both symbolic and innovative 

for the new nation. 

◦ The McMillan plan, the first comprehensive plan for modern city development, 

resulted in the most elegant example of 

City Beautiful tenets. 

◦ In the 1870s a major public works project 

enclosed Tiber Creek within the sewer 

system and created West Potomac Park. 

The McMillan plan conceived ideas for 

West Potomac Park on the reclaimed Potomac Flats with gardens and spaces for 

commemoration. 

• The National Mall and Memorial Parks preserve the stage upon which historic events of 

national significance occurred, such as the 

assassination of President Lincoln at Ford’s 

Theater in 1865 and the “I Have a Dream” 
APPENDIXES

speech of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., at the 

Lincoln Memorial in 1963. 

• The iconography, architecture, and open 

spaces within the National Mall and Memorial 

Parks are a source of national pride, and they 

commemorate individuals and events that 

symbolize our cherished values and ideals: 

democracy, freedom, justice, compassion, 

equality, unity, diversity, service, healing, citizenship, civil rights, liberty, service, dedication, courage, sacrifice, innovation, unity, and 

diversity, as well as struggles of the international community for freedom and democracy. A visit to the park sites is a pilgrimage to 

find inspiration among the principal symbols 

of America’s heritage. 

• The National Mall and Memorial Parks are 

the setting for national celebrations, parades, 

festivals, ceremonies, and rallies, as well as 

local and regional events. 

• The National Mall and Memorial Parks comprise a globally recognized platform to 

exercise democratic First Amendment rights. 

• The states within our nation are illustrated in: 

◦ street names and layout from the 

L’Enfant plan and successor plans 

◦ state stones in the Washington 

Monument 

◦ state listings on the Lincoln Memorial 

façade, the World War II Memorial, and 

the 56 Signers of the Declaration of 

Independence 

◦ state flags at Columbus Circle 

• African American personages, history, and 

events have taken place or are commemorated 

here (Benjamin Banneker, Pearl Incident, 

segregation and desegregation, Marian Anderson, 1963 March of Washington, Dr. Martin 

Luther King Jr., Rosa Parks state funeral, 

headquarters of the National Council of 

Negro Women). 

• The District of Columbia, as the capital of the 

nation, is an international city that is a melting 

pot where many cultures and languages come 

together. 

FUNDAMENTAL RESOURCES 

• The landmark L’Enfant and McMillan plans 

have become preeminent international examples of land use planning and design. 

◦ Pierre L’Enfant designed the plan of the 

City of Washington in 1791, and Andrew 

Ellicott mapped it the following year. 

Vistas for the most part relate to the 

course of avenues, street grid, 

monuments, and sites within the parks 

and the airspace up to the legal heightlimit of Washington, D.C.

◦ The McMillan plan components include 

the Lincoln Memorial and the reflecting 

pool, a site for a hero (the Thomas 

Jefferson Memorial), and the Arlington 

Memorial Bridge. 

• There are numerous commemorative sites, 

such as Ford’s Theater National Historic Site, 

Pershing Park, Freedom Plaza, the U.S. Navy 

Memorial, the General Meade statue, the 

Mellon Fountain, the Franklin Delano 

Roosevelt Memorial, the Benjamin Franklin 

statue, the Pulaski statue, and the General 

Pershing statue. 

FUNDAMENTAL VALUES

• Park aesthetics contribute to the character of 

the capital city and its relationship with the 

people of the United States. 

• Monuments and memorials honor individuals 

and events and reflect the core values of the 

country (citizenship, freedom, diversity, 

equality, civil rights, liberty, service, 

dedication, courage, sacrifice, innovation, 

unity, emotional healing, and struggles of the 

international community for freedom and 

democracy). 

• Citizenship activities, visitor enjoyment, 

educational and recreational activities, as 

defined by the Constitution, laws, regulations, 

and judicial rulings. 

• Opportunities for personal or emotional 

connections to the park. 

• Public access and ownership and a sense of 

belonging. 

556
Appendix A: The National Mall and Memorial Parks: Foundation Statement 

PRIMARY INTERPRETIVE THEMES 

• The national capital belongs to all citizens, and 

it provides citizens a sense of belonging to a 

nation. 

• The National Mall and Memorial Parks tell 

stories about ideas, people, and events that 

have changed and guided our nation and that 

are commemorated here. 

• Sites managed by the National Mall and 

Memorial Parks offer fundamental citizenship 

experiences so that all may understand, 

celebrate, and participate in being American. 

• The National Mall and Memorial Parks provide the stage where constitutional rights of 

free speech and assembly find their fullest 

expression. 

• The L’Enfant and McMillan plans guided city 

development. 

• The park is a national park, part of the larger 

national park system of public ownership and 

stewardship of America’s treasures. 

OTHER IMPORTANT RESOURCES AND 

VALUES

• The river systems surrounding the park are 

critical to the city’s setting. The confluence of 

the Potomac and Anacostia rivers is at Hains 

Point. 

• Park roads generally provide scenic driving 

experiences and open and unimpeded access 

across public land in the middle of the District 

of Columbia, in accordance with historic 

plans.

 557
APPENDIX B: BEST PRACTICES

Best management practices used by others were 

researched to provide a foundation for determining what steps could be taken to improve maintenance and operations for the National Mall. The 

review of best practices has been an ongoing process as alternatives were developed, and the most 

applicable practices were included in the action 

alternatives. The best practices that have been 

considered are summarized below. 

Design Features for Public Use and 

Maintenance 

Destinations should be convenient and flexible, 

and they should be well used throughout the day so 

people are comfortable being there. Best practices 

for design include: 

• Create a sense of place and enhance the 

landscape appearance through a hierarchy of 

design for site furniture (benches, trash cans, 

information stations, light fixtures, and 

orientation signs), with coordinated logos, 

color systems, signage, uniforms, and messages. 

• Use high-quality and durable materials and 

details to attract users, contribute to respect 

and user stewardship, and deter vandalism. 

Quality is the result of design, construction, 

facility condition, and maintenance. All four 

are needed components to achieve the 

desired standards. Quality places are pleasant 

to be in and appeal to all five senses. Quality, 

comfort, cleanliness, and feelings of safety 

make a good first impression. 

• Use design elements such as planting beds, 

cobblestone borders, raised curbs, placement 

of seating, mobile carts, groundcovers, and 

decorative or post-and-chain fencing to 

manage the movement of people and to 

protect landscape areas and reduce social 

trails and damage to trees and turf. 

• Design public areas that incorporate the 

attributes of successful places: 

◦ Access and linkages — good visual access, 

walking environment, defined access 

routes that are convenient to entries, multimodal access, and convenient transit stops 

◦ Comfort and image — cleanliness, safety, 

places to sit 

◦ Uses and activities — many types of activities that appeal to diverse users and mixed 

ages, space for singles and groups, areas 

used throughout the day, and a 

management presence 

◦ Sociability — meeting places for singles and 

groups, pride in features, destinations that 

bring people together, smiling people who 

make eye contact 

• Plan for certain types of visitor amenities that 

go together, such as signs, seating areas, cafés, 

restrooms, and places where paths cross. 

Functioning together, these elements have a 

bigger impact than they would alone. 

Combining activities and uses in one area can 

help create a comfortable and social place for 

people to relax, spend time, and attend to 

several needs at once (PPS 2008). 

• Encourage visitors to linger at visitor service 

locations by making them pleasant places. 

This will help concentrate trash where it can 

be handled efficiently and reduce trash at 

memorials or other trash-free zones. For 

example, the following groupings of amenities 

would be suitable for areas of the National 

Mall: 

◦ Entries — identification and welcome signs, 

orientation /directional / wayfinding signs, 

seating, trash / recycling containers 

◦ Memorials — commemorative works, education and information, bookstores, restrooms / drinking water, seating for contemplation 

◦ Connections / on-the-way experiences —

orientation maps, directional signs, walks, 

pleasant surroundings for enjoyment, seating, shade, education, interactive water 

features, restrooms / drinking water, food 

carts, refreshment stands with outdoor 

seating and tables, trash / recycling containers, limited retail, bike parking, transit 

access (sightseeing, tour bus, etc.) 

◦ Visitor facility areas — destinations where 

visitors can linger and recharge, views, 

food, gifts, bookstores, restrooms / drinking water, performance / entertainment 

areas, trash / recycling containers, gardens, 

water features (including interactive 

 

558
Appendix B: Best Practices 

features), seating and tables, convenient 

transit access (sightseeing and tour buses, 

etc.) 

◦ Events — convenient to entries, programmable space for events, portable restrooms, 

event logistics, utilities, defined access 

routes 

◦ Restrooms — seating, trash containers, 

walks, drinking water, wayfinding, and 

education 

• Consider ease of maintenance and typical 

uses, and incorporate ergonomics that 

support employee safety. 

• Ensure that access and circulation routes 

accommodate staff and maintenance vehicles, 

as well as pedestrians and other types of use. 

Natural Resources 

Soils 

• Maintain or restore soil function to support 

healthy plants, biological communities, 

infiltration, and water storage. 

• Alleviate erosion and compaction. 

• Maintain or improve soil conditions in the top 

12 inches of soil (constituting the root zone). 

Soils should contain the appropriate amount 

of organic matter to support infiltration and 

water storage. The least harmful soil 

amendments, such as compost, should be 

used, and conditions should be created to 

restore soil organisms (American Society of 

Landscape Architects [ASLA] et al. 2008). 

Vegetation 

• Green, organic landscapes are often safer, 

cleaner, and healthier for everyone. The 

public should understand “green” goals.

• Select plants that are suitable for the area to 

ensure that they will grow and that they can 

be easily maintained. 

Event Management 

To better accommodate events, spaces should be 

designed to sustainably accommodate events. 

This would include the following best 

management practices 

• Pave surfaces in event venues. 

• Design routes and areas to accommodate 

access and facilities such as stages or portable 

restrooms. 

• Provide utility infrastructure and connections 

in certain areas to minimize resource damage. 

• Provide permanent, regularly spaced tent 

anchor locations to eliminate the need for tent 

stakes. 

• Replace turf with a sand-based soil system 

combined with an efficient irrigation system. 

• Design areas to support temporary events 

fencing. 

Successful event permit processing, operations, 

and management look at ways to address or 

control the impacts of high levels of use. Best 

practices include 

• Develop on-line processes for permits and 

payment. 

• Write an events policy that identifies the 

physical capacity of each area (numbers of 

people who can safely fit into the space). 

• Limit the number, location, or duration of 

events (17–21 days is typical). 

• Allow or prioritize events that have some 

relationship to specific identified goals or 

locations. 

• Schedule events at non-peak times or seasons 

to attract use when resources can absorb 

more use. 

• Require back-up plans in case of inclement or 

extreme climatic conditions (hot or cold, wet 

or dry). 

• Provide maps or onsite marking for utilities 

and infrastructure, as well as resources that 

are to be protected. 

• Build post-event recovery time into the event 

scheduling process. 

• Use a tiered permit fee system. 

• Recover the full costs to restore or repair 

areas. 

Best practices for operations and management 

during events are varied and extensive. They include: 

• Monitor events constantly and document preand post-event conditions. 

559
APPENDIXES

• Utilize checklists to record compliance with 

permits. 

• Prohibit event infrastructure or facilities 

within drip lines of trees 

• Identify locations for temporary event facilities, such as trucks with portable restrooms or 

temporary walkways. 

• Systematically provide information about and 

improve access to public transportation. 

• Close roads to accommodate events. 

• Limit events on turf or in vegetated areas. 

• After events, quickly restore areas. 

Public Access 

Pedestrian Environments — Walking environments should be safe, comfortable, convenient, 

efficient, and welcoming. 

• Provide seating, human-scale street furniture, 

and interesting pedestrian amenities that 

make walking a pleasure. 

• Ensure street crossings are safe, and use 

various traffic-calming measures. 

• Treat motorists and pedestrians equitably; for 

example, make waits at stoplights equal for 

both pedestrians and drivers, and do not give 

vehicles priority in walkable urban areas. 

Traffic Calming — Traffic calming is the use of 

techniques such as engineering design, education, 

and enforcement to reduce traffic speeds and 

improve conditions for nonmotorized users. 

• Provide speed humps, raised crosswalks, 

raised intersections, textured surfaces, 

midblock crosswalks, and traffic circles at 

intersections. 

• Engineer design solutions to reduce the 

volume of vehicles in an area by controlling 

directional movement. 

Bicycling — Bicycling is a nonpolluting, healthy 

and sustainable mode of transportation, as well as a 

recreational activity. 

• Promote bicycling through more equitable 

use of road space by converting some road 

lanes to bike use. 

• Provide bike racks along with other should be 

provided, along with close-in bicycle parking 

spaces and valet parking for events. 

• Give priority to clearing snow from bike trails. 

• Foster bike-sharing rental programs to make 

bicycling more convenient. 

Public Transportation — Better public transportation access equates with improved quality of life 

and better environmental quality. 

• Facilitate connections between different 

modes of transit (subways, buses). 

• Increase bicycle use and alternative public 

transportation as important components of 

sustainable, green urban areas. 

• Use transit-oriented development to reduce 

automobile dependency and emphasize 

pedestrian-friendly experiences, quality of 

public spaces, place identity and character, 

and sustainable development. 

• Concentrate development along transit 

corridors, generally within a 10-minute walk 

from subway, light rail, heavy rail, or 

commuter stations or along heavily used bus 

or bus rapid transit corridors. 

Travel Demand Management — The goal of 

travel demand management is to manage 

congestion, improve air quality, and enhance 

quality of life. 

• Reduce private vehicle use and use variable 

price parking meters. 

• Use parking controls to reduce vehicle 

numbers in urban core areas, and discourage 

less efficient automobiles through parking 

policy. 

• Provide parking cost incentives to promote 

free or close-in parking for green vehicles. 

Tour Bus Management — Best practices to 

manage tour buses include 

• Designate curbside loading / unloading areas, 

as well as prohibited parking/stopping areas. 

• Enforce time limits for stopping or idling (3–

10 minutes). 

• Provide long-term parking in peripheral areas 

or at centrally located off-street, multi-modal 

parking facilities, or provide parking locations 

with a single parking fee that allows in and out 

parking. 

• Control use through daily permits, by 

prohibiting access to some roads or requiring 

the use of designated routes, limiting the 

 560
Appendix B: Best Practices 

number of buses, and developing a tour bus 

registration system. 

• Require tour bus users to transfer to local 

transit to reduce tour bus congestion in 

certain areas. 

Visitor Experience 

Memorable visitor experiences can be created by 

considering all aspects of how visitors get to the 

park, find out where to go, learn about what they 

are seeing, and move through the site. In addition, 

providing quality places that are pleasant to be in 

can help visitors enjoy being on site, knowing that 

they are in a safe environment and that they can 

easily take care of personal needs. Onsite staff, 

settings, and programs should all support 

memorable visitor experiences. 

• Make visitor amenities (rest areas, water, 

bathrooms, food service, gift shops, and 

stroller and locker rentals) convenient, 

accessible, and sized and configured to meet 

the visitation levels on high-volume days. 

• Incorporate educational messages into 

facilities. 

• Provide many types of activities and choices 

of things to appeal to diverse users and mixed 

ages. 

• To reduce congestion, encourage use during 

non-peak time with incentives and programs, 

such as pricing breaks, advanced reservation 

systems, timed ticketing, coordination with 

tour companies, and scheduling special events 

and programs during non-peak times or at 

locations that can accommodate more use. 

• Utilize multiple types of food service, ranging 

from mobile carts, refreshment stands, 

concentration of fast food choices (food 

courts), order-ahead picnic or pickup food, 

and full service restaurants, to meet a variety 

of user needs. The recommended split 

between fast-food and full-service facilities is 

80% fast-food to 20% full service. Mobile 

carts are generally around 5% of the 80%. 

• Provide quality retail merchandise at all price 

ranges and ensure that it relates directly to the 

desired visitor experience. 

Operations and Maintenance 

Building public support and encouraging positive 

visitor behavior can help achieve higher maintenance standards. Well-maintained and clean areas 

encourage a higher standard of behavior. 

• Prominently display visitor rules of behavior, 

and provide a visible management and staff 

presence. 

• Take time to help users understand regulations, limits, and maintenance goals to help 

gain their cooperation and support. 

• Use simple but visually unobtrusive systems, 

such as flags, to identify areas closed for 

restoration. 

• To foster a greater sense of stewardship, 

involve the public in activities such as 

planting, volunteer projects, and cleanup. 

• Develop written standards of care and criteria 

for all areas and types of facilities, ensuring 

that they are clear and understandable. 

• Use photos to illustrate desired or satisfactory 

conditions as well as unsatisfactory 

conditions. Make sure all staff understand the 

desired standards or level of care and know 

their role in achieving them. 

• To ensure that standards are achieved, use 

daily checklists, surprise or scheduled walkthrough inspections, and peer reviews. 

• When feasible, use or modify recognized 

standards developed or sanctioned by 

professional associations or organizations. 

• Ensure that all staff members support 

standards through actions such as picking up 

trash. 

• Make clean and “green” the goal. 

• Assign staff to certain areas to help build pride 

as they take care of “their” site. 

• Supplement geographic area teams with quick 

response teams to address immediate and 

high-profile needs. 

• Have staff members ask visitors for immediate 

feedback that can be used to recognize good 

work as well as identify areas for 

improvement. 

• Focus employee development on needed 

skills and building expertise to handle 

prominent activities. 

• Use specialists for trees, horticulture, organic 

turf, irrigation, or display fountain pumps to 

supplement core staff functions. 

561
APPENDIXES

• Take advantage of specialized training 

programs provided by organizations with 

historic landscape preservation experience, 

such as the nonprofit Olmsted Center for 

Landscape Preservation, to draw on their 

expertise. 

• Cross train staff to maximize learning from 

best practices or to ensure a common 

knowledge and understanding of related tasks 

(e.g., grounds maintenance crews or those 

who provide directions and visitor 

information). 

• For waste management, concentrate trashgenerating activities at specific places, such as 

food service locations or refreshment stands 

so visitors will be more inclined to stay there 

to eat or take care of other needs and then 

deposit their trash and recyclables in 

appropriate receptacles. 

• Locate trash and recycling containers 

together, and make sure they have restricted 

openings so the containers are not misused. 

• Use highly visible symbols and messages on 

trash and recycling containers. 

• Locate trash and recycling containers so that 

visitors can see them clearly and are not 

tempted to litter. 

• Thank visitors for putting trash in containers, 

recycling, or picking up trash. 

• Mechanize trash and recyclable pickups to 

promote efficiency and reduce the potential 

for staff injuries. 

• Strategically locate pickup areas so they are 

easily accessible and make operations as 

efficient as possible. 

• Conduct major trash pickups at night so the 

park is clean every morning. 

• Provide regular maintenance during open 

hours. 

• Monitor use levels in facilities such as 

restrooms so that facilities are cleaned in a 

timely fashion and the desired standard of 

care is achieved. 

• Use electronic monitoring to identify 

maintenance needs (burned out light bulbs) 

or to set regular maintenance schedules (such 

as self-cleaning restrooms). 

• Create a public website to help identify 

maintenance and repair needs, as well as to 

respond to public concerns. 

• To simplify work and limit the types of 

expertise needed, standardize furnishings, 

component parts, and equipment to the 

extent feasible. 

 562
APPENDIX C: NATIONAL REGISTER PROPERTIES 

ON THE NATIONAL MALL

HISTORIC DISTRICTS NEAR PLAN AREA

17th Street 

Downtown 

East and West Potomac Park 

Federal Triangle 

Fifteenth Street Financial 

Lafayette Square 

L’Enfant Plan of the City of Washington, District 

of Columbia 

Northwest Rectangle (determined eligible) 

Pennsylvania Avenue National Historic Site 

Potomac Annex (determined eligible) 

Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway 

The Mall 

PLAN AREA — IDENTIFIED CULTURAL 

LANDSCAPES

Constitution Gardens 

D.C. War Memorial 

Lincoln Memorial Grounds 

The Mall 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial 

Washington Monument and Grounds 

Union Square 

West Potomac Park 

PLAN AREA — HISTORIC STRUCTURES

1. 56 Signers Memorial 

2. Arts of Peace (Literature & Aspiration) 

3. Arts of Peace (Music & Harvest) 

4. Braddock’s Memorial Rock Well 

5. Canal Lockkeeper’s House 

6. Capitol Reflecting Pool 

7. Constitution Avenue (Corridor) 

8. D.C. War Memorial 

9. D.C. War Memorial Pathway 

10. Downing (Andrew Jackson) Urn 

11. Ericcson (John) Monument 

12. First Airmail Flight Marker 

13. Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial 

14. George Mason Memorial 

15. George Mason Memorial — Fountain 4 

16. German American Friendship Garden 

17. Grant (General Ulysses S.) Memorial 

18. Henry (Joseph) Memorial 

19. Independence Avenue, SW (Corridor) 

20. Japanese Lantern 

21. Japanese Pagoda 

22. Jefferson Drive, SW 

23. Jefferson Memorial 

24. Jefferson Memorial — Statue 

25. Jefferson Pier 

26. Jones (John Paul) Memorial 

27. Korean War Veterans Memorial 

28. Kutz Memorial Bridge 

29. Lady Bird Johnson Beautification Program 

Plaque 

30. Lincoln Memorial — Approachway 

31. Lincoln Memorial 

 a. Alaska-Hawaii Stone 

 b. MLK Inscription 

32. Lincoln Memorial — Statue 

33. Lockkeeper’s House — Plaque 

34. Lockkeeper’s House — Mounting Block 

35. Madison Drive, NW 

36. Mall — Olmsted Lights 

37. National Grange Marker 

563
APPENDIXES

38. Reflecting Pool (Lincoln) 

39. Stone Seawalls — West Potomac Park 

40. Survey Lodge 

41. Sylvan Theatre 

42. Tidal Basin 

43. Tidal Basin Seawalls 

44. Tidal Basin — Inlet Bridge 

45. Tidal Basin — Outlet Bridge 

46. Union Square 

47. Bulfinch Gatepost (East) 

48. Bulfinch Gatepost (West) 

49. Vietnam Veteran’s Memorial 

 a. In Memory Plaque 

50. Vietnam Veteran’s Memorial — Statue 

51. Women’s Vietnam Veteran’s Memorial 

52. Washington Monument 

 a. Washington Monument Dedication 

Plaque 

 b. Elevation Benchmark 

53. Washington Monument Lodge 

54. Watergate Steps 

55. World War II Memorial 

56. Constitution Avenue Belvedere 

57. Parkway Drive / Rock Creek and Potomac 

Parkway 

58. Constitution Gardens 

ADDITIONAL NPS RESOURCES NEARBY

59. Meade (General George C.) Statue 

60. Mellon (Andrew) Park — Fountain 

61. Mellon (Andrew) Park — Bench 

62. Cuban American Friendship Urn 

63. Stone Seawalls — East Potomac Park 

64. U.S. Engineer’s Storehouse — East Potomac 

Park 

GEORGE WASHINGTON MEMORIAL 

PARKWAY

65. Memorial Bridge 

66. Arts of War (Sacrifice) 

67. Arts of War (Valor)

 564
Appendix C: National Register Properties on the National Mall 

map 1 

11x17 

565
This page has been left blank intentionally. 
Appendix C: National Register Properties on the National Mall 

map 2 

11x17 

567
This page has been left blank intentionally. 
Appendix C: National Register Properties on the National Mall 

map 3 

11x17 

569
This page has been left blank intentionally. 
APPENDIX D: PARK FACILITIES GUIDANCE 

POLICY GUIDANCE

The National Park Service provides visitor and 

administrative facilities and has policy guidance that 

relates to park facilities. The NPS Management 

Policies 2006 address park facilities in chapter 9, 

which begins with the following statement. 

The National Park Service will provide visitor 

and administrative facilities that are necessary, 

appropriate, and consistent with the conservation of park resources and values. Facilities 

will be harmonious with park resources, compatible with natural processes, [a]esthetically 

pleasing, functional, energy- and water-efficient, 

cost-effective, universally designed, and as 

welcoming as possible to all segments of the 

population. NPS facilities and operations will 

demonstrate environmental leadership by 

incorporating sustainable practices to the maximum extent practicable in planning, design, 

siting, construction, and maintenance. 

NECESSARY AND APPROPRIATE FACILITIES

Policy. Visitor facilities for park use and enjoyment 

will be limited to what is necessary and appropriate 

(Management Policies 2006, sec. 9.3). Necessary and 

appropriate are important criteria for determining 

whether facilities are needed. Park managers should 

consider whether a facility needs to be located 

within the park, or whether it could be provided or 

located outside the park boundary. Policies recommend that public input be sought at the earliest 

stages of decision-making, particularly in those areas 

where controversy is likely (Management Policies 

2006, sec. 9.1.1). Guidance is provided for specific 

types of facilities. 

Background. The National Mall provides a limited 

number and variety of visitor facilities, such as restrooms, food service facilities, bookstores, information stations, and retail. Many are located at or near 

memorials. In addition there are numerous smallscale site furnishings, such as seating, orientation 

maps, signs, and lighting. 

Public facilities are also provided at adjacent visitor 

destinations, such as museums, galleries, and the 

National Archives. Adjacent destinations typically 

provide information, restrooms, a variety of food 

service, and merchandise (books, retail, postcards, 

convenience items) related to their purpose or 

theme. However, visitors need to clear security 

checkpoints to use these facilities, and hours of 

operation are shorter than on the National Mall. 

The park has received repeated complaints about 

the lack, location, and quality of facilities. When 

planning for the National Mall plan began in 

November 2006, the National Park Service sought 

public comment on necessary and appropriate 

facilities. 

Best Practices. In order to limit the development 

footprint, a best practice is to co-locate visitor 

services such as restrooms, bookstores, food, and 

retail. Additionally, it is a best practice to merge 

information, stewardship messages, and education 

throughout all visitor facilities, including restrooms. 

LOCATION OF FACILITIES

Policy. A preferred location for visitor facilities 

within park boundaries minimizes impacts on 

resources and should be situated to stimulate use of 

alternative transportation systems, bicycle routes, 

and pedestrian walkways. Facility locations should 

be identified in an approved plan (Management 

Policies 2006, sec. 9.1.1.2). 

Management facilities will be located outside the 

park whenever necessary functions can be adequately supported. When located inside the park, 

they will be located away from primary resources 

and features so as not to adversely affect resources 

and values or to detract from visitor experience. 

Historic properties will be adaptively reused (i.e., 

used for another purpose) to the maximum extent 

practicable if it does not affect their significance 

(Management Policies 2006, sec. 9.4). 

Background. The National Mall facilities are 

generally located in accordance with policy, and 

several historic buildings are being adaptively reused 

for visitor services and office space. Because walking 

is the primary means of visiting multiple destinations 

on the National Mall, it is important to understand 

reasonable walking distances and necessary 

pedestrian site furnishings. Reasonable walking 

distances are assumed to range from 800 feet to 

1,700 feet (1/3 mile) for most visitors. 

 571
APPENDIXES

HARMONIOUS, AESTHETICALLY PLEASING 

FACILITIES

Policy. If determined necessary within park boundaries, facilities will be integrated into the park 

landscape with sustainable designs and systems to 

minimize environmental impacts. Development or 

facilities will not compete with or dominate park 

features. Any desired cohesive design theme will 

reflect the park’s purpose and character, whether 

for the whole park or an individual developed area 

(Management Policies 2006, sec. 9.1.1.2). 

When important cultural resources are present, 

efforts will be made to use existing contributing 

structures. New structures will harmonize with the 

area and the cultural resources in proportion, color, 

and texture. No attempt will be made to duplicate or 

mimic a historic design, nor will any modern construction be portrayed to the public as being historic. However, vernacular styles of architecture are 

appropriate when they provide visual compatibility 

with the cultural landscape (Management Policies 

2006, sec. 9.1.1.3). 

Background / Existing Character. The character 

of Washington, D.C., and the National Mall is monumental and symbolic. Much of the character can be 

traced to the historic L’Enfant and McMillan plans, 

which identified locations for iconic structures such 

as the U.S. Capitol and the Lincoln Memorial. Each 

monument or memorial and its surrounding area 

have a unique character and may contain or provide 

facilities for visitors such as information, exhibits, 

restrooms, bookstores, or retail. In two cases 

historic structures (Monument Lodge and Survey 

Lodge at the Washington Monument) have been 

adaptively reused to provide visitor information, 

bookstores, and restrooms. 

There are three general architectural styles of park 

facilities: 

• Circular, flat roofed, restroom buildings date 

from the 1970s and are located on the Washington Monument grounds and at Constitution Gardens and Ash Woods. The exterior 

finishes and building sizes vary, and the 

modern design is not harmonious or sensitive 

to the context of the historic landscape. 

• Small circular structures with metal roofs 

have been used for information and refreshment stands. While the roofs are higher 

quality materials, they project a somewhat 

circus tent appearance, and the exterior walls 

are painted. 

• The most recent architectural style for visitor 

service facilities is a simple, square cruciform 

with hipped copper metal roofs, wood trim, 

and stucco walls. There are several variations 

and sizes on the National Mall. The quality, 

materials, colors, texture, scale, and detailing 

are compatible with the historic landscape. 

Smaller scale site furnishings are diverse and reflect 

numerous uncoordinated designs. There are more 

than 1,000 benches or chairs in 10 or more styles, 9 

styles of drinking fountains, 7 types of paved surfaces, and 8 types of trash containers. There are 

more than 1,000 light fixtures, with different sizes of 

bulbs. There are also more than 400 signs, but there 

is no comprehensive pedestrian guide or wayfinding 

system. The park is currently updating the sign 

system. 

Best Practices. A cost-effective best practice is to 

use a recurring and recognizable architectural theme 

for visitor facilities. An easily identifiable style 

improves visitor experiences because visitors know 

what to look for, making them more self-sufficient 

and increasing their comfort level. High-quality and 

context-sensitive facilities and buildings generate 

visitor respect as well as encourage stewardship 

behavior on the part of visitors and staff. 

RESTROOMS

Policy. NPS policies state that the level of use 

determines the size of facilities (Management Policies 

2006, sec. 9.3.3). 

Background. As a biological and public health 

necessity, restrooms within parks are both necessary 

and appropriate. The fact that the National Mall is a 

large area with multiple destinations, consistently 

high levels of visitation, and a number of large 

annual celebrations and events underscores the 

need for restrooms. 

There are 10 restrooms west of 15th Street, including 5 that are within or part of memorials (the 

Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, World War II, and 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt memorials) and 2 that 

are within information areas or bookstores (at the 

Washington Monument Lodge and Survey Lodge). 

These restrooms have 102 toilets (including 23 

urinals). Family restrooms are provided in three 

locations (Survey Lodge and the World War II and 

Thomas Jefferson memorials). There are no NPS 

public restrooms east of 15th Street. While restrooms are available in nearby museums (see Table 

D-1), as previously mentioned users must go 

 

572
Appendix D: Park Facilities Guidance 

through a security checkpoint and the hours of 

operation are limited. 

TABLE D-1: PUBLIC RESTROOM AVAILABILITY 

ON AND NEAR THE NATIONAL MALL

Number of Toilets / Urinals 

Women Men Family Total 

National Park Service 52 46 4 102 

Adjacent Museums 

and the National 

Archives 299 307 129 735 

NOTE: This count does not include the Capitol Visitor Center, 

which will also have food service, restrooms, and retail. 

TABLE D-2: NATIONAL GUIDELINES FOR PUBLIC RESTROOM 

FACILITIES

 American Restroom Association Guidelines 

Hourly 

Visitation 

Toilets/Urinals 

for Men 

Toilets for 

Women 

<500 1/2 6 

500–1,000 2/4 9 

1,000–2,000 4/8 12 

2,000–3,000 6/15 18 

3,000–5,000 8/25 30 

 International Plumbing Code Guidelines 

Ratio of Facilities to Visitors 

Men Women Generic 

Assembly Areas 1/125 1/65 

Restaurants 1/75 

Transportation 

Facilities 

1/500 

 National Standard Plumbing Code Guidelines 

Number of 

Facilities for 

Men 

Number of 

Facilities for 

Women 

Outdoor Assembly / Fairs (peak hour) 

400 6 10 

2,600 8 14 

20,000 64 130 

40,000 132 263 

60,000 199 396 

Museums, Exhibits, Food Courts 

100 2 2 

300 2 3 

900 5 9 

1,500 7 13 

3,000 11 21 

Visitors are generally equally divided between males 

and females (a comprehensive survey in 2003 

showed 51% of visitors were female). No restrooms 

are available near food service, a common 

requirement to support good public hygiene. 

Best Practices. Several standards may provide 

useful guidance about the distribution and number 

of restrooms needed. One common best practice is 

to co-locate drinking fountains near restrooms. 

According to the National Standard Plumbing Code, 

there should be one drinking fountain for every 

1,000 visitors. 

The National Recreation and Park Association’s 

Park, Recreation and Leisure Facility Site Planning 

Guidelines recommend that restrooms be located 

every 800 feet (1,000 feet at a maximum) at major 

tourist sites (such as National Mall memorials) and 

adjacent to food service. Restrooms should be 

located near entries at minor tourist sites (smaller or 

single destinations that attract tourists), or every 

1,000 feet when minor tourist sites are dispersed. 

According to the American Restroom Association, 

for outdoor sites with more than 2,000 visitors daily, 

the maximum distance between public restrooms is 

0.3 mile. At highly visited theme parks, such as 

Disneyworld, with very densely concentrated 

attractions, restrooms are located every 300 feet. 

The American Restroom Association, the National 

Standard Plumbing Code, and the International 

Plumbing Code have criteria for numbers of toilets 

and urinals (see Table D-2). Typically more facilities 

should be provided for women than for men. 

Considering the National Plumbing Code, the 

National Mall may be most comparable to the 

category of museums / exhibits / food courts, or 

outdoor assembly areas / fairs. 

FOOD SERVICES

Policy. Food and lodging may be provided if 

necessary and appropriate to achieve the park 

purpose, or in-park facilities or services may be 

justified when the distance and travel time are too 

great or leaving the park would detract from the 

overall visitor experience (Management Policies 

2006, sec. 9.3.2) 

Background. The pedestrian nature of the National 

Mall justifies the need for food service. Distances to 

facilities off the National Mall are not convenient for 

visitors during the day, and the capacity of food 

service venues at adjacent museums and the 

National Archives is limited (see Table D-3). 

Currently the National Mall has 10 refreshment 

stands (none with restrooms located nearby), which 

also provide retail/souvenirs and convenience items

such as rain ponchos, film, water bottles, and 

aspirin. Seven refreshment stands have outdoor 

573
APPENDIXES

seating. Refreshment stands are supplemented by 

mobile food carts during the peak season. 

A restaurant was planned and approved in the 1970s 

for Constitution Gardens but was not built because 

of inadequate funding. Commercial service plans 

examine in more detail the feasibility of alternative 

services. 

Best Practices. The National Recreation and Park 

Association emphasizes that “eating out for pleasure 

is one of the primary leisure activities of many 

people” and that indoor and outdoor restaurants 

(food service) can enhance the visitor experience. 

Encouraging people to linger at food service locations can help concentrate waste at these locations 

and help protect memorials. (Recently, eating and 

drinking near cultural tourist destinations in Italy, 

such as memorials and fountains, were restricted for 

preservation reasons.) To get people to linger, 

pleasant environments, amenities, and seating are 

essential. 

VISITOR CENTERS

Legislation. A law enacted in 2003 prohibits the 

addition of visitor centers within the Reserve, which 

contains the National Mall, except for the Vietnam 

Veterans Memorial Center, which was authorized in 

that same law. The memorial center is to provide for 

appropriate educational and interpretive functions. 

Policy. Visitor centers may be provided when 

needed for visitor information and interpretive 

services. Visitor centers are not substitutes for onsite interpretation and will be constructed only 

when it has been determined that indoor media are 

the most effective means of communicating major 

elements of the park story. The size and scope of 

visitor centers will be evaluated using an NPS 

planning model tool (Management Policies 2006, sec. 

9.3.1.3). 

Visitor centers may provide indoor media, audiovisual programs, museums, museum collection 

storage, exhibits, information services, sales of 

educational materials and theme-related items, selfhelp programs, and spaces necessary for highquality visitor experiences (Management Policies 

2006, sec. 9.3.1.3). 

Visitor centers have traditionally been used to 

encourage visitors to explore a full range of park 

resources. NPS visitor centers have been located 

near park entrances or near special attractions to 

provide an overview of resources, educate visitors 

about park resources, and inform visitors about the 

range of opportunities. Additionally, parks may have 

outdoor education areas, orientation / welcome 

areas, and amphitheaters. Today, there is 

widespread availability of websites that facilitate 

advance planning, understanding of park resources, 

and an overview of visitor opportunities. Multipurpose facilities provide information and 

education that may be integrated with other visitor 

services. 

TABLE D-3: PUBLIC FOOD SERVICE AT ADJACENT 

MUSEUMS AND THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES

Venue Seating 

Café/Food Courts 1,155 

Restaurants 824 

Outdoor Cafés 116 

Total Seating 2,095 

Outdoor Carts 5 locations 

NOTE: Does not include the Capitol Visitor Center, 

which will have food service, restrooms, and retail. 

Background. A National Visitor Center was provided at Union Station for the 1976 Bicentennial but 

was later removed. When the Washington 

Monument was restored, a temporary visitor center 

was provided. Neither of these facilities proved to be 

well used. 

There is no single entry point to the National Mall, 

and destinations are widespread, with visitors 

primarily walking to them. NPS information and 

education has been provided at major memorial 

destinations — the Thomas Jefferson Memorial, the 

Washington Monument, the Lincoln Memorial, the 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial, the World War II 

Memorial, the Korean War Veterans Memorial, and 

the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial. Temporary and permanent wayside exhibits have been 

provided, along with small audiovisual components, 

at the Thomas Jefferson and Lincoln memorials, and 

interactive components have been provided at the 

World War II and Korean War Veterans memorials. 

Maps, area brochures, educational wayside panels, 

onsite radio information, guided walks, scheduled 

programs, and cell-phone tours are other means of 

providing information. Additional educational 

waysides are being developed. Currently, a cohesive 

system of National Mall signs, orientation maps, and 

pedestrian guide signs is being developed to update 

orientation signs and maps and to provide wayfinding information. 

The Smithsonian Metro station is a primary pedestrian entrance to the National Mall. Surrounding 

museums and galleries also provide visitor 

information. 

 

574
Appendix D: Park Facilities Guidance 

Best Practices. A best practice is to provide some 

level of information, stewardship messages, and 

education at all visitor facilities. Traditional visitor 

centers, with auditoriums and extensive media or 

museum exhibits, have been occasionally replaced 

by open air facilities that provide these functions. 

ACCESSIBILITY FOR PERSONS WITH 

DISABILITIES

Policy. New and altered facilities will be accessible 

and comply with accessibility standards. They will 

incorporate universal design (Management Policies 

2006, sec. 9.1.1) and be accessible and usable to the 

greatest extent reasonable (Management Policies 

2006, sec. 9.1.2). 

Background. Some memorials have elevators to 

provide access for visitors with disabilities. Wheelchairs are available upon request. The park provides 

more parking for the disabled than standards 

require, and staff are working to improve the park 

website to make it accessible for people with visual 

disabilities. 

SUSTAINABLE PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES 

Policy. The National Park Service will incorporate 

sustainable principles and practices into design, 

siting, construction, building materials, utility 

systems, recycling of all unusable materials, and 

waste management (Management Policies 2006, sec. 

9.1.3). 

Reduced greenhouse gases and improved energy 

efficiency are required for all facility designs. The 

incorporation of solar, photovoltaic, insulation, and 

glazing strategies, along with energy-efficient 

lighting and appliances and renewable energy 

technologies, are also recommended. Visitors 

should be educated about sustainable approaches. 

All projects must incorporate LEED (Leadership in 

Energy and Environmental Design) standards to 

achieve a silver level (Management Policies 2006, sec. 

9.1.1.6). 

Background. Refreshment stands near the Lincoln 

Memorial, completed in 2006 and 2007, meet these 

standards and include geothermal technology for 

cooling and ice making, saving millions of gallons of 

water annually. 

Public comments indicate a common expectation 

that the government and the National Park Service 

should set an example of using sustainable, green 

development, including recycling. The park is 

working with the Environmental Protection Agency 

to examine trash makeup, identify ways to reduce 

waste, and improve recycling and solid waste 

management on a daily basis as well as during 

events. 

Best Practices. Capital cities are expected to 

exemplify wise or sustainable development. 

Efficient solid waste management systems utilize 

mechanized trash pickup, locate trash containers 

conveniently along visual lines of sight, use strong 

stewardship education messages, co-locate recycling 

and trash containers, but focus recycling containers 

near areas where recyclable materials are generated. 

Also, trash and recycling containers should be 

available in various sizes to meet demands in 

different areas, and they should be designed in 

coordinated, attractive styles so that they are 

immediately recognizable.

575
APPENDIX E: DRAFT STATEMENT OF FINDINGS 

FOR FLOODPLAINS

Draft 

Statement of Findings 

for 

Executive Order 11988: Floodplain Management 

Management Plan 

The National Mall 

Washington, D.C. 

 576
APPENDIXES

Executive Order 11988 (“Floodplain Management”) 

requires the National Park Service and other agencies to evaluate the likely impacts of actions in 

floodplains. This statement of findings (SOF) has 

been prepared to comply with EO 11988. 

In managing floodplains on park lands, the National 

Park Service policy is to (1) manage for the preservation of floodplain values; (2) minimize potentially 

hazardous conditions associated with flooding; and 

(3) comply with the NPS Organic Act and all other 

federal laws and Executive Orders related to the 

management of activities in flood-prone areas 

(Management Policies Sec. 4.6.4). This SOF is 

considered a part of the Environmental Impact 

Assessment associated with the National Mall Plan. 

PROPOSED ACTION

The National Park Service would propose to impleent the preferred alternative of the National Mall 

Plan / Environmental Impact Statement. 

The National Mall Plan performs two critical functions for Park Service managers. First, by describing 

specific desirable resource conditions and visitor 

experiences for the National Mall, it establishes a 

clear direction for management of resources and 

visitation. Second, the management plan provides a 

framework to guide park management decisionmaking for up to 50 years. The National Mall Plan

was developed in consultation with interested 

parties including federal, state, and local agencies as 

well as the public. 

The plan provides overall direction for park management but specific actions needed to implement 

the plan will be provided in subsequent plans. 

Because the plan is general in nature, floodplain 

analysis is also general. Site-specific environmental 

analysis would be completed for individual actions 

prescribed in the plan. 

The preferred alternative would continue use and 

retain existing facilities in floodplain areas within 

the park. Three additional visitor facilities are 

planned within the floodplain. Other construction 

would be replacement of existing facilities. Land use 

patterns and visitation levels would not change 

appreciably from current situations. 

SITE DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND

The National Mall is located along the Atlantic seaboard. The majority of precipitation comes in the 

form of rains with some typically minor winter 

snows. Extended storms are capable of dropping 

several inches of rain in a 24 to 48 hour period which 

can cause temporary flooding of low-lying areas. 

Floodplains in the planning area are associated with 

the Potomac and Anacostia rivers. Most of the 

southern portions of the planning area were created 

from fill dredged from the rivers or the Washington 

Channel. These areas remain as low-elevation flats 

within the identified floodplains. Occasionally, 

extreme high tides will result in a tidal flow up the 

Potomac River from Chesapeake Bay and cause 

overflowing of the river banks or the Tidal Basin. 

High water events have led to inundation of relatively small areas of open lawns and playing fields. 

The Federal Emergency Management Agency 

(FEMA) has identified 100-year and 500-year flood 

hazard areas in the District of Columbia (floodplains 

map, the 500-year floodplain is slightly larger than 

that shown). 

Development within the floodplains include primary 

and secondary roads, monuments, visitor services 

(restrooms, information kiosks, food services, etc.), 

sidewalks, and park operation facilities. Some structures are historic and moving them would be considered an adverse effect. The Lincoln Memorial, 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial, and Washington 

Monument are built on elevated ground and are out 

of the floodplain. 

These facilities are determined to be in Action Class 

I according to the definitions in Director’s Order 77-

2: “Class I includes the location or construction of 

administrative, residential, warehouse and maintenance buildings, non-excepted parking lots or other 

man-made features, which by their nature entice or 

require individuals to occupy the site, are prone to 

flood damage, or result in impacts to natural floodplain values. Actions in this class are subject to the 

floodplain policies and procedures if they lie within 

the 100-year regulatory floodplain (the base 

floodplain).” 

JUSTIFICATION FOR CONTINUED USE OF THE 

FLOODPLAIN

As described above, some of the park development 

is in the 100-year or 500-year floodplains. Development and public use in these areas has been in place 

for many years. The situations that lead up to 

flooding of the rivers, and the scope and duration of 

high water events are well known by park staff. 

Actions proposed in the preferred alternative 

include the retention of roads, monuments, visitor 

services, and park operation facilities within 100-

 577
APPENDIXES

FIGURE SOF-1. FLOODPLAINS MAP

year and 500-year floodplains. The facilities are 

historically and functionally dependent on their 

locations. 

Moving entire developed areas out of the 

floodplains would be cost-prohibitive and would 

adversely affect historic resources. 

SPECIFIC FLOOD RISKS

Conditions associated with flooding in the locations 

discussed in this statement are not considered particularly hazardous to people or property. Flooding 

generally occurs gradually in the planning area as a 

result of prolonged rainfall, making warning and 

evacuation a practical option for protection of 

human life. 

Park development in the floodplains has been in 

place for many decades and the situations, scope, 

and duration of flooding of the rivers are well 

known by park staff. The timing, depth, and velocity 

of floodwaters will be considered when preparing 

evacuation plans. 

An evacuation plan would be prepared to identify 

high ground safe areas and evacuation routes for 

each area of visitor concentration. In the event that 

it should become necessary to evacuate visitors and 

NPS personnel, it could be readily accomplished 

along the many access roads. 

There would be no additional storage facilities for 

fuels or toxic materials, or museum collections in a 

floodplain as a result of the preferred alternative. 

MITIGATION

The National Park Service is working with the 

District of Columbia and the Army Corps of 

Engineers to implement flood control measures by 

creating a movable barrier across 17th Street. This 

will complete a raised levee and help prevent flood-

 

578
Appendix E: Draft Statement of Findings for Floodplains 

waters from inundating the northern side of the 

National Mall and the adjacent neighborhood. 

An evacuation plan for each developed area in a 

floodplain would be prepared to identify high 

ground safe areas and evacuation strategies. Water 

levels would be monitored by park staff and, if 

flooding is imminent, visitors would be informed of 

evacuation procedures. 

No major new construction in floodplains is prescribed in the preferred alternative. Nonetheless, 

site-specific environmental analysis would be 

conducted for all construction and would address 

potential impacts to floodplains. 

SUMMARY

The National Park Service has determined that 

implementing the preferred alternative would not 

result in any additional disruption of floodplains. 

Risk to life from flooding is minimal and can be 

mitigated. The National Park Service would allow 

existing structures to remain in their current 

locations because there are no reasonable alternative 

locations. Three additional visitor facilities are 

planned within the floodplain. Other construction 

would be replacement of existing facilities. Water 

levels would continue to be monitored by park staff. 

Visitors would be informed of changes caused by 

heavy precipitation events through regular interpretation and local media. 

Therefore, the proposed action would not have any 

additional adverse impacts on floodplains and their 

associated values. 

The environmental impact statement, this statement 

of findings for Executive Order 11988, and the 

signed record of decision would complete the 

requirements of the National Environmental Policy 

Act for the National Mall Plan.

STATEMENT OF FINDINGS REFERENCES: 

Office of the President 

1980 Executive Order 11988” Floodplain 

Management (May 28, 1980). 

National Park Service 

2003 Director’s Order 77-2: Floodplain 

Management. Washington, D.C. 

2006 Management Policies. Washington D.C.

579
GLOSSARY

Accessibility — Buildings, facilities, and programs 

are required to be made accessible to people with 

disabilities. Legislation that provides for this includes: the Architectural Barriers Act of 1968, the 

Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the 1984 Uniform 

Federal Accessibility Standards, and the Americans 

with Disabilities Act of 1990.

Architect of the Capitol — The Architect of the 

Capitol manages the U.S. Capitol Building, the 

Senate and House office buildings, the U.S. 

Supreme Court, the Library of Congress buildings, 

and the U.S. Botanic Garden, as well as Pennsylvania and Maryland avenues between 1st and 3rd 

streets. 

Area I and Area II — These are the areas designated in the Commemorative Works Act that are 

north and south of the Reserve and where 

commemorative works may be sited. 

Area of potential effect — The geographic area or 

areas within which an undertaking could directly 

or indirectly cause changes in the character or use 

of historic properties. The area of potential effects 

is influenced by the scale and nature of the undertaking and may be different for different kinds of 

effects caused by the undertaking. 

Assessment of effect — Documentation to assist in 

completing the activities required under 36 CFR 

800.5, “Assessment of Adverse Effects.” This documentation applies the criteria of adverse effect to 

each property that is within the area of potential 

effect and that is eligible for listing on the National 

Register of Historic Places. 

Best management practice / best practice — A 

technique or methodology that, through experience and research, has proven to reliably lead to a 

desired result. Best management practices may 

include schedules for activities, prohibitions, maintenance guidelines, and other management 

practices. 

Choosing by Advantages — A process by which 

the differences of advantages for alternatives and 

their related costs are compared, ranked, and rated 

in order to make better and trackable decisions. 

The process can be used to develop alternatives 

that combine advantages from several alternatives 

while working to reduce associated costs.

Civic art — Art that is displayed in public spaces 

for the enjoyment of the people. In the case of the 

National Mall study area, civic art includes the 

present landscape design, which is based on the 

L’Enfant and McMillan plans, plus commemorative works, water features, and landscaped 

areas.

Commemorative work — As defined in the 

Commemorative Works Act, “any statue, monument, sculpture, plaque, memorial, inscription, or 

other structure or landscape feature, including a 

garden or memorial grove, designed to perpetuate 

the memory of an individual, group, event, or other 

significant element of history.” 

Commemorative Works Act (40 USC 8901 et 

seq.) — This is the federal law that governs the 

establishment and placement of commemorative 

works and memorials on the lands administered by 

the National Park Service and the General Service 

Administration in Washington, D.C. and a portion 

of northern Virginia. The purposes of the act are: 

(a) to preserve the integrity of the comprehensive design of the L’Enfant and 

McMillan plans for the Nation’s Capital; 

(b) to ensure the continued public use and 

enjoyment of open space in the District of 

Columbia; 

(c) to preserve, protect, and maintain the limited 

amount of open space available to residents 

of, and visitors to, the Nation’s Capital; and 

(d) to ensure that future commemorative works 

in areas administered by the National Park 

Service and the General Services 

Administration in the District of Columbia 

and its environs (1) are appropriately 

designed, constructed, and located, and (2) 

reflect a consensus of the lasting national 

significance of the subjects involved. 

Conservation (management) zoning — Zones or 

districts that correspond to a description of the 

desired resource and visitor experience conditions 

for each area of a park. Management zoning will 

outline the criteria for (or describe the kind of) 

appropriate uses and facilities necessary to support 

these desired conditions. Some desired conditions 

may apply throughout a park, but the delineation 

of management zones will illustrate where there are 

differences in intended resource conditions, visitor 

experiences, and management activities (NPS 

2006e, sec. 2.3.1.2). 

 580
Glossary 

Consulting parties — Vested organizations who 

under section 106 of the National Historic 

Preservation Act provide input in protecting 

cultural resources. 

Cooperating agency — Any federal or local 

agency involved in joint planning conducted 

pursuant to the National Environmental Policy 

Act. 

Cultural landscape — As defined by the National 

Park Service, a geographic area, including both 

cultural and natural resources and the wildlife or 

domestic animals therein, associated with a historic 

event, activity, or person or exhibiting other 

cultural or aesthetic values. There are four general 

kinds of cultural landscape, not mutually exclusive: 

• Historic site: a landscape significant for its 

association with a historic event, activity, or 

person. 

• Historic designed landscape: a landscape significant as a design or work of art; was 

consciously designed and laid out either by a 

master gardener, landscape architect, architect, or horticulturist to a design principle, or 

by an owner or other amateur according to a 

recognized style or tradition; has a historical 

association with a significant person, trend or 

movement in landscape gardening or architecture, or a significant relationship to the 

theory or practice of landscape architecture. 

• Historic vernacular landscape: a landscape 

whose use, construction, or physical layout 

reflects endemic traditions, customs, beliefs, 

or values; in which the expression of cultural 

values, social behavior, and individual actions 

over time is manifested in physical features 

and materials and their interrelationships, 

including patterns of spatial organization, 

land use, circulation, vegetation, structures, 

and objects; in which the physical, biological, 

and cultural features reflect the customs and 

everyday lives of people. 

• Ethnographic landscape: areas containing a 

variety of natural and cultural resources that 

associated people define as heritage 

resources, including plant and animal 

communities, geographic features, and 

structures, each with their own special local 

names. 

Cultural resources — As defined by the National 

Park Service, any archeological or historic resource, structure, statue, memorial, museum object, district, or landscape related to areas under 

NPS management. Resources over 50 years old and 

determined to have local, regional, or national 

significance may be listed on the National Register 

of Historic Places. 

Cumulative effects (impacts) — Effects on the 

environment that result from the incremental 

impacts of an action when added to other past, 

present, and reasonably foreseeable actions, 

regardless of which agency (federal or non-federal) 

or person undertakes such actions. Cumulative 

effects can result from individually minor, but 

collectively significant, actions taking place over a 

period of time. 

East Potomac Park — Three hundred and thirty 

acres of recreational open space managed by the 

National Mall and Memorial Parks south of the 

14th Street Bridges to Hains Point. This area is not 

included in the planning study area. East Potomac 

Park, with its golf course, swimming pool, picnic 

areas, and thousands of cherry trees, was never 

considered part of the National Mall, and is not 

included in the planning study area. 

Environmental impact statement (EIS) — A 

detailed analysis document that is prepared by a 

federal agency pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) when a federally 

proposed action or alternatives have the potential 

for significant impacts on the human environment. 

Federal Triangle — A triangular site bounded by 

Pennsylvania Avenue, Constitution Avenue, and 

15th Street. Ten structures designed by different 

architects are located on the site, including the Old 

Post Office and the District Building, which were 

constructed between 1899 and 1908. The rest were 

constructed between 1926 and the 1930s except for 

the Ronald Reagan Building and International 

Trade Center, which was designed and constructed 

in the 1990s. The planning for the Federal Triangle 

was one of the last City Beautiful efforts on such a 

monumental scale in the nation.

First Amendment — The First Amendment to the 

United States Constitution protects the rights of 

freedom of speech and assembly. 

Historic district — A significant concentration, 

linkage, or continuity of sites, buildings, structures, 

or objects united historically or aesthetically by 

plan or physical development. 

Historic site — The location of a significant event, 

a prehistoric or historic occupation or activity, or a 

building or structure, whether standing, ruined, or 

vanished, where the location itself possesses his581
GLOSSARY

toric, cultural, or archeological value regardless of 

the value of any existing structure.

Maintainability — “The relative ease and 

economy of time and resources with which an item 

can be retained in, or restored to, a specified 

condition when maintenance is performed by 

personnel having specified skill levels, using 

prescribed procedures and resources, at each 

prescribed level of maintenance and repair. In this 

context, it is a function of design” (U.S. Department of Defense 1997). Design for maintainability 

requires a product that is serviceable (must be easily 

repaired) and supportable (must be cost-effectively 

kept in or restored to a usable condition); it is 

better yet if the design includes a durability feature 

called reliability (absence of failures). 

Mall — The area west of the United States Capitol 

between Madison and Jefferson Drives from 1st to 

14th streets NW/SW. The east end of the Mall 

from 1st to 3rd streets NW/SW between Pennsylvania Avenue and Maryland Avenue and is also 

known as Union Square. The Mall is characterized 

by the east-west stretch of lawn bordered by rows 

of American elm trees. The Mall is managed by the 

National Mall and Memorial Parks. 

Management Policies — The NPS directive 

governing management of the national park 

system. The current version is Management Policies 

2006. 

Management area — A planning term used by the 

National Park Service when referring to statements 

about desired resource conditions and visitor 

experiences, along with appropriate kinds and 

levels of management, use, and development for 

each park area. 

Monumental core — A large area of land in 

central Washington, D.C. extending from the U.S. 

Capitol to the Lincoln Memorial, and including the 

Washington Monument; the Jefferson and 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt memorials; the White 

House complex; and the Korean War Veterans and 

Vietnam Veterans memorials. 

Multipurpose facility — A facility that would provide more than one function, such as restrooms 

and food service/retail, or restrooms, information, 

and office space. A multipurpose space could also 

include flexible outdoor space that could be used 

for ranger programs or performances. 

National Archives — The federal repository of the 

records of the U.S. government, located between 

7th and 9th Streets NW, between Constitution and 

Pennsylvania avenues NW.

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) — The public law that requires federal 

agencies to look at alternatives for proposed major 

federal actions and to fully analyze the impacts of 

those alternatives on the human environment 

before a decision is made. 

National Gallery of Art — The National Gallery 

of Art East and West Buildings, as well as the Sculpture Garden, located between Constitution Avenue 

and Madison Drive from 3rd to 9th streets NW.

National Mall — The area comprised of the Mall, 

the Washington Monument, and West Potomac 

Park. It is managed by the National Park Service’s 

National Mall and Memorials Parks. Specifically 

the areas are: 

• the Mall, which extends from the grounds 

of the U.S. Capitol to the Washington 

Monument and include Union Square 

• the Washington Monument and its grounds 

• West Potomac Park, which is the setting for 

numerous memorials, including the Lincoln 

Memorial, the World War II Memorial, the 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial, the Vietnam 

Veterans Memorial, the Korean War 

Veterans Memorial, the Franklin Delano 

Roosevelt Memorial, and the Tidal Basin 

Often the terms National Mall and the Mall are 

used interchangeably, and map labeling and 

references to the National Mall have further 

created public confusion.

National Mall and Memorial Parks — The NPS 

manager of the National Mall, East Potomac Park, 

and many circles, squares, and smaller park areas 

within Washington, D.C. 

National Register of Historic Places — The 

comprehensive list of districts, sites, buildings, 

structures, and objects of national, regional, state, 

and local significance in American history, 

architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture 

kept by the National Park Service under authority 

of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966.

Pedestrian — A person on foot or using an 

assistive device, such as a wheelchair, electric 

scooter, or Segway®HT.

Rehabilitation — The act or process of making 

possible a compatible use for a property through 

repair, alterations, and additions while preserving 

those portions or features which convey its 

historical, cultural, or architectural values.

 

582
Glossary 

Reservation — Refers to a parcel of federal land in 

Washington, D.C., identified by its acquisition 

number. 

Reserve — As defined in the 2003 amendments to 

the Commemorative Works Act, the great crossaxis of public space that extends west from the U.S. 

Capitol to the Lincoln Memorial, and from the 

White House to the Jefferson Memorial. Congress 

declared this area to be a substantially completed 

work of civic art. 

Site furnishings — Landscape components, such 

as paving, lighting, seating, fencing (including 

bollards and post-and-chain fencing), tree grates 

and guards, trash containers, information stations, 

wayside displays, shelters, and signs. 

Smithsonian Institution — The national museums 

of the Smithsonian Institution, and related grounds 

and gardens, flank the north and south edges of the 

Mall. Museums include: 

National Museum of American History 

National Museum of Natural History 

Freer Gallery of Art 

Arthur M. Sackler Gallery 

S. Dillon Ripley Center 

National Museum of African Art 

Smithsonian Castle 

Arts and Industries Building 

Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden 

National Air and Space Museum 

National Museum of the American Indian 

National Museum of African American History 

and Culture (future) 

Social trail — A user-created trail off paved 

pathways, which may indicate an alternative 

circulation path.

Standards — Description of what is to be achieved 

for maintenance of landscapes, commemorative 

works, other facilities, education, etc. 

State historic preservation office — Office in a 

state or territorial government that administers the 

preservation programs under the National Historic 

Preservation Act.

Sustainable development — According to the 

1983 United Nations Bruntland report, “development that meets the needs of the present without 

compromising the ability of future generations to 

meet their own needs.” 

Temporary event facilities — Facilities such as 

tents, stages, staging areas, and vehicles.

Tidal Basin — A partially man-made inlet adjacent 

to the Potomac River . It is part of West Potomac 

Park and is flanked by the Jefferson Memorial on 

the south side (on axis with the White House) and 

the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial on the 

west side. The future site of the Martin Luther 

King, Jr. Memorial is on the northwest side. Cherry 

trees that were a gift of Japan were planted around 

the basin in 1912 and are now the focus of the 

National Cherry Blossom Festival. 

Traffic calming — Various measures used to slow 

traffic to the posted speed and create a safer 

circulation system for vehicles, pedestrians, 

bicyclists, and other circulation modes. 

Triangulation — A concept of using signs plus 

other park amenities, such as benches, cafés, restrooms, and path intersections, to create mini destinations in a park, where elements functioning 

together have a bigger impacts than they would 

separately. (See Project for Public Spaces at http:// 

www.pps.org/parks_plazas_squares/info/). 

Trust for the National Mall — Authorized 

fundraising partner of the National Park Service 

and dedicated to improving the appearance and 

facilities of the National Mall. 

Travel Demand Management — Programs and 

policies that reduce and manage the demand 

within transportation corridors and by transportation modes, disperse peak-period traffic, 

and/or encourage transit usage and capacity. Elements include encouraging employers to provide 

flexible work hours, staggered work schedules, and 

alternative work schedules; encouraging van and 

car pools, or bus pass programs for major employers; and creating disincentives to drive, such as 

increasing the cost of parking.

Turf — The upper stratum of soil bound by grass 

and plant roots into a thick mat. 

Union Square — The east end of the Mall from 1st 

to 3rd street NW/SW between Pennsylvania and 

Maryland Avenues and containing the Ulysses S. 

Grant Memorial and the Capitol Reflecting Pool. 

Union Station — The railroad station was 

designed by architect Daniel Burnham and opened 

on October 27, 1907, and is considered to be one of 

the finest examples of the Beaux-Arts style of 

architecture. The National Park Service manages 

the grounds. Union Station is not within the study 

area. 

User (visitor) capacity — The type and level of 

visitor use that can be accommodated while 

sustaining desired resource and visitor experience 

conditions in a park. 

583
GLOSSARY

Views and vistas — The prospect afforded by a 

range of vision in a landscape, conferred by the 

composition of other landscape characteristics and 

associated features (NPS 2001c). The National 

Park Service distinguishes views and vistas as 

follows: 

• A view is the expansive and/or panoramic 

prospect of a broad range of vision, which 

may be naturally occurring or deliberately 

contrived. 

• A vista is the controlled prospect of a discrete, linear range of vision, which is 

deliberately contrived. 

Vision — A broad philosophical statement that 

describes what a park should be with regard to 

future resource conditions and human 

experiences.

Visitor center — Visitor centers provide indoor 

media, audiovisual programs (auditoriums), 

museums, museum collection storage, exhibits, 

information services, sales of educational materials 

and theme-related items, self-help programs, and 

spaces necessary for high-quality visitor experiences (Management Policies 2006, sec. 9.3.1.3). 

Visitor facilities — Visitor facilities provide 

convenient services for visitors, such as information and education, restrooms, bookstores, food 

service, retail, and recreation equipment rentals. 

Some facilities, such as food and education, could 

be mobile (e.g., roving interpreters and refreshment carts). Existing outdoor spaces can be 

adaptively used for educational programs and 

performances. 

Washington Monument — The monument is 

located on U.S. Reservation 2, and it extends from 

14th Street NW/SW west to 17th Street NW/SW 

and from Constitution Avenue NW south to the 

intersection of Maine Avenue and Raoul 

Wallenberg Place. In addition to the giant marble 

obelisk, facilities on the grounds include the Sylvan 

Theater, Survey Lodge, and NPS ranger station. It 

is managed by the National Mall and Memorial 

Parks. 

Wayfinding — Systems of signs, maps, and other 

graphic or written materials, and audio methods, 

used to convey location, route finding, and 

directions to travelers. 

Waysides / wayside exhibits — Free-standing 

educational exhibits about park features and 

structures that provide additional historic or 

interpretive information for visitors. 

West Potomac Park — The portion of the 

National Mall west of the Washington Monument 

to the Potomac River. It contains a number of 

smaller commemorative works, along with the 

following memorials, which are managed by the 

National Mall and Memorial Parks: 

• Constitution Gardens 

• Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial 

• George Mason Memorial 

• Korean War Veterans Memorial 

• Lincoln Memorial 

• National World War II Memorial 

• Thomas Jefferson Memorial 

• Vietnam Veterans Memorial 

White House and President’s Park —U.S. Reservation 1, the northern portion of the Reserve, 

north of Constitution Avenue NW. It is managed 

by the National Park Service, but is not part of the 

National Mall and Memorial Parks. 

Witness trees — Trees that were present when an 

area was originally developed. 

 

584
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abbreviations used in text references: 

AOC Architect of the Capitol 

ASLA American Society of Landscape 

Architects 

CEQ Council on Environmental Quality 

CFA Commission of fine Arts 

FEMA Federal Emergency Management 

Agency 

NCPC National Capital Planning Commission 

NPS National Park Service 

SCS Soil Conservation Service 

US EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

USFS U.S. Forest Service 

USGS U.S. Geological Survey 

WMATA Washington Metropolitan Area Transit 

Authority 

American Society of Landscape Architects, Lady Bird 

Johnson Wildflower Center / University of Texas at 

Austin, and the United States Botanic Garden 

2008 Sustainable Sites Initiative Guidelines and 

Performance Benchmarks — Draft 2008. 

Washington, DC. http://www 

.sustainablesites.org/report/ (accessed Dec. 

4, 2008). 

American Sociological Association 

2004 “Who Counts and How: Estimating the Size 

of Protests,” by Clark McPhail and John 

McCarthy. Contexts 3 (3): 12–18. 

APPA, The Association of Higher Education Facilities 

Officers, National Recreation and Park Association, 

Professional Grounds Maintenance Society 

2001 Operational Guidelines for Grounds 

Maintenance. Ashburn VA: National 

Recreation and Park Association. 

Architect of the Capitol 

2007 Capitol Visitor Center Fact Sheet. http:// 

www.aoc.gov/cvc (accessed Mar. 26, 2009). 

Bednar, Michael 

2006 L’Enfant’s Legacy — Public Open Spaces in 

Washington, D.C. Baltimore, MD: The Johns 

Hopkins University Press 

Beatley, Timothy 

2000 Green Urbanism — Learning from European 

Cities. Washington, DC: Island Press 

Berg, Scott 

2007 Grand Avenues — The Story of the French 

Visionary Who Designed Washington, D.C.

New York: Pantheon Books 

Bosselman, Fred P., Craig A. Peterson, and Claire 

McCarthy 

1999 Managing Tourism Growth — Issues and 

Applications. Washington, DC: Island Press 

Brookings Institution 

1999 A Region Divided — The State of Growth in 

Greater Washington D.C. Washington, DC. 

Brudis & Associates, Inc. 

2006 D.C. Speed Study. Prepared for the D.C. Department of Transportation. Washington, 

DC. http://ddot.dc.gov/ddot/frames.asp 

?doc=/ddot/lib/ddot/information/maps/ 

speedstudydata_2006.pdf (accessed Jan. 7, 

2008). 

Commuter Connections 

2008 2007 State of the Commute Survey Report 

from the Metropolitan Washington DC Region.

National Capital Region Transportation 

Planning Board, Metropolitan Washington 

Council of Governments. Washington, DC. 

http://www.mwcog.org/uploads/pub 

-documents/yldZWA20080903151902.pdf 

(accessed Jan. 6, 2009). 

Cosentino, Andrew J., and Richard W. Stephenson 

1991 City of Magnificent Distances, The Nation’s 

Capital: A Checklist. Compiled with the 

assistance of Cheryl A. Regan. Washington, 

DC: Geography and Map Division, Library 

of Congress. 

Council on Environmental Quality 

1978 “Regulations for Implementing the 

Procedural Provisions of the National 

Environmental Policy Act.” Code of Federal 

Regulations, title 40, part 1500–1508. 

Washington, DC. 

Crompton, John L. 

2004 The Proximate Principle: The Impact of Parks, 

Open Space and Water Features on Residential Property Values and Property Tax Base.

Ashburn VA: National Recreation and Park 

Association. 

District of Columbia 

2003a The Anacostia Waterfront Initiative 

Framework Plan. Office of Planning. 

Washington, DC. 

2003b “Southwest Waterfront Plan Summary.” 

Office of Planning. Available at http:// 

planning.dc.gov/planning/cwp/view,a,1285 

,q,582228,planningNav_GID,1708.asp 

(accessed Nov. 2, 2006). 

585
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

2006 District of Columbia Wildlife Action Plan. 

Department of the Environment, Fisheries 

and Wildlife Division. Washington, DC. 

2007 “List of Special Status Species.” Letter to 

National Park Service. Department of the 

Environment, Fisheries and Wildlife 

Division, Washington, DC. 

2008 Center City Action Agenda 2008: Toward a 

Vibrant, Global, Washington, DC. Washington, DC. http://planning.dc.gov/ 

planning/frames.asp?doc=planning/lib/ 

planning/city-center_action_agenda/ 

the_opportunitiy.pdf (accessed Sept. 29, 

2008). 

District of Columbia, Department of Health 

2002 The District of Columbia Water Quality 

Assessment. 2002. Report to the Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Congress 

pursuant to Section 305(b), Clean Water Act 

(PL 97-117). Environmental Health Administration, Bureau of Environmental 

Quality, Water Quality Division, 

Washington, DC. 

District of Columbia, Department of Transportation 

2003a L’Enfant Promenade Urban Planning Study. 

Washington, DC. 

2003b 2002 Traffic Volumes. Traffic Services 

Administration, Washington D.C. http:// 

ddot.dc.gov/ddot/frames.asp?doc=/ddot/lib/

ddot/information/maps/trafficvolume/2002 

_citywide.pdf 

and 

 http://ddot.dc.gov/ddot/frames.asp?doc=/ 

ddot/lib/ddot/information/maps/ 

trafficvolume/2002_downtown.pdf 

(accessed Jan. 6, 2009). 

2005a District of Columbia Bicycle Master Plan. 

April. Washington, DC. 

2005b New York Avenue Corridor Study.

Washington, DC. 

2007 2006 Washington D.C. Speed Study (466 

Locations). Map. Washington, DC. http:// 

ddot.dc.gov/ddot/lib/ddot/information/ 

maps/speedstudymap_2006.pdf (accessed 

Jan. 7, 2009). 

2008a 14th Street Bridge Projects and EIS. Washington, DC. http://ddot.dc.gov/ ddot/cwp/ 

(accessed Oct. 1, 2008). 

2008b Pedestrian Master Plan: May 2008 Draft. 

Washington, DC. http://www.tooledesign 

.com/projects/dc/downloads/Draft 

%20Pedestrian%20Plan_5_19_08.pdf 

(accessed Dec. 29, 2008). 

2008c 2006 Traffic Volumes. Washignton, DC. 

http://ddot.dc.gov/ddot/frames.asp?doc=/ 

ddot/lib/ddot/information/maps/ 

trafficvolume/2006_citywide.pdf 

and 

 http://ddot.dc.gov/ddot/frames.asp?doc=/dd

ot/lib/ddot/information/maps/trafficvolume

/2006_downtown.pdf (accessed Jan. 6, 2009). 

2008d 2007 Traffic Volumes. Washington DC. 

http://ddot.dc.gov/ddot/frames.asp?doc=/ 

ddot/lib/ddot/information/maps/ 

trafficvolume/2007_citywide.pdf 

and 

 http://ddot.dc.gov/ddot/frames.asp?doc=/ 

ddot/lib/ddot/information/maps/ 

trafficvolume/2007_downtown.pdf 

(accessed Dec. 29, 2008). 

District of Columbia Recreation Board 

1972 “Facilities for Public Recreation.” Memorandum of agreement (MU 3000-9-4001) 

with the National Park Service, National 

Capital Region. Washington, DC. 

Eley, Geoff, and Ronald Grigor Suny 

1996 Becoming National — A Reader. New York:

Oxford University Press. 

Federal Emergency Management Agency 

2007 “Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), District 

of Columbia, Washington, D.C.” Panels 18c 

and 19c. 

Field, Cynthia R., Isabelle Gournay, and Thomas P. 

Somma, compilers and editors 

2007 Paris on the Potomac: The French Influence on 

the Architecture and Art of Washington, D.C. 

Athens, OH: Published for the United States 

Capitol Historical Society by the Ohio 

University Press. 

Fogg, George E., FASLA 

2005 Park, Recreation & Leisure Facilities Site 

Planning Guidelines. Ashburn VA: National 

Recreation and Park Association. 

14th Street Bridge Corridor Environmental Impact 

Statement 

2008 Purpose & Need. http://www 

.14thstreetbridgecorridoreis.com/ (accessed 

Oct. 1, 2008). 

Goode, James M., and Schiavo, Laura Burd 

2004 Rare Maps and Prints from the Albert H. Small 

Collection. Historical Society of Washington, 

D.C. 

Gutheim, Frederick 

1976 The Federal City: Plans and Realities. 

Published in cooperation with the National 

Capital Planning Commission. Washington, 

DC: Smithsonian Institution Press 

 

586
Selected Bibliography 

Gutheim, Frederick, and Antoinette J. Lee 

2006 Worthy of the Nation: Washington D.C. from 

L’Enfant to the National Capital Planning 

Commission. 2nd ed. Baltimore: The Johns 

Hopkins University Press. 

Interagency Initiative for National Mall Road 

Improvement Program 

1992 Streetscape Manual. Architectural and 

Engineering Standards Subgroup. On file at 

National Park Service, National Capital 

Region, Washington, DC. 

John G. Waite, Associates, Architects 

2006 Historic Structure Report & Cultural 

Landscape Assessment, District of Columbian 

War Memorial. Prepared for the National 

Park Service. On file at National Mall and 

Memorial Parks, Washington, DC. 

Kammen, Michael 

2006 Visual Shock: A History of Art Controversies in 

American Culture. New York; Alfred A. 

Knopf 

Kibert, Charles J. 

1999 Reshaping the Built Environment: Ecology, 

Ethics and Economics. Washington, DC: 

Island Press 

Longstreth, Richard, with Therese O’Malley 

2002 The Mall in Washington, 1791–1991. 2nd ed. 

National Gallery of Art Studies in the 

History of Art 39, Center for Advanced 

Study in the Visual Arts Symposium papers 

XIV. New Haven: Yale University Press 

MacDonald, Lynn 

1994 “Bad Dirt: What You Can’t See Can Hurt.” 

Urban Forests, February/March. 

Manski, D. A., L. W. VanDruff, and V. Flyger. 

1981 “Activities of Gray Squirrels and People in a 

Downtown Washington, D.C. Park: Management Implications.” In Transactions of the 

46th American Wildlife and Natural Resources 

Confercence, 439–454. Washington, DC: 

Wildlife Management Institute. 

Milner, John, Associates 

2003 “Cultural Landscape Report, Washington 

Monument Grounds.” Prepared for the 

National Park Service by John Milner 

Associates, Alexandria, Virginia. 

National Capital Planning Commission 

1993 Management Program for the Perpetuation of 

the American Elm Tree in the National 

Capital. Washington, DC: Save-The-Elms 

Task Force. 

1997 Extending the Legacy: Planning America’s 

Capital for the 21st Century. Washington, 

DC. 

1999 Washington’s Waterfronts. Washington, DC. 

2001 Memorials and Museums Master Plan.

Washington, DC. 

2002 The National Capital Urban Design and 

Security Plan. Washington, DC. http:// 

www.ncpc.gov/initiatives/pg.asp?p=ncudsp 

(accessed Jan. 29, 2009). 

2004a Comprehensive Plan for the National Capital: 

Federal Elements. Washington, DC. 

2004b The National Capital Urban Design and 

Security Plan, November 2004 Addendum. 

Washington, DC. http://www.ncpc.gov/ 

UserFiles/File/NCUDSP2004Addendum.pdf 

(accessed Jan. 28, 2009). 

2005a National Capital Urban Design and Security 

Plan: Objectives and Policies. Washington, 

DC. http://www.ncpc.gov/UserFiles/File/ 

NCUDSPAddendum050505.pdf (accessed 

Jan. 29, 2009). 

2005b NCPC’s New Vision for South Capitol Street.

Washington, DC. 

2007 “NCPC Issues Report on Flood Risks in 

Washington’s Monumental Core.” National 

Capital Planning Commission Quarterly

(January, February, March), pp 2–3. 

http://www.ncpc.gov/UserFiles/File/ 

Quarterly%20March%2007.pdf (accessed 

Aug. 27, 2008). 

2008a Planning Together for Central Washington.

Brochure. Published in cooperation with the 

Architect of the Capitol, Commission of Fine 

Arts, Government of the District of Columbia, and National Park Service. Washington, 

DC. http://www.ncpc.gov/UserFiles/File/ 

publication/Planning%20Together%20 

Brochure.pdf (accessed Sept. 29, 2008). 

2008b Report on Flooding and Stormwater in Washington, DC. Washington, DC. http://www 

.ncpc.gov/UserFiles/File/publications_press/ 

Report%20on%20Flooding%20and%20 

Stormwater%20in%20Washington,%20DC_

.pdf (accessed Sept. 26, 2008). 

2009 Monumental Core Framework Plan: Connecting New Destinations with the National 

Mall. Washington, DC. http://www.ncpc 

.gov/initiatives/pg.asp?p=frameworkplan 

(accessed May 27, 2009). 

587
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

National Capital Planning Commission, National Park 

Service, and District of Columbia 

2008 CapitalSpace: A Park System for the Nation’s 

Capital. http://www.ncpc.gov/initiatives/ 

pg.asp?p=parksandopenspace (accessed 

Sept. 26, 2008). 

National Park Service, U.S. Department of the 

Interior 

1970 History of the Mall, by George J. Olszewski. 

Office of History and Historic Architecture, 

Eastern Service Center, Washington, DC. On 

file at National Mall and Memorial Parks, 

Washington, DC. 

1975 “Soil Compaction and its Effects upon Urban 

Vegetation,” by James C. Patterson. NPS 

Ecological Service Laboratory, National 

Capital Parks, Washington, DC. 

1981 Development Concept Plan, Washington 

Monument Grounds. Denver Service Center . 

1982 “Design Concept, Washington Monument 

Grounds.” On file at National Mall and 

Memorial Parks, Washington, DC. 

1983 Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and 

Guidelines for Archeology and Historic 

Preservation. http://www.nps.gov/history/ 

local-law/arch_stnds_0.htm (accessed Feb. 

20, 2008). 

1989 Development Concept Plan, Washington 

Monument Grounds. Revision to the 1981 

plan. On file at National Mall and Memorial 

Parks, Washington, DC. 

1990 “Park Landscape Maintenance Manual, 

National Capital Region.” On file at National 

Mall and Memorial Parks, Washington, DC. 

1992a “Summer 1992 Studies Confirm Compacted 

Mall Soils.” Memo from Chief, Center for 

Urban Ecology, to Associate Regional 

Director for Operations. On file at National 

Capital Region, Washington, D.C. 

1992b National Capital Regional Director to 

Director, regarding turf conditions on the 

National Mall. 

1993 “Washington Monument Work Group 

Design Considerations.” Washignton, DC. 

1994 “Comparison of the Core and Clod Methods 

for Determining the Bulk Density of 

Anthropogenic Soils,” by John R. Short. 

Center for Urban Ecology. Washington, DC. 

1995 The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for 

the Treatment of Historic Properties, with 

Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, 

Resoring and Reconstructing History Buildings 

by Kay D. Weeks and Anne E. Grimmer. 

Washington, DC. http://www.nps.gov/ 

history/hps/tps/standards/index.htm. 

1996a “Landscape Overview, Thomas Jefferson 

Memorial.” On file at National Mall and 

Memorial Parks, Washington, DC. 

1996b “Record of Decision for Partial and Temporary Closure of a Portion of the National 

Mall (the Mall) for Turf Renovation.” On file 

at National Mall and Memorial Parks, 

Washington, DC. 

1996c The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the 

Treatment of Historic Properties, with Guidelines for Treatment of Cultural Landscapes.

Washington, DC. http://www.access.gpo.gov/ 

nara/cfr/waisidx_05/36cfr68_05.htm. 

1997 Design Guidelines, The White House and 

President’s Park. Washington, DC. 

1998a “Cultural Landscape Inventory, Thomas 

Jefferson Memorial.” Rev. 2001. On file at 

National Mall and Memorial Parks, 

Washington, DC. 

1998b NPS-28: Cultural Resource Management 

Guideline. Washington, DC. http:// 

www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/ 

nps28/28contents.htm. 

1999a “Cultural Landscape Report, West Potomac 

Park Lincoln Memorial Grounds, Part 1: Site 

History, Analysis and Evaluation and Design 

Guidelines,” by Maureen De Lay Joseph. 

National Mall and Memorial Parks, Washington, DC. http://www.nps.gov/ linc/ 

parkmgmt/lincoln-memorial-cultural 

-landscape-report-page.htm (accessed Feb. 

9, 2009). 

1999b “East and West Potomac Parks Historic 

District, Revised National Register of 

Historic Places Nomination.” Prepared by 

Robinson & Associates, Inc., in association 

with Architrave P.C. Architects. National 

Mall and Memorial Parks, Washington DC. 

http://www.nps.gov/nationalmallplan/ 

Documents/EastWestPotomacParks 

_HR1999.pdf. 

2000a Comprehensive Design Plan, The White House 

and President’s Park. Washington, DC. 

 

588
Selected Bibliography 

2000b Director’s Order #24: NPS Museum Collections Management. Washington, DC. 

http://www.nps.gov/policy/DOrders/ 

DOrder24.html. 

2001a Director’s Order #12: Conservation Planning, 

Environmental Impact Analysis, and Decisionmaking. Washington, DC. http://www.nps 

.gov/policy/DOrders/DOrder12.html 

(accessed Apr. 8, 2009). 

2001b Director’s Order #12: Handbook for Environmental Impact Analysis. Washington, DC. 

http://home.nps.gov/applications/ 

npspolicy/DOrders/RM12.pdf (accessed 

Apr. 8, 2009). 

2001c Cultural Landscapes Inventory Professional 

Procedures Guide. Washington, DC. 

2002 Washington Monument Permanent Security 

Improvements Environmental Assessment.

National Mall and Memorial Parks, 

Washington, DC. 

2003a Director’s Order #75A: Civic Engagement and 

Public Involvement. Washington, DC. 

2003b Director’s Order #77-2: Floodplain Management. http://www.nps.gov/policy/DOrders/ 

DO77-2--Floodplains.pdf (accessed Feb. 20, 

2008). 

2003c General Management Plan, Anacostia Park. 

Washington, DC. 

2003d General Management Plan / Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Rock Creek Park. 

Washington, DC. 

2003e National Capital Parks–Central, Washington, 

D.C., Visitor Transportation Survey. November. Prepared for the National Park Service 

by PriceWaterhouseCoopers. On file at 

National Mall and Memorial Parks, Washington, DC. 

2004a Anacostia Riverwalk: Environmental 

Assessment. Washington, DC. 

2004b Director’s Order #48A: Concession 

Management. Washington, DC. 

2004c “Paleontological Resource Inventory and 

Monitoring, National Capital Region,” by 

Jason P. Kenworthy and Vincent L, Santucci. 

National Capital Region, Washington, DC.

2004d Procedural Manual #77-2: Floodplain 

Management. http://www.nature.nps.gov/ 

RM77/floodplain.cfm (accessed Sept, 28, 

2009). 

2005a American Veterans Disabled for Life Memorial: Environmental Assessment. Washington, 

DC. 

2005b Lincoln Memorial Circle Roadway Project. 

Washington, DC. http://www.nps.gov/linc/ 

Lincoln%20Oriject%20Summary3.pdf 

(accessed August 2005). 

2005c Martin Luther King, Jr. National Memorial: 

Environmental Assessment. Washington, DC. 

2005d National World War II Memorial. http:// 

www.nps.gov/nwwm/ (accessed August 

2005). 

2005e Rehabilitation of Rock Creek and Potomac 

Parkway from Virginia Avenue to P Street 

Bridge and the Thompson Boat Center: Environmental Assessment. Washington, DC. 

2005f Rock Creek Park Final General Management 

Plan and Environmental Impact Statement. 

Denver: Denver Service Center. 

2005g Standard Public Health Requirements for 

Temporary Food Establishments Operating in 

Conjunction with a Special Event Held on 

Parkland in the National Capital Region. 

National Capital Region, Washington, DC. 

2005h Victims of Communism Memorial: Environmental Assessment. Washington, DC. 

2006a “Cultural Landscape Inventory, The Mall,” 

by Kay Fanning. On file at National Mall and 

Memorial Parks, Washington, DC. 

2006b “Cultural Landscape Inventory, Union 

Square,” by Kay Fanning. On file at National 

Mall and Memorial Parks, Washington, DC. 

2006c Environmental Assessment: Washington, D.C., 

Visitor Transportation Study for the National 

Mall and Surrounding Park Areas. Denver 

Service Center. http://parkplanning.nps.gov/ 

documentsList.cfm?parkId=427&projectId 

=17349. 

2006d “Inventory and Condition Assessment: Site 

Furnishings and Plant Materials.” Washington, DC. 

2006e Management Policies 2006. Washington, DC. 

http://www.nps.gpv/policy/mp/Index2006 

.htm (accessed Feb. 13, 2007). 

2006f National Mall & Memorial Parks Superintendent’s Compendium, November 1, 2006.

Washington, DC. http://www.nps.gov/nama/ 

parkmgmt/upload/NAMAcompendium1.pdf 

(accessed Apr. 14, 2009). 

589
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

2007a “Annual Investigators Report, March 21, 

2007.” Center for Urban Ecology, Natural 

Resources and Science, National Capital 

Region, Washington, DC. 

2007b Best Management Practices Used at Designed 

Landscapes in Washington, D.C.: A Background Report for the National Mall Plan, by 

Lindsay J. Kordis. National Mall and Memorial Parks, Washington, DC. 

2007c The Future of America’s National Parks: A 

Report to the President of the United States by 

the Secretary of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne.

Washington, DC. http://www.nps.gov/2016/ 

(accessed Dec. 11, 2008). 

2007d Public Scoping Comments Report, A Background Report for the National Mall Plan.

Prepared for the National Park Service by 

the School of Recreation, Health, and 

Tourism, George Mason University, Fairfax, 

VA. http://www.nps.gov/nationalmallplan/ 

Documents/National%20Mall%20Plan%20

%20Report%20on%20Public%20Scoping%

20Comments%20-%20Response%20to%20 

Newsletter%201.pdf

2007e Requirements for Special Events Held on 

Parkland in the National Capital Region. 8-

06-07-A. National Capital Region, 

Washington, DC. 

2007f Vietnam Veterans Memorial Visitor Center 

Site Selection Environmental Assessment. 

Washington, DC. 

2008a “Cultural Landscape Inventory, Constitution 

Gardens,” by Kay Fanning. On file at National Mall and Memorial Parks, Washington, 

DC. 

2008b National Park Service Centennial Challenge 

Projects and Programs Approved for Fiscal 

Year 2008. Washington, DC. http://www.nps 

.gov/2016/assets/files/Park%20Sort%20 

Approved%20Projects%20and%20Programs 

%20204-21-08.pdf (access Dec. 11, 2008). 

2008c “Park Asset Management Plan, National 

Mall and Memorial Parks.” Washington, 

D.C. 

2008d Potomac Park Levee Project, Environmental 

Assessment. Washington, D.C. 

2008e Public Comments Report: Newsletter 3 

Alternatives, A Background Report for the 

National Mall Plan. Prepared for the National Park Service by the School of Recreation, Health, and Tourism, George Mason 

University, Fairfax, VA. http://www.nps.gov/ 

nationalmallplan/Documents/News3Report

_Sept2008_post.pdf (accessed Apr. 14, 2009). 

2008f Values and Challenges in Urban Ecology.

www.nps.gov/cue/publications/values 

_challenges.htm (accessed June 26, 2009). 

2009a “Cultural Landscape Inventory, D.C. War 

Memorial, National Mall and Memorial 

Parks — West Potomac Park.” Washington, 

DC. 

2009b “Cultural Landscape Inventory, Washington 

Monument Grounds, National Mall and 

Memorial Parks.” Washington, DC. 

2009c Guidelines for Special Events and Demonstrations, Lincoln Memorial. National Mall and 

Memorial Parks. Washington, DC. 

2009d National Park Service Energy and Water 

Audit Guide. Washington, DC. 

2009e “Visitor Survey, National Mall Visitors, 

2008.” Prepared for the National Park 

Service by George Mason University, School 

of Recreation, Health and Tourism. On file 

at National Mall and Memorial Parks, 

Washington, DC. 

National Park Service / Robinson and Associates Inc., 

in association with Architrave P.C. Architects 

1999 “East and West Potomac Parks Historic 

District, Revised National Register Nomination.” On file at National Mall and 

Memorial Parks, Washington, DC. 

National Parks Conservation Association 

2007 Best Management Practices Used at Urban 

Parks in National and International Locations: A Background Report for the National 

Mall Plan. Prepared for the National Mall 

and Memorial Parks. Center for Park 

Management, Washington, DC. 

2008 Unnatural Disaster: Global Warming and Our 

National Parks. Washington, DC. 

Newseum 

2005 “The Newseum’s Move to Washington, 

D.C.” http://www.newseum.org/newseum/ 

newseum2006/overview. htm (accessed 

August 2005). 

 

590
Selected Bibliography 

Nowak, D. J., R. Hoehn III, D. E. Crane, J. C. Stevens, 

and J. T. Walton 

2006 “Assessing Urban Forest Effects and Values, 

Washington, D.C.’s Urban Forest.” Resource 

Bulletin NRS-1. Northern Research Station, 

Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Newtown Square, PA. 

O’Leary, Cecilia Elizabeth 

1999 To Die For: the Paradox of American Patriotism. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 

Parking Design Group 

2008 “Solutions.” htts://www.parkingdesigngroup 

.com/solutions.html (site accessed June 2, 

2009). 

Paumier, Cy 

2004 Creating a Vibrant City Center. Washington, 

DC: Urban Land Institute. 

Peatross, C. Ford 

2005 Capital Drawings Architectural Designs for 

Washington, D.C., from the Library of 

Congress. Baltimore MD, The Johns Hopkins 

University Press. 

Penczer, Peter R. 

1998 Washington, D.C. Past & Present. Arlington, 

VA: Oneonta Press. 

2007 The Washington National Mall. Arlington, 

VA: Oneonta Press. 

Project for Public Spaces 

2008 “Cretaing Park Signage.” http://www.pps 

.org/parks_plazas_square/info/design/ 

Signage (accessed Nov. 26, 2008). 

Resources for the Future 

2009 Climate Change and Outdoor Recreation 

Resources, by Daniel Morris and Margaret 

Walls. Backgrounder report. Washington, 

DC. 

Ruane, Michael E. 

2007 “Jefferson Memorial’s Signs of Sinking Raise 

Fresh Alarms; Officials Studying Safety, 

Repairs.” Washington Post, June 16, A1. 

Short, J. R., D. S. Fanning, M. S. McIntosh, J. E. Foss, 

and J. C. Patterson 

1986 “Soils of the Mall in Washington, DC: 

Statistical Summary of Properties.” Soil 

Science Society of America Journal 50(3):699–

705. 

Skidmore, Owings and Merrill 

1973 “The Washington Mall: Circulation 

Systems.” Prepared for the National Park 

Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. On 

file at National Mall and Memorial Parks, 

Washington, DC. 

1977 “East End Pavillion: The Constitution 

Gardens.” Prepared for the National Park 

Service. On file at National Mall and 

Memorial Parks, Washington, DC. 

Smithsonian Institution 

2005a National Museum of African American 

History and Culture. http://nmaahc.si.edu/

(accessed August 2005). 

2005b National Museum of the American Indian. 

http://www.nmai.si.edu/index_nmai.cfm

(accessed August 2005). 

Soil Conservation Service 

1976 “Soil Survey of the District of Columbia.” 

Prepared in cooperation with the National 

Park Service, National Capital Parks. 

Washington, DC. 

Tukey, Paul 

2007 The Organic Lawn Care Manual: A Natural, 

Low-Maintenance System for a Beautiful, Safe 

Lawn, North Adams, MA: Storey Publishing. 

Turgeon, A. J. 

2006 “Report on Turfgrass Management at the 

National Mall.” Prepared for the National 

Mall and Memorial Parks. Pennsylvania State 

University. 

United States Park Police 

1991 Guideline Manual: Crowd Estimates. 

OD/SFB/1. Washington, DC. 

University of Maryland 

2008 “Report on the National Mall Soil Compaction Evaluation,” by Charlie White and 

Guihua Chen. Department of Environmental 

Science and Technology. College Park, MD. 

Urban Land Institute 

2006 Parks, People and Places: Making Parks 

Accessible to the Community, prepared by 

Deborah L. Myerson. The 2005 ULI / 

Charles H. Shaw Forum on Urban Community Issues, Sept. 22–23, 2005. 

Washington, DC. 

Urban Parking Concepts 

2009 “Costs to Build a Parking Garage.” http:// 

www.urbanparkingconcepts.com/docs/info 

.html (site accessed June 2, 2009). 

U.S. Commission of Fine Arts 

2006 Designing the Nation’s Capital — The 1901 

Plan for Washington, D.C., by Sue Kohler and 

Pamela Scott. Washington, DC. 

591
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on the District of 

Columbia 

1902 The Improvement of the Park System of the 

District of Columbia, edited by Charles 

Moore. 57th Congress, 1st sess, S. Rep. 166. 

Washington, DC: Government Printing 

Office. http://www.nps.gov/history/ 

online_books/mcmillan/index.htm 

U.S. Department of Defense 

1997 Designing and Developing Maintainable 

Products and Systems. Military Handbook 

470A. Washington, DC. 

2003 Air Force Memorial, Naval Annex Site: 

Environmental Assessment. March 2003. 

Washington, DC. 

U.S. Department of Energy 

2008 “Facility Energy Management Guidelines 

and Criteria for Energy and Water Evaluations in Covered Facilities.” Washington, 

DC. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

1998 Final Guidance for Incorporating Environmental Justice Concerns in EPA’s NEPA 

Compliance Analyses. Washington, DC. 

2002 Community, Culture and the Environment — 

A Guide to Understanding a Sense of Place.

Washington, DC. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

2008 National Wetlands Inventory website: 

http://www.fws.gov/wetlands (accessed 

March 2008). 

2009 “Shortnose Sturgeon in the Potomac River.” 

Maryland Fishery Resource Office. 

Annapolis, MD. 

U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture 

2006 “Assessing Urban Forest Effects and Values.” 

Northern Research Station, Newtown 

Square, PA. 

U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Department of the 

Interior 

1965 Washington and Vicinity, D.C., Scale 1:24,000. 

Soil map. Reston, VA. 

1999 “Washington’s Geologic Setting.” http:// 

pubs.usgs.gov/gip/stones/index.html. 

2007 “Acid Rain in Washington.” http://pubs.usgs 

.gov/stones/acid-rain.html. 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

2003 District of Columbia Tour Bus Management 

Intitiative. Prepared by the Volpe Transportation systems Center for the District 

Department of Transportation, National 

Capital Planning, Commission, Wahsington 

Convention and Tourism Corporation, 

Downtown DC Business Improvement 

District, and Office of DC CouncilmemberSharon Ambrose. Washington, DC. 

http://www.ddot.dc.gov/ddot/cwp/view 

,a,1249,q ,602549.asp (accessed Dec. 29, 

2008). 

Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 

2005 K Street Busway Project. http://www 

.wmata.com/about/expansion/kst 

_busway.pdf (accessed July 2005). 

2008a Metrorail Station Access & Capacity Study. 

Prepared by Parson Trasnportation Group, 

inc., PB Americas, Inc., and Delon Hampton 

& Associates, Chartered. Washington, DC. 

http://www.wmata.com/pdfs/planning/ 

Final%20Report_Station%20Access%20& 

%20Capacity%20Study%202008%20Apr 

.pdf (accessed Jan. 29, 2009). 

2008b WMATA Facts. http://www.wmata.com/ 

about_metro/docs/metrofacts.pdf (accessed 

Feb. 2, 2009). 

2009 “Metrorail Service Information for Tuesday, 

January 20, 2009.” http://www.wmata.com/ 

rail/disruption_reports/viewPage_update 

.cfm?ReportID=1327 (accessed Feb. 27, 

2009). 

Personal Communications 

Minkkinen, Steve, Biologist, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Maryland Fishery Office 

2007 Personal communication with Matthew 

Stafford regarding the shortnose sturgeon in 

the Potomac River, June 20. 

Sherald, Jim, Chief, NPS Center for Urban Ecology 

2007 Personal communication with Matthew 

Stafford regarding soil conditions, July 12. 

 

592
INDEX

A

accessibility, 26, 184, 333, 416, 443, 444, 470, 521, 

526, 530, 534, 538, 546 

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, 8, 68, 

353, 368, 370, 372, 373, 375, 376, 377, 380, 382, 

385, 388, 547, 548, 550 

air pollution, 26, 53, 186, 298, 299 

American elm trees, 28, 72, 78, 200, 202, 265, 274, 

327, 397, 402, 541 

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 

projects, 29, 30, 44, 132, 133, 146, 224, 349, 361, 

362, 363, 375, 422, 505, 522 

archeological resources, 31, 32, 68, 371 

Architect of the Capitol, 3, 28, 38, 42, 48, 61, 72, 86, 

98, 127, 180, 181, 198, 272, 299, 353, 357, 358, 397, 

442, 480, 486, 490, 496, 547, 548, 550 

area of potential effect, 368, 372 

defined, 582 

Arlington Memorial Bridge, 74, 80, 100, 110, 226, 

228, 229, 238, 239, 286, 287, 310, 312, 323, 324, 

329, 338, 349, 362, 374, 381 

Ash Woods, 29, 64, 75, 79, 93, 101, 111, 119, 176, 

230, 232, 267, 288, 325, 333, 334, 374, 379, 381, 

384, 387, 476, 483, 488, 493, 499, 507, 508, 549 

B

best practices, 32, 51, 53, 54, 61, 71, 84, 154, 155, 164, 

186, 187, 350, 351, 364, 389, 397, 441, 442, 447, 

468, 469, 482, 492, 498, 514, 516, 517, 521, 526, 

527, 530, 533, 534, 537, 538, 545, 547 

defined, 582 

bicycle rentals, 85, 86, 91, 115, 138, 151, 174, 175, 

214, 332, 454, 464, 467, 468, 512 

bicycle routes, 246, 439, 455, See also bike lanes, bike 

trails 

bicycles, 24, 26, 31, 54, 70, 77, 78, 84, 85, 87, 90, 91, 

93, 94, 106, 107, 109, 118, 120, 133, 134, 135, 136, 

138, 160, 161, 162, 164, 172, 174, 184, 185, 204, 

205, 212, 213, 224, 240, 242, 243, 246, 276, 305, 

307, 316, 329, 330, 338, 340, 360, 361, 378, 379, 

421, 427, 431, 438, 439, 441, 442, 443, 447, 448, 

449, 454, 455, 456, 462, 464, 467, 468, 482, 508, 

524, 536, 541 

bicycling, 15, 48, 58, 70, 84, 85, 90, 91, 93, 116, 136, 

138, 141, 143, 165, 172, 173, 174, 204, 232, 246, 

247, 316, 330, 360, 442, 444, 447, 453, 454, 456, 

462, 464, 467, 474, 475, 480, 482, 485, 486, 487, 

491, 495, 497, 500, 507, See also tours, bicycling 

bike lanes, 120, 137, 143, 144, 241, 454, 464, 482, 497, 

549 

bike trails, 120, 212, 213, 241 

bike-sharing program, 70, 316, 448 

boat rentals, 236, 237, 492, 507, 512 

boating, 30, 58, 64, 92, 93, 220, 232, 288, 329, 481, 

487 

bookstores, 18, 25, 40, 58, 130, 143, 194, 322, 333, 

353, 468, 476, 487, 501, 503 

Bulfinch gateposts, 276 

C

Canada geese, 22, 68, 156, 302, 326, 363, 409, 410, 

411, 412 

CapitalSpace, 47, 48, 357 

Capitol Complex Master Plan, 42, 357, 505 

Capitol Reflecting Pool, 22, 27, 35, 36, 78, 118, 133, 

196, 197, 258, 268, 270, 271, 295, 326, 351, 374, 

377, 383, 385, 392, 395, 409, 411, 412, 420, 497, 

519, 522, 525, 527, 537, 539 

carousel, 90, 100, 176, 208, 209, 275, 276, 475, 481, 

486, 491, 497 

cherry trees, 12, 13, 21, 22, 33, 64, 75, 76, 80, 93, 105, 

111, 156, 157, 232, 234, 235, 238, 242, 244, 256, 

280, 288, 290, 292, 296, 299, 300, 305, 322, 324, 

325, 328, 373, 379, 402, 403, 404, 405, 406, 407, 

421, 516, 519 

Circulator 

Smithsonian–National Gallery of Art, 24, 47, 168, 

218, 313, 447, 483, 493 

Commemorative Works Act, 18, 42, 128, 129, 146, 

152, 258, 259, 260, 367 

commercial activities, 19, 71, 174, 546 

concession stands, 119, 549, See also refreshment 

stands 

concessioners, 19, 279, 293, 305, 307, 365, 416, 503, 

523 

conservation zones, 51, 56, 61, 247, 471, 473 

Constitution Avenue belvedere, 14, 29, 44, 64, 74, 

79, 92, 119, 146, 226, 227, 286, 287, 309, 324, 329, 

331, 362, 373 

Constitution Gardens, 13, 29, 59, 62, 63, 65, 73, 86, 

87, 91, 100, 107, 110, 119, 176, 177, 188, 216, 217, 

218, 246, 257, 258, 267, 281, 282, 283, 284, 285, 

296, 328, 331, 333, 334, 340, 348, 352, 378, 381, 

384, 387, 392, 393, 394, 395, 398, 399, 400, 404, 

405, 406, 410, 411,•412, 416, 417, 421, 423, 427, 

428, 431, 432, 435, 436, 439, 440, 476, 481, 483, 

488, 492, 493, 497, 498, 507, 508, 509, 510, 512, 

519, 525, 529, 532, 533, 536, 537, 549 

Lake, 13, 21, 29, 36, 37, 115, 133, 157, 174, 175, 

245, 268, 283, 295, 301, 302, 351, 392, 393, 395, 

404, 405, 406, 407, 409, 410, 411, 412, 413, 435, 

 593
INDEX

492, 497, 511, 519, 521, 522, 525, 527, 529, 531, 

532, 535, 536, 539 

consulting parties, 547, 548 

cooperating agencies, 51, 546, 547 

cost estimates, 132, 547 

underground parking, 461, 511 

cross axes, 13, 58, 90, 108, 125, 201, 208, 209, 267, 

275, 278, 326, 328, 383 

cultural landscapes, 31, 57, 58, 67, 68, 74, 138, 152, 

224, 260, 267, 367, 371, 375, 402, 548 

defined, 583 

cultural resources, 4, 16, 21, 31, 39, 52, 57, 58, 59, 67, 

68, 105, 129, 134, 136, 140, 152, 154, 244, 260, 267, 

317, 322, 343, 365, 368, 369, 371, 372, 373, 375, 

376, 377, 380, 382, 385, 388, 398, 402, 408, 415, 

421, 427, 431, 435, 439, 443, 471, 547 

defined, 583 

D

D.C.. See District of Columbia 

D.C. Department of Parks and Recreation, 40, 174, 

550 

D.C. Department of the Environment, 37, 84, 301 

D.C. Department of Transportation, 70, 168, 316, 

354, 358, 360, 547 

D.C. Historic Preservation Office, 3, 8, 32, 67, 68, 

152, 196, 197, 260, 270, 353, 368, 370, 372, 373, 

375, 376, 377, 380, 382, 385, 547, 548, 550 

D.C. Office of Planning, 126, 127, 314, 547, 550 

D.C. War Memorial, 29, 33, 58, 61, 64, 70, 75, 129, 

132, 133, 146, 172, 267, 287, 325, 332, 334, 361, 

375, 418, 423, 424, 428, 433, 436, 475, 478, 481, 

487, 505, 549 

D.C. Water and Sewer Authority, 84 

demonstrations 

First Amendment, 3, 4, 7, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 22, 23, 

25, 31, 52, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 66, 67, 70, 71, 72, 

73, 74, 75, 76, 83, 84, 85, 88, 89, 90, 92, 105, 106, 

109, 116, 125, 129, 134, 135, 137, 140, 142, 146, 

150, 151, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 171, 172, 

173, 194, 198, 200, 204, 206, 208, 209, 212, 218, 

222, 224, 234, 238, 242, 247, 303, 304, 305, 317, 

319, 322, 352, 414, 415, 416, 420, 422, 424, 428, 

436, 437, 469, 471, 472, 473, 479, 480, 490, 496, 

509, 520, 546, 547 

District of Columbia, 3, 4, 7, 9, 13, 15, 16, 18, 21, 22, 

24, 26, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 40, 41, 42, 44, 47, 48, 53, 

70, 72, 75, 92, 126, 127, 136, 141, 146, 172, 173, 

180, 222, 251, 254, 256, 258, 259, 266, 270, 272, 

274, 277, 282, 284, 287, 288, 293, 294, 295, 296, 

298, 299, 300, 309, 311, 312, 315, 316, 318, 322, 

330, 332, 339, 340, 341, 342, 343, 344, 345, 347, 

350, 351, 353, 354, 357, 358, 360, 362, 364, 390, 

391, 416, 422, 442, 443, 449, 454, 464, 478, 501, 

503, 505, 506, 507, 508, 509, 510, 511, 512, 516, 

523, 535, 546, 547, 548 

drinking fountains, 26, 78, 79, 86, 87, 98, 107, 117, 

135, 137, 178, 179, 182, 183, 208, 214, 272, 275, 

276, 340, 351, 362, 444, 453, 462, 464, 482, 493, 

498, 519, 525, 529, 532, 536 

E

East Potomac Park, 76, 86, 91, 115, 116, 119, 120, 

126, 151, 171, 174, 175, 212, 213, 238, 241, 254, 

266, 289, 294, 299, 301, 302, 305, 309, 314, 315, 

316, 347, 349, 375, 421, 427, 431, 435, 439, 447, 

449, 454, 464, 523 

defined, 583 

energy use, 32, 39, 40, 48, 54, 71, 83, 86, 88, 98, 117, 

135, 138, 139, 150, 176, 177, 180, 181, 190, 191, 

248, 350, 351, 444, 514, 515, 516, 518, 521, 522, 

523, 524, 527, 528, 529, 531, 535, 539, 540 

ethnographic resources, 31, 32, 33, 68, 260 

exhibits, interpretive, 14, 58, 59, 73, 89, 91, 92, 93, 

100, 110, 116, 119, 130, 146, 170, 196, 197, 198, 

214, 218, 219, 222, 230, 242, 265, 307, 323, 325, 

330, 338, 340, 358, 453, 462, 464, 468, 474, 478, 

479, 480, 486, 491, 496, 522, 549 

Extending the Legacy, 42, 125, 127, 140, 257, 258, 

357, 469, 505 

F

Fifty-Six (56) Signers of the Declaration of 

Independence Memorial, 13, 63, 73, 216, 283, 322 

First Air Mail Marker, 13, 76, 322 

First Amendment demonstrations, 3, 4, 7, 12, 13, 14, 

16, 17, 22, 23, 25, 31, 52, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 66, 67, 

70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 83, 84, 85, 88, 89, 90, 92, 

105, 106, 109, 116, 125, 129, 134, 135, 137, 140, 

142, 146, 150, 151, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 

171, 172, 173, 194, 198, 200, 204, 206, 208, 209, 

212, 218, 222, 224, 234, 238, 242, 247, 303, 304, 

305, 317, 319, 322, 352, 414, 415, 416, 420, 422, 

424, 428, 436, 437, 469, 471, 472, 473, 479, 480, 

490, 496, 509, 520, 546, 547 

fish and wildlife, 31, 245, 301, 407, 408, 409, 410, 

411, 412, 413 

flooding, 21, 22, 28, 84, 105, 115, 119, 120, 140, 154, 

155, 157, 218, 219, 226, 235, 295, 296, 297, 362, 

374, 379, 387, 391 

food service, 23, 25, 26, 31, 40, 55, 65, 71, 78, 85, 87, 

90, 91, 92, 94, 99, 100, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 117, 

118, 119, 125, 133, 134, 137, 144, 172, 173, 176, 

182, 183, 184, 185, 198, 199, 210, 211, 214, 216, 

217, 221, 230, 238, 239, 247, 275, 276, 282, 294, 

333, 336, 338, 342, 344, 352, 378, 379, 381, 384, 

386, 387, 392, 393, 394, 395, 398, 399, 400, 401, 

404, 405, 406, 407, 410, 411, 412, 420, 426, 427, 

434, 435, 439, 470, 476, 479, 482, 483, 484, 485, 

487, 488, 489, 492, 493, 494, 495, 498, 499, 500, 

501, 502, 504, 506, 507, 508, 509, 510, 511, 512, 

549 

 

594
Index 

J fountains, 21, 25, 26, 27, 61, 78, 79, 86, 87, 90, 98, 

107, 117, 118, 126, 135, 137, 140, 154, 174, 178, 

179, 182, 183, 188, 201, 208, 210, 214, 256, 268, 

271, 272, 274, 275, 276, 282, 295, 296, 340, 351, 

362, 444, 453, 462, 464, 482, 493, 498, 519, 520, 

521, 525, 528, 529, 532, 536, 539 

Jefferson Pier Marker, 278, 322 

jogging, 117, 136, 179, 281, 300, 332, 340, 403, 468, 

475, 482, 487, 492, 497, 525, 532, 536 

John Ericcson Memorial, 13, 58, 74, 76, 79, 226, 238, 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial, 4, 12, 14, 30, 270, 287, 322, 328, 522 

57, 61, 62, 64, 76, 93, 101, 111, 120, 126, 130, 168, 

170, 188, 236, 238, 258, 260, 267, 270, 281, 289, 

290, 291, 298, 306, 307, 316, 319, 320, 321, 322, 

325, 328, 329, 330, 332, 333, 334, 337, 338, 348, 

350, 351, 373, 379, 384, 418, 472, 475, 476, 477, 

481, 483, 484, 487, 488, 489, 494, 499, 510, 512, 

518, 522, 549 

John Paul Jones Memorial, 13, 58, 270, 288, 322, 328, 

351, 387, 522 

K

Korean War Veterans Memorial, 4, 12, 29, 33, 62, 75, 

92, 93, 100, 110, 111, 119, 129, 130, 170, 188, 226, 

227, 230, 258, 260, 267, 270, 281, 287, 290, 298, 

315, 316, 319, 320, 322, 324, 325, 328, 329, 330, 

333, 334, 338, 348, 350, 351, 353, 373, 374, 379, 

381, 384, 387, 392, 398, 404, 453, 461, 464, 476, 

489, 522, 549 

Frederick Law Olmsted Jr., 14, 28, 42, 86, 90, 98, 

107, 128, 178, 179, 208, 209, 254, 271, 273, 274, 

275, 280, 292, 375, 551 

furnishings, 14, 27, 59, 61, 63, 78, 86, 87, 98, 107, 117, 

136, 178, 179, 182, 270, 426, 519, 521, 525, 526, 

529, 530, 532, 534, 536, 538, 549 Kutz Bridge, 13, 93, 101, 111, 120, 232, 233, 235, 236, 

237, 280, 288, 315, 328, 338, 379, 381, 387, 412 

G

L George Mason Memorial, 13, 14, 44, 63, 76, 126, 

188, 240, 242, 244, 259, 267, 270, 289, 309, 317, 

318, 322, 325, 328, 331, 333, 334, 338, 350, 351, 

373, 414, 448, 477, 484, 489, 494, 499, 522, 546, 

549 

L’Enfant plan, 9, 12, 13, 14, 18, 21, 42, 72, 78, 83, 97, 

98, 127, 140, 150, 151, 171, 198, 251, 252, 254, 256, 

258, 260, 265, 267, 268, 270, 271, 273, 277, 278, 

282, 283, 286, 287, 290, 293, 309, 364, 504 

German-American Friendship Garden, 12, 13, 58, 

72, 87, 91, 100, 178, 210, 211, 214, 280, 322, 328, 

331, 340, 372, 522 

lighting, 14, 26, 27, 38, 54, 57, 58, 59, 63, 74, 78, 86, 

87, 88, 90, 93, 98, 107, 108, 111, 117, 118, 120, 125, 

135, 136, 137, 139, 142, 144, 164, 178, 179, 180, 

181, 184, 185, 190, 191, 208, 209, 210, 211, 222, 

230, 236, 237, 247, 270, 276, 285, 293, 307, 316, 

322, 332, 337, 340, 350, 351, 358, 362, 363, 373, 

379, 421, 427, 431, 435, 438, 439, 453, 454, 462, 

464, 474, 477, 478, 479, 480, 484, 485, 486, 488, 

489, 490, 494, 495, 496, 499, 500, 521, 523, 525, 

526, 527, 530, 532, 534, 536, 538, 539, 548, 549 

Grant, Ulysses S., Memorial, 14, 27, 62, 78, 88, 89, 

99, 108, 117, 127, 129, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 256, 

268, 270, 271, 272, 273, 324, 326, 327, 330, 331, 

333, 374, 377, 380, 383, 385, 397, 425, 434 

Guidelines for the Treatment of Cultural Landscapes, 

67, 152, 368 

H memorials, 7, 93, 120, 236, 237, 351 

pedestrian, 90, 93, 107, 111, 117, 120, 125, 135, 

136, 139, 142, 144, 180, 181, 208, 209, 236, 237, 

247, 285, 340, 379, 421, 427, 431, 435, 439, 453, 

462, 464, 477, 479, 480, 484, 485, 488, 489, 490, 

494, 495, 496, 499, 500, 549 

historic districts, 260, 267, 548 

defined, 583 

I Lincoln Memorial, 4, 7, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18, 26, 29, 33, 

35, 38, 44, 57, 58, 62, 63, 64, 70, 74, 79, 86, 92, 93, 

98, 100, 101, 106, 110, 119, 126, 127, 130, 142, 152, 

158, 161, 168, 172, 176, 177, 180, 190, 222, 224, 

225, 230, 236, 238, 244, 246, 256, 258, 259, 260, 

267, 268, 272, 277, 278, 280, 281, 282, 283, 284, 

285, 286, 287, 288, 290, 291, 296, 298, 303, 304, 

306, 307, 315, 316, 319, 320, 322, 323, 324, 326, 

327, 328, 329, 330, 331, 332, 333, 334, 337, 340, 

348, 349, 351, 361, 372, 373, 378, 381, 384, 387, 

392, 393, 394, 395, 398, 399, 400, 401, 404, 405, 

406, 407, 410, 411, 412, 415, 416, 417, 418, 421, 

422, 423, 424, 427, 428, 431, 433, 435, 436, 439, 

448, 449, 474, 475, 476, 477, 478, 481, 483, 484, 

Inlet Bridge, 93, 111, 232, 233, 236, 288, 291, 293, 

338, 379, 448 

interactive water features, 84, 87, 89, 92, 108, 109, 

117, 118, 137, 144, 178, 179, 186, 187, 194, 195, 

197, 199, 200, 201, 208, 209, 210, 211, 220, 377, 

383, 386 

interpretive themes, 9, 14, 502 

irrigation, 23, 27, 53, 56, 58, 59, 60, 61, 66, 84, 88, 89, 

99, 115, 118, 137, 156, 157, 190, 191, 200, 202, 203, 

300, 301, 331, 351, 353, 363, 377, 381, 383, 386, 

402, 404, 405, 406, 407, 426, 518, 519, 524, 525, 

526, 529, 532, 533, 535, 536, 549 

595
INDEX

487, 488, 492, 493, 494, 497, 499, 521, 522, 523, 

529, 535, 549 

Metro system, 31, 304, 441, 444, 450, 456 

access, 361, 427, 428, 431, 435 

elm walkways, 29, 63, 74, 224, 327, 362, 453, 462, 

464, 549 

Metropolitan Police, 353 

mitigating measures 

grounds, 74, 79, 92, 110, 119, 224, 226, 284, 285, 

286 

cultural resources, 68 

natural resources, 68 

Lincoln Reflecting Pool, 13, 21, 22, 58, 93, 132, 133, 

146, 258, 268, 271, 283, 286, 295, 296, 299, 304, 

305, 327, 340, 351, 397, 398, 399, 400, 401, 403, 

404, 405, 406, 407, 453, 462, 464, 475, 478, 486, 

487, 505, 522, 532, 536, 549 

Monument Lodge, 14, 63, 79, 91, 109, 129, 176, 212, 

213, 214, 215, 216, 254, 270, 278, 323, 333, 334, 

337, 363, 372, 476, 483, 488, 498 

monumental core, 38, 47, 86, 98, 105, 125, 128, 180, 

181, 198, 257, 260, 266, 277, 299, 317, 351, 360, 

362, 364, 442, 443, 469, 474, 478, 480, 486, 490, 

M 496 

defined, 584 

Monumental Core Framework Plan, 20, 29, 43, 125, 

126, 129, 258, 357, 358, 360, 364, 422, 423, 449, 

478, 505, 523 

Mall (3rd to 14th streets), 4, 12, 13, 16, 18, 21, 22, 23, 

24, 26, 28, 32, 36, 42, 44, 59, 78, 79, 86, 89, 90, 98, 

100, 105, 108, 109, 116, 118, 125, 127, 128, 129, 

152, 156, 157, 160, 161, 162, 168, 169, 176, 177, 

186, 188, 194, 198, 200, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 

207, 208, 209, 236, 245, 246, 247, 252, 253, 254, 

256, 257, 258, 259, 260, 265, 267, 270, 271, 272, 

273, 274, 275, 276, 277, 278, 279, 280, 281, 283, 

285, 287, 290, 294, 298, 299, 300, 301, 303, 304, 

307, 309, 311, 312, 313, 322, 323, 327, 330, 332, 

336, 337, 340, 348, 350, 353, 363, 372, 375, 377, 

381, 383, 386, 392, 393, 394, 395, 397, 398, 399, 

400, 401, 402, 404, 405, 406, 407, 410, 411, 412, 

416, 417, 419, 420, 422, 423, 424, 425, 426, 428, 

430, 432, 434, 436, 437, 438, 440, 447, 449, 453, 

456, 461, 462, 463, 464, 467, 468, 476, 477, 478, 

479, 481, 482, 484, 485, 487, 488, 490, 491, 492, 

494, 496, 497, 498, 504, 510, 519, 525, 529, 532, 

533, 536, 537, 541 

museum collections, 31, 33, 87, 260 

N

National Capital Planning Commission, 3, 8, 15, 18, 

20, 24, 26, 29, 38, 41, 42, 43, 47, 48, 84, 86, 98, 105, 

126, 127, 128, 146, 152, 154, 156, 157, 180, 181, 

256, 257, 258, 260, 296, 316, 331, 353, 357, 358, 

360, 361, 362, 363, 366, 442, 443, 453, 480, 486, 

490, 496, 535, 547, 548, 550 

national celebrations, 3, 4, 7, 13, 16, 40, 52, 58, 59, 

60, 61, 62, 66, 67, 70, 71, 72, 74, 84, 89, 90, 106, 

109, 129, 134, 135, 138, 140, 146, 160, 162, 163, 

171, 172, 200, 204, 205, 210, 212, 222, 232, 240, 

248, 303, 304, 305, 316, 317, 319, 320, 324, 326, 

333, 350, 365, 414, 415, 418, 419, 420, 423, 425, 

426, 427, 428, 430, 431, 432, 434, 435, 438, 439, 

440, 447, 456, 469, 471, 473, 474, 475, 477, 479, 

481, 484, 487, 489, 492, 494, 497, 499, 509, 520, 

526, 529, 531, 533, 547 

defined, 584 

Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial, 19, 41, 42, 62, 76, 

94, 111, 120, 130, 146, 259, 321, 325, 328, 348, 350, 

362, 375, 379, 384, 391, 397, 403, 409, 418, 422, 

448, 454, 462, 467, 476, 478, 483, 488, 494, 499, 

502, 505, 506, 523, 549, 550 

National Cherry Blossom Festival, 23, 80, 170, 172, 

234, 236, 240, 300, 305, 316, 324, 330, 333, 350, 

353, 354, 414, 417, 421, 427, 431, 435, 439, 471, 

475, 481, 484, 487, 492, 497, 500, 509 

mass notification, 78, 85, 99, 117, 135, 137, 142, 170, 

184, 185, 192, 193, 305, 488, 489, 499 

National Environmental Policy Act, 15, 51, 67, 132, 

133, 134, 135, 137, 357, 366, 367, 369 

McMillan plan, 12, 13, 14, 18, 21, 28, 42, 72, 78, 83, 

88, 97, 98, 108, 125, 126, 127, 128, 140, 150, 151, 

171, 194, 198, 200, 206, 226, 254, 255, 256, 258, 

265, 266, 267, 268, 270, 271, 273, 274, 277, 278, 

279, 280, 281, 283, 285, 286, 289, 290, 299, 309, 

375, 504 

National Gallery of Art Sculpture Garden, 90, 204, 

327, 392, 398 

National Historic Preservation Act, 15, 32, 51, 52, 

67, 152, 260, 267, 357, 366, 367, 368, 372, 373, 377, 

Memorials and Museums Master Plan, 42, 74, 125, 380, 382, 385, 548, 549 

129, 146, 228, 258, 357, 469 section 106, 52, 152, 244, 260, 366, 367, 368, 369, 

Metro stations, 47, 307, 312, 420, 432, 436, 439, 442, 372, 373, 376, 377, 380, 382, 385, 388, 548 

447, 462, 464 National Museum of African American History and 

Culture, 19, 28, 42, 146, 214, 259, 321, 325, 337, 

363, 391, 397, 403, 409, 422, 448, 476, 478, 506, 

523, 550 

L’Enfant station, 360, 449 

proposed near Thomas Jefferson Memorial, 44, 

416, 423, 449 

National Register of Historic Places, 27, 31, 33, 67, 

68, 260, 267, 270, 272, 276, 279, 284, 285, 287, 288, 

289, 366, 367, 368, 369, 373, 377, 378, 380, 381, 

382, 383, 385, 386, 548 

Smithsonian station, 24, 28, 72, 78, 79, 90, 100, 

109, 118, 130, 138, 141, 168, 206, 208, 209, 246, 

275, 276, 312, 327, 416, 426, 443, 444, 450, 478, 

479, 480, 490, 491, 496, 508 

 

596
Index 

NPS Cultural Landscapes Inventory, 267 

NPS List of Classified Structures, 267, 270, 275, 279, 

280, 284, 285, 286, 287, 288, 289, 548 

O

Outlet Bridge, 93, 111, 232, 233, 236, 288, 291, 293, 

325, 338, 379 

P

paddleboat rentals, 71, 75, 174, 236, 334, 338, 354, 

468, 475, 487, 512 

paddleboats, 15, 25 

park rangers, 14, 69, 73, 78, 91, 100, 109, 120, 143, 

184, 208, 215, 216, 243, 323, 330, 337, 338, 339, 

468, 474, 486, 520 

parking, 36, 42, 47, 48, 55, 59, 60, 65, 68, 69, 73, 76, 

80, 85, 91, 93, 162, 212, 214, 241, 242, 257, 293, 

303, 442 

bicycle, 84, 160, 161, 184, 185, 307, 316, 332, 438, 

447, 454, 456, 464, 467 

closures, 234, 311, 421 

for visitors with disabilities, 62, 74, 91, 166, 184, 

212, 213, 218, 226, 234, 238, 242, 311, 314, 337, 

450, 461, 463, 477, 484, 488, 494 

garages, 36, 85, 106, 133, 141, 166, 246, 360, 450, 

461, 511 

metered, 274, 311, 354, 376, 449 

paid, 205, 213, 505, 506, 508, 509, 510, 512, 535, 

549 

permit, 78, 204 

public, 24, 73, 74, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 94, 111, 116, 

118, 120, 154, 166, 167, 198, 202, 204, 228, 232, 

233, 234, 236, 238, 240, 242, 258, 291, 305, 311, 

312, 314, 324, 337, 338, 349, 360, 362, 363, 364, 

378, 379, 387, 417, 422, 427, 428, 431, 432, 435, 

436, 439, 441, 442, 443, 447, 448, 449, 453, 461, 

462, 467, 471, 476, 488, 494, 499, 507, 514, 516 

tour bus, 57, 70, 76, 168, 218, 238, 242, 246, 311, 

314, 315, 443, 444, 449, 476, 482, 493 

truck, 90, 204, 232 

underground, 109, 110, 133, 141, 237, 247, 248, 

257, 281, 312, 363, 383, 394, 400, 406, 411, 434, 

435, 442, 456, 461, 462, 463, 511, 533, 535, 549 

vehicle, 90, 100, 204, 205, 256, 314, 315, 381 

visitors with disabilities, 106, 109, 144, 167 

paving, 23, 26, 27, 30, 60, 78, 84, 85, 87, 89, 91, 93, 98, 

108, 109, 116, 117, 131, 136, 158, 159, 166, 167, 

178, 179, 184, 185, 199, 200, 206, 207, 209, 213, 

216, 217, 218, 219, 232, 236, 237, 280, 327, 352, 

375, 377, 381, 383, 385, 386, 392, 394, 395, 398, 

426, 430, 453, 454, 455, 461, 462, 464, 481, 484, 

491, 494, 497, 525, 526, 532, 534, 536, 538, 541, 

549 

pedestrian environment, 31, 52, 83, 84, 87, 91, 106, 

137, 150, 164, 165, 184, 212, 246, 247, 329, 363, 

441, 444, 447, 449, 450, 453, 454, 455, 456, 462, 

463, 464, 489, 495, 525, 532, 536 

pedestrian safety, 87, 99, 108, 117, 137, 141, 184, 185, 

206, 208, 361 

plans 

Frederick Law Olmsted Jr., 14, 28, 42, 86, 90, 98, 

107, 128, 178, 179, 208, 209, 254, 271, 273, 274, 

275, 280, 292, 375, 551 

L'Enfant, 9, 12, 13, 14, 18, 21, 42, 72, 78, 83, 97, 

98, 127, 140, 150, 151, 171, 198, 251, 252, 254, 

256, 258, 260, 265, 267, 268, 270, 271, 273, 277, 

278, 282, 283, 286, 287, 290, 293, 309, 364, 504 

McMillan, 12, 13, 14, 18, 21, 28, 42, 72, 78, 83, 88, 

97, 98, 108, 125, 126, 127, 128, 140, 150, 151, 

171, 194, 198, 200, 206, 226, 254, 255, 256, 258, 

265, 266, 267, 268, 270, 271, 273, 274, 277, 278, 

279, 280, 281, 283, 285, 286, 289, 290, 299, 309, 

375, 504 

Skidmore Owings and Merrill, 206 

Potomac Park levee, 92, 132, 146, 216, 218, 296, 362, 

375, 378, 384, 387, 448, 505, 522, 523 

public involvement, 8, 42, 52, 67, 545 

public transportation, 24, 48, 54, 77, 88, 164, 166, 

190, 191, 246, 303, 307, 311, 312, 329, 345, 358, 

416, 418, 443, 444, 448, 450, 455, 461, 463 

R

Rainbow Pool, 14, 73, 259, 268, 278, 282, 286, 327 

recreation, 4, 7, 8, 12, 13, 15, 25, 29, 30, 31, 40, 44, 59, 

60, 65, 67, 74, 75, 84, 88, 90, 91, 110, 116, 117, 118, 

120, 126, 129, 135, 136, 138, 141, 143, 144, 160, 

161, 162, 174, 175, 179, 188, 207, 208, 209, 210, 

212, 213, 214, 216, 220, 226, 230, 231, 233, 

235,•236, 237, 238, 240, 254, 256, 266, 281, 288, 

294, 295, 317, 322, 323, 332, 334, 338, 342, 345, 

386, 387, 423, 426, 437, 438, 447, 449, 454, 462, 

463, 468, 470, 471, 473, 475, 479, 481, 482, 486, 

487, 490, 491, 492, 495, 497, 501, 502, 505, 506, 

507, 510, 512, 523, 549 

active, 14, 25, 31, 47, 59, 60, 117, 143, 150, 181, 

240, 256, 294, 331, 468, 472, 473, 475, 482, 487, 

492, 497, 498 

passive, 25, 47, 59, 73, 76, 83, 89, 125, 138, 143, 

150, 174, 200, 208, 216, 240, 331 

recreation equipment rentals, 56, 71, 86, 89, 91, 92, 

93, 101, 111, 115, 117, 119, 120, 125, 134, 136, 138, 

143, 151, 174, 175, 176, 200, 214, 221, 236, 237, 

340, 354, 362, 379, 381, 384, 387, 435, 439, 468, 

475, 482, 487, 507, 510, 512, 586 

recycling, 27, 32, 53, 55, 71, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 98, 99, 

107, 108, 125, 134, 135, 139, 164, 171, 172, 178, 

179, 182, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 248, 307, 

333, 337, 352, 353, 354, 443, 482, 493, 498, 514, 

515, 516, 517, 518, 520, 521, 526, 527, 530, 533, 

534, 537, 538 

reflecting pools, 178, 179, 271, 274, 302, 322, 351, 

519, 521, 529, 531, 535 

597
INDEX

Capitol, 22, 27, 35, 36, 78, 118, 133, 196, 197, 258, 

268, 270, 271, 295, 326, 351, 374, 377, 383, 385, 

392, 395, 409, 411, 412, 420, 497, 519, 522, 525, 

527, 537, 539 

Senate Park Commission, 254, See also McMillan 

plan 

Smithsonian carousel, 90, 100, 176, 208, 209, 275, 

276, 475, 481, 486, 491, 497 

Lincoln, 13, 21, 22, 58, 93, 132, 133, 146, 258, 268, 

271, 283, 286, 295, 296, 299, 304, 305, 327, 340, 

351, 397, 398, 399, 400, 401, 403, 404, 405, 406, 

407, 453, 462, 464, 475, 478, 486, 487, 505, 522, 

532, 536, 549 

Smithsonian Castle, 24, 265, 267, 273, 274, 275, 276, 

277, 301, 309, 319, 324, 327, 449 

Smithsonian Folklife Festival, 17, 23, 304, 305, 332, 

353, 402, 417, 420, 426, 434, 475, 481, 487, 492, 

497 

refreshment stands, 26, 55, 76, 80, 86, 87, 90, 92, 93, 

98, 99, 100, 109, 111, 117, 118, 120, 137, 176, 177, 

182, 183, 190, 208, 209, 210, 220, 221, 226, 227, 

234, 236, 237, 239, 242, 243, 247, 276, 307, 333, 

334, 335, 336, 337, 338, 340, 344, 374, 378, 379, 

381, 382, 384, 386, 387, 388, 426, 430, 431, 438, 

476, 482, 483, 487, 488, 489, 492, 493, 494, 498, 

499, 509, 521, 522, See also concession stands 

Smithsonian Institution, 3, 12, 19, 24, 25, 38, 41, 44, 

61, 86, 90, 98, 125, 127, 130, 146, 200, 202, 208, 

210, 253, 267, 270, 273, 276, 277, 294, 298, 299, 

303, 305, 307, 312, 313, 321, 325, 327, 333, 335, 

336, 353, 363, 375, 376, 449, 478, 480, 505, 547, 

548, 550 

soils, 3, 7, 22, 29, 31, 38, 47, 53, 56, 58, 59, 60, 66, 79, 

89, 97, 108, 140, 156, 157, 200, 201, 202, 205, 218, 

245, 297, 298, 377, 381, 383, 386, 396, 397, 398, 

399, 400, 401, 402, 404, 405, 406, 407, 432, 490, 

515, 519, 521, 525, 529, 531, 532, 533, 536, 537, 

541 

Reserve, 3, 4, 14, 18, 42, 43, 44, 74, 129, 130, 146, 228, 

251, 259, 266, 448, 469, 523, 550 

defined, 585 

restrooms, 4, 18, 23, 25, 28, 29, 30, 40, 54, 55, 58, 59, 

71, 74, 76, 78, 79, 80, 84, 85, 86, 87, 89, 90, 91, 92, 

93, 94, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 107, 108, 109, 110, 117, 

118, 119, 120, 125, 129, 131, 133, 134, 135, 136, 

137, 144, 146, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 172, 

176, 182, 183, 184, 185, 188, 189, 198, 199, 200, 

202, 204, 208, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 

220, 221, 222, 223, 226, 227, 230, 236, 237, 238, 

239, 242, 243, 244, 246, 247, 278, 294, 303, 305, 

307, 308, 316, 317, 323, 325, 333, 335, 337, 338, 

351, 352, 373, 378, 379, 381, 382, 384, 386, 387, 

392, 393, 394, 395, 398, 399, 400, 401, 404, 405, 

406, 407, 410, 411, 412, 417, 418, 420, 425, 426, 

427, 428, 429, 430, 431, 432, 433, 434, 435, 436, 

438, 439, 440, 444, 453, 462, 464, 468, 474, 476, 

478, 479, 482, 483, 485, 487, 488, 489, 490, 492, 

493, 494, 496, 498, 499, 507, 509, 510, 511, 519, 

525, 526, 529, 531, 532, 534, 536, 538, 549 

compaction, 22, 23, 28, 101, 105, 108, 139, 156, 

190, 191, 202, 234, 235, 274, 298, 299, 300, 352, 

390, 399, 400, 403, 404, 405, 406, 407, 541 

soundscapes, 38, 365 

special events, 3, 4, 7, 13, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 27, 

28, 32, 52, 55, 56, 57, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 

67, 70, 74, 75, 76, 78, 79, 80, 84, 87, 89, 90, 91, 92, 

94, 98, 101, 106, 108, 110, 111, 116, 118, 120, 134, 

135, 141, 146, 158, 160, 162, 164, 172, 182,•186, 

188, 194, 196, 198, 199, 200, 202, 204, 205, 208, 

210, 211, 212, 213, 216, 218, 219, 222, 224, 230, 

232, 234, 238, 240, 242, 243, 248, 298, 300, 303, 

304, 305, 306, 316, 317, 319, 320, 325, 330, 332, 

340, 343, 347, 350, 352, 354, 378, 383, 384, 399, 

403, 404, 405, 414, 415, 417, 418, 419, 420, 421, 

422, 423, 424, 425, 426, 427, 428, 429, 430, 431, 

432, 434, 435, 436, 437, 438, 439, 440, 462, 468, 

469, 470, 471, 474, 475, 477, 479, 481, 485, 487, 

489, 490, 492, 495, 496, 497, 507, 509, 510, 516, 

517, 519, 520, 521, 523, 525, 526, 528, 529, 530, 

531, 533, 535, 537, 539, 540, 541, 547 

S

seating, 14, 26, 27, 54, 58, 59, 62, 63, 78, 79, 86, 89, 

90, 92, 93, 94, 98, 99, 107, 109, 110, 111, 131, 136, 

137, 143, 144, 164, 178, 179, 180, 181, 183, 186, 

187, 198, 199, 202, 208, 210, 212, 221, 222, 223, 

226, 230, 232, 236, 237, 238, 240, 247, 283, 287, 

316, 323, 324, 332, 333, 334, 335, 336, 337, 338, 

364, 377, 378, 379, 419, 421, 426, 427, 431, 435, 

438, 439, 444, 453, 455, 462, 464, 468, 475, 476, 

479, 481, 482, 483, 484, 485, 487, 488, 490, 492, 

493, 494, 495, 496, 497, 498, 499, 500, 507, 549 

stormwater, 22, 31, 53, 66, 84, 88, 115, 119, 154, 157, 

190, 191, 218, 219, 294, 361, 362, 389, 390, 391, 

392, 393, 518, 521, 522, 531, 535 

Survey Lodge, 14, 28, 64, 79, 91, 110, 176, 212, 213, 

214, 215, 216, 254, 270, 278, 279, 281, 312, 323, 

333, 334, 337, 372, 378, 427, 435, 476, 483, 484, 

488, 493, 494, 498 

sustainability, 39, 40, 41, 44, 53, 67, 85, 88, 99, 108, 

117, 133, 134, 135, 136, 138, 171, 172, 190, 191, 

248, 389, 391, 392, 397, 401, 402, 403, 404, 407, 

414, 437, 480, 491, 496, 514, 518, 521, 523, 524, 

528, 531, 535, 536, 537, 539, 540 

security, 20, 24, 26, 28, 41, 52, 78, 86, 98, 106, 109, 

134, 135, 162, 167, 180, 181, 182, 202, 205, 208, 

213, 224, 258, 303, 312, 319, 323, 324, 336, 347, 

353, 354, 360, 362, 363, 375, 376, 394, 400, 406, 

411, 422, 448, 449, 456, 461, 470, 478, 505, 511, 

520, 523, 533, 546, 547, 548, 549 

Sylvan Theater, 14, 61, 64, 70, 79, 91, 109, 118, 172, 

210, 211, 214, 215, 246, 256, 279, 281, 306, 323, 

332, 333, 334, 349, 378, 383, 386, 421, 427, 428, 

Segway® Human Transporter (HT), 47 

 

598
Index 

431, 434, 436, 438, 440, 475, 476, 481, 487, 488, 

492, 498 

commercial, 472 

guided, 85, 136, 172, 335, 345, 354, 431, 468, 472, 

507, 508 

multilingual, 85, 172, 173, 507 T walking, 40, 70, 85, 106, 116, 136, 172, 173, 496 

Washington Monument, 210, 278 taxis, 31, 77, 164, 313, 354, 441, 447 

The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the travel demand management, 585 

Treatment of Historic Properties, 67, 128, 129, 152, 

368, 370, 373, 375, 376, 377, 380, 382, 385 

trees 

American elm, 28, 72, 78, 200, 202, 265, 274, 327, 

Theodore Roosevelt Memorial Bridge, 74, 226, 309, 397, 402, 541 

310 cherry, 12, 13, 21, 22, 33, 64, 75, 76, 80, 93, 105, 

111, 156, 157, 232, 234, 235, 238, 242, 244, 256, 

280, 288, 290, 292, 296, 299, 300, 305, 322, 324, 

325, 328, 373, 379, 402, 403, 404, 405, 406, 407, 

421, 516, 519 

Thomas Jefferson Memorial, 4, 7, 12, 13, 17, 21, 26, 

30, 34, 38, 41, 44, 57, 63, 64, 70, 75, 76, 80, 86, 91, 

94, 98, 101, 106, 111, 120, 126, 127, 128, 130, 132, 

133, 142, 146, 152, 161, 168, 172, 180, 232, 240, 

242, 256, 258, 260, 267, 268, 277, 278, 281, 282, 

283, 289, 290, 292,•296, 304, 305, 306, 312, 319, 

320, 322, 323, 324, 326, 327, 328, 330, 332, 333, 

335, 337, 338, 340, 348, 349, 351, 362, 373, 375, 

379, 384, 388, 416, 417, 418, 421, 422, 423, 427, 

431, 435, 436, 439, 440, 443, 449, 476, 477, 478, 

481, 483, 484, 487, 488, 492, 494, 497, 499, 505, 

506, 507, 510, 512, 518, 522, 523, 549 

U

U.S. Capitol Police, 353 

U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, 3, 8, 15, 18, 20, 38, 41, 

42, 43, 48, 78, 86, 98, 126, 127, 128, 152, 180, 181, 

256, 258, 260, 275, 290, 353, 358, 362, 366, 442, 

480, 486, 490, 496, 547, 548, 549, 550 

grounds, 76, 80, 120, 242, 289, 290, 291, 292 U.S. Secret Service, ii, 353, 548 

Tidal Basin, 4, 12, 13, 15, 21, 22, 25, 29, 30, 33, 36, 37, 

58, 59, 64, 65, 71, 72, 75, 76, 79, 86, 91, 93, 94, 101, 

105, 107, 111, 119, 120, 126, 133, 136, 138, 142, 

152, 154, 156, 157, 166, 174, 175, 176, 177, 210, 

212, 213, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 238, 240, 242, 

244, 245, 246, 256, 267, 268, 277, 279, 280, 288, 

289, 290, 291, 292, 293, 295, 296, 297, 299, 300, 

301, 305, 312, 314, 315, 316, 322, 323, 324, 325, 

328, 331, 334, 337, 338, 340, 349, 352, 362, 373, 

374, 379, 381, 382, 384, 386, 387, 390, 392, 393, 

394, 395, 396, 397, 398, 402, 403, 404, 405, 406, 

407, 409, 410, 411, 412, 413, 416, 417, 418, 421, 

423, 424, 427, 428, 431, 432, 433, 435, 436, 439, 

447, 448, 453, 455, 461, 462, 463, 464, 467, 469, 

475, 476, 477, 480, 481, 482, 483, 484, 486, 488, 

489, 490, 491, 492, 493, 494, 495, 496, 497, 499, 

500, 503, 507, 508, 509, 510, 512, 518, 524, 525, 

528, 532, 536, 541, 549 

Union Square, 4, 22, 27, 42, 59, 65, 71, 78, 86, 88, 89, 

99, 107, 108, 117, 125, 129, 138, 152, 174, 175, 176, 

177, 194, 196, 197, 198, 199, 206, 246, 256, 267, 

268, 270, 271, 272, 273, 274, 275, 298, 303, 304, 

309, 324, 326, 327, 329, 332, 333, 337, 358, 374, 

375, 377, 380, 383, 385, 388, 392, 398, 404, 410, 

415, 416, 417, 418, 420, 423, 424, 425, 428, 430, 

432, 433, 434, 436, 438, 440, 476, 477, 481, 483, 

484, 488, 492, 493, 494, 498, 507, 508, 510, 512, 

521, 525, 527, 532, 535, 536, 537, 539, 549 

United States Park Police, 29, 75, 78, 79, 93, 101, 108, 

111, 120, 176, 210, 230, 231, 232, 233, 288, 294, 

307, 348, 351, 353, 366, 374, 379, 381, 384, 387, 

414, 454, 462, 467, 547 

stables, 75, 79, 93, 101, 111, 120, 137, 176, 230, 

231, 232, 233, 288, 374, 379, 381, 384, 387, 454, 

462, 467, 549 

universal access, 27, 144, 194 

tour buses, 57, 77, 78, 87, 164, 182, 204, 205, 246, 

314, 315, 360, 364, 442, 443, 444, 447, 449, 463, 

467, 473, 476, 483, 493 

user capacity, 4, 61, 246, 320, 432, 468, 471, 473, 477, 

489 

drop-off/pickup sites, 30, 57, 62, 63, 70, 73, 74, 78, 

314, 337, 338, 361, 379, 388, 443, 444, 450, 476, 

483, 488, 493, 498, 499 

V

Vietnam Veterans Memorial, 4, 13, 17, 29, 33, 34, 57, 

62, 65, 70, 73, 74, 92, 110, 126, 129, 158, 218, 222, 

224, 226, 227, 258, 260, 267, 270, 281, 282, 283, 

284, 285, 304, 305, 319, 320, 324, 328, 329, 330, 

333, 334, 337, 348, 351, 353, 354, 372, 378, 384, 

417, 549 

drop-offs, 79, 90, 109, 168, 169, 204, 205, 226, 238, 

246, 337, 443, 493, 498 

parking, 57, 70, 76, 168, 218, 238, 242, 311, 314, 

315, 444, 449, 476, 482, 493 

tours, 40, 106, 116, 130, 339, 467 

bicycling, 70, 106, 136, 143, 172, 316, 330, 332, 

354, 454, 464, 474, 480, 486, 491, 496, 497, 507 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial Center, 19, 34, 42, 74, 

119, 130, 146, 174, 222, 226, 227, 259, 321, 325, 

331, 348, 350, 363, 375, 378, 384, 391, 397, 403, 

409, 448, 472, 476, 478, 502, 505, 506, 523, 549 

bus, 314 

cell phone, 85, 101, 143, 170, 172, 330, 474, 480, 

486, 491, 496 

599
INDEX

views and vistas, 13, 16, 17, 26, 48, 57, 59, 60, 63, 64, 

65, 75, 76, 77, 86, 88, 89, 90, 91, 94, 97, 99, 100, 

106, 108, 109, 111, 120, 126, 131, 137, 138, 140, 

146, 152, 153, 158, 161, 162, 180, 181, 195, 196, 

198, 199, 200, 202, 204, 205, 208, 211, 212, 214, 

226, 232, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240, 242, 266, 267, 

271, 272, 273, 275, 276, 277, 278, 280, 282, 283, 

284, 285, 290, 291, 307, 314, 322, 323, 324, 326, 

327, 328, 329, 333, 337, 372, 374, 375, 376, 377, 

381, 382, 383, 384, 385, 386, 416, 419, 420, 421, 

422, 427, 428, 430, 432, 436, 439, 454, 462, 464, 

468, 472, 474, 481, 482, 483, 486, 487, 488, 491, 

492, 493, 494, 497, 498, 499, 509, 548 

cross axes, 13, 58, 90, 108, 125, 201, 208, 209, 326, 

328, 383 

defined, 586 

visitor contact station, 18, 28, 78, 79, 85, 90, 100, 118, 

168, 172, 208, 212, 214, 222, 230, 337, 338, 377, 

383, 431, 478, 496 

visitors with disabilities, 24, 26, 62, 63, 73, 74, 91, 

144, 166, 184, 185, 212, 214, 218, 226, 238, 242, 

291, 311, 314, 444, 450, 453, 461, 463, 471 

volunteers, 71, 73, 132, 194, 222, 316, 330, 447, 456, 

474 

W

Washington Monument, 4, 7, 12, 13, 14, 17, 19, 21, 

22, 26, 27, 28, 33, 36, 38, 41, 57, 58, 59, 62, 63, 64, 

65, 70, 72, 75, 79, 86, 87, 88, 89, 91, 98, 100, 106, 

107, 109, 111, 118, 125, 127, 129, 130, 142, 146, 

152, 158, 161, 168, 174, 176, 177, 180, 196, 205, 

206, 210, 211,•212, 214, 232, 237, 246, 252, 254, 

256, 258, 259, 260, 266, 267, 268, 270, 272, 273, 

277, 278, 279, 280, 281, 282, 283, 284, 286, 291, 

294, 296, 297, 299, 303, 304, 305, 307, 309, 313, 

315, 319, 320, 322, 323, 324, 326, 327, 328, 329, 

330, 332, 333, 334, 337, 348, 349, 351, 353, 363, 

364, 372, 374, 376, 378, 381, 383, 386, 392, 393, 

394, 395, 398, 399, 400, 401, 404, 405, 406, 407, 

410, 411, 412, 416, 418, 420, 421, 422, 423, 424, 

427, 428, 432, 435, 436, 450, 461, 468, 472, 474, 

476, 477, 478, 480, 481, 483, 484, 486, 488, 490, 

492, 493, 494, 496, 497, 498, 499, 502, 503, 507, 

508, 509, 510, 512, 518, 519, 522, 525, 529, 532, 

533, 536, 537, 549 

grounds, 72, 100, 119, 126, 210, 213, 277, 279, 280, 

281, 304, 307, 327, 328, 364, 383, 420, 426, 430, 

434, 438, 484, 494, 507 

waste management, 55, 70, 135, 168, 192, 352, 515, 

516, 517, 520, 526, 530, 533, 537 

water 

nonpotable, 89, 119, 140, 154, 155, 196, 218, 219, 

392, 518, 527 

potable, 22, 28, 29, 31, 53, 66, 84, 115, 134, 154, 

155, 244, 295, 351, 389, 391, 392, 393, 394, 396, 

518, 519, 521, 522, 527, 528, 531, 532, 535, 539, 

541 

water features 

Capitol Reflecting Pool, 22, 27, 35, 36, 78, 118, 

133, 196, 197, 258, 268, 270, 271, 295, 326, 351, 

374, 377, 383, 385, 392, 395, 409, 411, 412, 420, 

497, 519, 522, 525, 527, 537, 539 

fountains, 21, 25, 26, 27, 61, 78, 79, 86, 87, 90, 98, 

107, 117, 118, 126, 135, 137, 140, 154, 174, 178, 

179, 182, 183, 188, 201, 208, 210, 214, 256, 268, 

271, 272, 274, 275, 276, 282, 295, 296, 340, 351, 

362, 444, 453, 462, 464, 482, 493, 498, 519, 520, 

521, 525, 528, 529, 532, 536, 539 

Lincoln Reflecting Pool, 13, 21, 22, 58, 93, 132, 

133, 146, 258, 268, 271, 283, 286, 295, 296, 299, 

304, 305, 327, 340, 351, 397, 398, 399, 400, 401, 

403, 404, 405, 406, 407, 453, 462, 464, 475, 478, 

486, 487, 505, 522, 532, 536, 549 

Rainbow Pool, 14, 73, 259, 268, 278, 282, 286, 327 

water taxi service, 48, 94, 119, 227, 240, 313 

Watergate steps, 14, 29, 59, 64, 65, 74, 79, 92, 93, 100, 

101, 110, 119, 146, 224, 226, 227, 285, 286, 324, 

329, 354, 447 

wayfinding, 48, 83, 85, 98, 130, 142, 150, 168, 170, 

246, 361, 375, 425, 426, 434, 438, 441, 448, 450, 

455, 463, 467, 478, 480, 485, 491, 503, 505, 506 

wayside exhibits, 59, 196, 197, 198, 330, 453, 462, 

464, 468, 474, 479, 480, 486, 491, 522 

defined, 586 

welcome plaza, 90, 141, 142, 208, 247, 377, 479, 480, 

481, 485, 490, 491, 492, 549 

West Potomac Park 

defined, 586 

West Potomac Park riverfront, 14, 64, 76, 80, 238, 

240, 267, 289, 295, 329, 358, 364, 379, 387, 421, 

427, 431, 435, 439, 453 

wheelchair and scooter rentals, 166, 168, 169, 184, 

450, 453, 461 

World War II Memorial, 4, 13, 14, 17, 29, 30, 62, 63, 

65, 73, 126, 129, 130, 146, 218, 259, 267, 270, 278, 

282, 283, 284, 304, 305, 317, 319, 320, 321, 323, 

324, 326, 327, 329, 330, 331, 333, 334, 337, 348, 

349, 350, 351, 353, 354, 372, 444, 463, 476, 478, 

483, 488, 489, 493, 498, 549, 550 

 

600
 

As the nation’s principal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior has responsibility for 

most of our nationally owned public lands and natural resources. This includes fostering sound use 

of our land and water resources; protecting our fish, wildlife, and biological diversity; preserving the 

environmental and cultural values of our national parks and historical places; and providing for the 

enjoyment of life through outdoor recreation. The department assesses our energy and mineral 

resources and works to ensure that their development is in the best interests of all our people by 

encouraging stewardship and citizen participation in their care. The department also has a major 

responsibility for American Indian reservation communities and for people who live in island 

territories under U.S. administration. 

NPS 802/100554 November 2009