Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 86 / Wednesday, May 3, 2000 / Notices 25747

of private lands or interests in private

lands within Douglas County, Nevada.

The environmental assessment, to be

produced by a third-party contractor,

will analyze the impacts (direct,

indirect, and cumulative) of the

potential disposal of BLM managed

public lands and criteria for acquisition

or private lands or interests in private

lands by the BLM.

EFFECTIVE DATES: A public scoping

meeting will be held on May 17, 2000

to allow the public an opportunity to

identify issues and concerns to be

addressed in the plan amendment and

Environmental analysis. Comments will

be accepted until June 2, 2000. Scoping

comments may be sent to: Field

Manager, Bureau of Land Management,

5665 Morgan Mill Road, Carson City,

NV 89701.

The scheduled public meeting will be

held on May 17, 2000 at 6:30 p.m. at the

Carson Valley Community Church,

located at 3616 North Sunridge Drive.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

additional information, write to the

Field Manager of the Carson City Field

Office at the address listed in the agency

section of this notice, call or email Mike

McQueen (BLM NEPA Coordinator) at

(775) 885–6120,

mmcqueen@nv.blm.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

proposed plan amendment schedule is

as follows:

Begin Public Scoping: May 1, 2000

Host Public Scoping Meeting: May 17,

2000

Release Proposed Plan Amendment, EA

and FONSI for Public Review,

Governor’s Consistency Review:

September 15, 2000

Issue Plan Amendment and Decision

Record: January 15, 2000

Planning Criteria

Planning criteria have been developed

to ensure that the plan amendment is

tailored to the issues identified and

ensure that unnecessary data collection

and analysis would be avoided. These

criteria may change in response to

public comment and coordination with

state and local governments or other

Federal agencies. The criteria developed

for the North Douglas County Plan

Amendment are described below. The

plan amendment will address the

following decisions in the North

Douglas County Planning Area:

1. Identify specific parcels of public

lands for potential disposal through

exchange, or under the R&PP Act to

private entities.

2. Identify specific parcels of public

lands for potential transfer to the

Washoe Tribe or to another Federal

agency for management on behalf of the

Tribe.

3. Adopt criteria for BLM acquisition

of private lands or interests in lands

within Douglas County.

4. Approximately 430 acres of BLM

managed public lands located in North

Douglas County will be affected by the

decisions regarding land disposal

through exchange, R&PP Act or transfer

to the Tribe or other Federal agency for

management on behalf of the Tribe.

5. A significant cultural resource site

important to the Washoe Tribe exists on

these lands and will require inventory,

delineation, management and

protection.

6. Criteria for BLM acquisition of

lands or interests in lands will focus on

the acquisition of conservation

easements in the Carson River Flood

Plain in order to protect agricultural

lands and the associated open space

values, wildlife habitat, and flood plain

functions. Approximately 25,000 of

private lands in the flood plain are

expected to be threatened by

development in the future.

7. Additional acquisition criteria will

be developed or adopted for sensitive

lands elsewhere in Douglas County.

8. No lands will be transferred out of

or into Federal ownership as a direct

result of this plan amendment. Specific

exchange proposals or leases under the

R&PP will be considered and analyzed

case by case after the joint County

Specific Plan and BLM Resource

Management Plan Amendment are

completed.

Dated: April 27, 2000.

Richard Conrad,

Assistant Field Office Manager for

Nonrenewable Resources.

[FR Doc. 00–11056 Filed 5–2–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–HC–M

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[NV–952–00–1420-BJ]

Filing of Plats of Survey; Nevada

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management,

Interior.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The purpose of this notice is

to inform the public and interested State

and local government officials of the

filing of Plats of Survey in Nevada.

EFFECTIVE DATES: Filing is effective at

10:00 a.m. on the dates indicated below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David J. Clark, Chief, Branch of

Geographic Services, Bureau of Land

Management (BLM), Nevada State

Office, 1340 Financial Blvd., P.O. Box

12000, Reno, Nevada 89520, 775–861–

6541.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

1. The Plat of Survey of the following

described lands was officially filed at

the Nevada State Office, Reno, Nevada

on February 10, 2000:

The plat, representing the entire

survey record of a metes-and-bounds

survey in section 1, Township 1 South,

Range 68 East, Mount Diablo Meridian,

Nevada, Under Group No. 781, was

accepted February 8, 2000.

This survey was executed to meet

certain administrative needs of the

Bureau of Land Management and

Lincoln County, Nevada.

2. The Plat of Survey of the following

described lands was officially filed at

the Nevada State Office, Reno, Nevada

on March 17, 2000:

The plat representing the dependent

resurvey of a portion of the

subdivisional lines, and the subdivision

of section 14, and a metes-and-bounds

survey of Lot 10 in section 14,

Township 20 North, Range 20 East,

Mount Diablo Meridian, Nevada, under

Group No. 786 was accepted March 17,

2000.

This survey was executed to meet

certain administrative needs of the

Bureau of Land Management and Holy

Cross Catholic Community.

3. The above-listed surveys are now

the basic record for describing the lands

for all authorized purposes. These

surveys have been placed in the open

files in the BLM Nevada State Office

and are available to the public as a

matter of information. Copies of the

surveys and related field notes may be

furnished to the public upon payment of

the appropriate fees.

Dated: April 20, 2000.

David J. Clark,

Chief Cadastral Surveyor, Nevada.

[FR Doc. 00–11044 Filed 5–2–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–HC–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service

Record of Decision for the

Comprehensive Design Plan for the

White House and President’s Park and

Final Environmental Impact Statement

AGENCY: National Park Service,

Department of the Interior.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Department of the

Interior, National Park Service has

prepared the following Record of

25748 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 86 / Wednesday, May 3, 2000 / Notices

Decision on the Final Comprehensive

Design Plan for the White House and

President’s Park and Environmental

Impact Statement. This Record of

Decision is a statement of the

background of the project, what

decisions were made, the basis for the

decision, what alternatives were

considered, the environmentally

preferred alternative, the measures to

minimize environmental harm and the

public involvement in the planning

process.

Background of the Project

Need for the Plan

The White House and President’s Park

are located in our nation’s capital,

Washington D.C., where the White

House serves as the home and office of

the President of the United States. The

overall purpose of a Comprehensive

Design Plan for the White House and

President’s Park is to provide a

framework for future management of the

area that will respect past traditions and

meet the needs of tomorrow. This effort

represents the first comprehensive plan

for the property since George

Washington designated the site in 1791

as the residence for the President.

The White House and President’s Park

are a manifestation of more than 200

years of incremental change. Most

problems have been addressed as they

have arisen, while some have not been

addressed at all. The lack of a

comprehensive plan has generally

resulted in a piecemeal approach to

problem solving and development. Also,

surrounding urban land uses continue

to encroach on President’s Park and

threaten its dignity and character.

Some of the critical concerns facing

the White House and President’s Park

include:

• Not enough space or facilities, or

facilities that are not of the right type or

in the right location, to accommodate

the changing functions of the Executive

Office of the President.

• Insufficient informational and

educational programs and support

facilities for visitors.

• A lack of privacy and indoor

recreation space for the first family.

• The inconsistent use of designs and

materials throughout the area, creating a

haphazard appearance.

• Adverse effects on the dignity and

visual quality of the White House and

President’s Park as a result of vehicles

parking throughout the site, temporary

structures (such as bleachers) that look

out of place, and other activities that

create a disorganized appearance.

• Inadequate maintenance storage

and equipment; poorly located and

worn-out utilities.

The following agencies, which serve

as members of the project’s Executive

Committee, helped develop the

Comprehensive Design Plan for the

White House and President’s Park:

Advisory Council on Historic

Preservation, Commission of Fine Arts,

District of Columbia, Executive Office of

the President, Executive Residence at

the White House, General Services

Administration, National Capital

Planning Commission, National Park

Service, Pennsylvania Avenue

Development Corporation (until April

1996), U.S. Department of the Treasury,

U.S. Secret Service, White House

Military Office.

Park Purpose

The White House has been the official

residence of every president since

November 1, 1800 when the first

residents—John and Abigail Adams—

moved in. The White House is a classic

Georgian manor house that is one of the

most important buildings in the history

of the United States.

The White House was created and set

aside as an important national treasure

to: (1) Provide a residence that offers

privacy, protection and recreational

opportunities for the first family; (2)

Provide a suitable location for the

official functions and activities of the

presidency; (3) Provide office facilities

for the president and immediate staff;

and to (4) Preserve and interpret the

museum character of the White House;

provide public access to the principal

corridor on the ground floor and to the

state rooms on the first floor.

President’s Park was created and set

aside to: (1) Preserve the cultural

resources of the White House—its

architecture, artifacts, landscape design,

gardens and grounds and the

surrounding parklands—in ways that

foster and preserve dignity and respect

for the office of the presidency while

still allowing for their use; (2) Provide

a dignified transition area from an urban

environment to the White House

environs; (3) Interpret the history and

significance of the presidency, the

White House, and President’s Park,

including their relationship to the

American public, our republican form of

government, and the growth of

Washington, DC; (4) Preserve existing

historic memorials as examples of

memorial art; (5) Provide a large open

area associated with the White House

for freedom public expression and

assembly activities, as well as for public

use and enjoyment; (6) Protect and

enhance views to and from the White

House and provide a setting for viewing

the White House; (7) Preserve Lafayette

Park as open public space in the

foreground of the White House as a

setting for passive activities (reflecting,

observing, making a personal

connection with the presidency), First

Amendment activities within legal

limitation, and as a support area for

presidential inaugural activities; (8)

Preserve and interpret Lafayette Park as

one element of the oldest planned

federal reservation in the nation, an

example of early American landscape

design, and the 19th century

neighborhood of the president; and to

(9) Provide a setting for viewing the

White House and elements of the

Lafayette Square National Historic

Landmark District.

Planning Assumptions

The following planning assumptions

form the framework for future actions at

President’s Park and the White House

and were used in development of the

proposed action and the alternatives.

The alternatives, draft and final plans

were measured against these

assumptions to guide the choice of

actions.

Comprehensive Design

Future designs and actions on the

White House grounds and within

President’s Park will respect the

significant elements of past landscape

designs. Elements may be carefully

redesigned to serve modern functions,

but their original context will be

preserved. The vistas, viewsheds,

buildings, roadway and walkway

systems, fencelines, plantings, and all

other elements that combine to create a

ceremonial landscape for state functions

will be respected in the design and

construction of new facilities.

President’s Park will continue to be an

open area that is visually linked to the

National Mall; the traditional vistas to

and from the north and south will be

maintained. No new surface facilities

will be constructed within primary and

secondary views with President’s Park.

Facilities and maintenance operations

will reflect the dignity, significance, and

history of the site and the presidency.

Design Guidelines that have been

developed for architecture, landscape

architecture, design elements, signs, and

temporary facilities at the White House

and President’s Park will be followed.

Quality materials will be used to reflect

the importance and dignity of the White

House.

Resource Conservation and

Management

Cultural and natural resources will

continue to receive high-quality care

and protection. All federal agencies

managing cultural resource programs at

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 86 / Wednesday, May 3, 2000 / Notices 25749

the site will continue to do so. The

National Park Service will cooperate

with these agencies to foster the

exchange of information and the

development of cooperative approaches

and programs for resource protection.

All memorials established by legislation

will be retained. All programs and

facilities will be designed and managed

in an environmentally sound manner.

Executive Residence

The White House will continue to

serve as the executive residence of the

President of the United States. The plan

will not address the second and third

floors of the White House. Official

functions will continue to be held at the

White House and on its grounds.

Vehicular arrivals and departures by the

president and official visitors will

continue at multiple entry and exit

points. The south lawn of the White

House, and on occasion the Ellipse, will

be used for air transport. Safety and

security for the president and the first

family will not be compromised.

Business visitors, guests for official

functions and staff will be cleared at

entrances that are convenient to their

meetings or events, or their work places.

West Executive Avenue will continue to

be within the secured portion of the

White House complex and closed to

public pedestrian traffic. New utility

systems will be energy efficient,

environmentally sensitive, and easy to

maintain and upgrade.

Executive Office Support Services

The White House will continue to

serve as the president’s official office.

Multiple points of access into the White

House complex will continue to be

available for all presidential guests and

visitors. Space for essential White

House administrative and operational

functions will be provided within or

adjacent to the White House; existing

spaces within President’s Park may be

used. Staff parking on the Ellipse and

adjacent roadways, East Executive Park,

West Executive Avenue, and Hamilton,

State, Jackson, and Madison Places will

be provided elsewhere in order to

improve aesthetics and to reestablish

the dignity and character of the site.

Replacement parking with easy access

to the White House will be provided.

News Media Facilities

Facilities will be provided for the

news media to maintain direct access to

the press secretary and the press staff.

Such facilities are in the long tradition

of chief executives providing space for

the news media so they can provide

coverage of, and maintain proximity to,

the operations of the Executive Office of

the President.

Visitor Use and Services

The White House and President’s Park

are integral to the total visitor

experience of Washington DC. The

White House will continue to be open

to the general public on a regular basis

free of charge. The present White House

tour will not change dramatically and

will continue to feature rooms on the

ground and state floors. Because access

to the White House is the most

important objective of most visitors to

President’s Park, this experience will be

made as pleasant and convenient as

possible. To ensure adequate visitor

orientation to the White House and

President’s Park and to provide ticketing

and staging for White House tours, a

White House visitor center and museum

will be provided within easy access of

the White House.

Special Events

Special events of varying size,

intensity, and significance will continue

in President’s Park, as well as on the

White House grounds. All First

Amendment activities will be

accommodated in compliance with

current law.

Transportation

The National Park Service will enter

into discussions with local and regional

planning agencies to address traffic

concerns in the Washington, DC,

downtown area in a comprehensive

fashion, while ensuring the protection

and preservation of national resources

as represented by the White House and

President’s Park. Access to the White

House and President’s Park will be

maintained for operational support and

emergency vehicles. Madison, Jackson,

State, and Hamilton Places will remain

restricted to public vehicular traffic and

will become pedestrian-oriented streets.

No vehicle parking will be provided on

Jackson, Madison, State, or Hamilton

Place; on the Ellipse roadways, or along

the curb lanes surrounding President’s

Park (15th Street, 17th Street,

Constitution Avenue, and H Street). A

future long-term design for

Pennsylvania Avenue, as well as

Lafayette Park, will be considered in a

separate planning document. The use of

mass transit by visitors and staff will be

actively encouraged through policy and

design. Agencies will work with the

Washington Metropolitan Area Transit

Authority to promote staff and visitor

use of mass transit.

Site Management and Operations

The White House and President’s Park

will continue to be managed through

interagency cooperation. All buildings

and grounds within the White House

complex will be managed by the

responsible agency or through

interagency agreements. Sites or

structures outside the boundaries of

President’s Park may have to be used in

order to meet needs identified in the

plan.

Decision (Selected Action)

Comprehensive Design

The plan includes those actions that

will best meet the needs of the

Executive Residence, the Office of the

President, the multiple agencies

involved in stewardship or management

roles within President’s Park, and

visitors. The historic elements and

character of President’s Park and the

White House, including roadways,

boulevards, and walkways, will

continue to be respected. This area will

still serve as a ceremonial landscape for

state events. A comprehensive

landscape plan will be developed for

the White House and President’s Park,

including guidelines for maintenance

practices. The landscape plan will

update the existing Olmsted Plan (1935)

for the White House grounds and create

a guide for landscaping in the remainder

of President’s Park.

President’s Park will become a

pedestrian-oriented space. While

pedestrians can enter from any point

around the site, entryways would be

created at intersections with the highest

pedestrian volumes. These entryways

will signal visitors that they are coming

into a special place and also will

provide visitor information. A total of 8

entryways will be provided (two each

on H Street, Pennsylvania Avenue, E

Street, and Constitution Avenue).

Design Guidelines for the White

House and President’s Park, approved in

1995, provide a framework to guide

future development. The guidelines

identify principles for architecture,

landscape architecture, design elements,

signs and temporary facilities. They are

based on existing designs in and around

President’s Park and the White House.

Two objectives were considered in

locating all proposed facilities: (1)

Where possible, use existing buildings

(if they meet desired future conditions

and program requirements) in order to

protect resources, enhance the site

character, and minimize new

development. (2) Where new facilities

are needed, relocate as many functions

as possible to new underground

structures to minimize any new

25750 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 86 / Wednesday, May 3, 2000 / Notices

intrusions on the surface; optimize the

use of new facilities in order to avoid

the creation of numerous small facilities

and increased costs.

Resource Conservation and

Management

All cultural resource documentation

will be kept current. All monuments

and memorials within President’s Park

will receive conservation/preservation

treatment on a regular schedule and be

kept in the best possible condition. All

historically significant trees and

specimen plants will be identified,

physically assessed, inventoried,

maintained and replaced with similar

plant materials, as needed.

A comprehensive landscape plan will

be developed for the White House and

President’s Park, including guidelines

for maintenance practices. The

landscape plan also will update the

existing Olmsted Plan (1935) for the

White House grounds.

A comprehensive archeological

program, based on a completed

preliminary survey, will be developed

to help ensure the conservation,

protection and proper administration of

archeological resources.

Storage space for fine and decorative

arts will be provided within or

immediately adjacent to the White

House so that items can be properly

prepared for shipment to offsite storage

facilities, or so that damaged items can

be fully assessed before transportation

to conservators. This facility will also be

used to temporarily store artifacts

during events.

Executive Residence

Secure, indoor, informal recreation

space for future first families will be

provided outside of the White House

itself, but immediately adjacent to the

residence. General storage space for

items frequently used at the Executive

Residence will be provided below

ground underneath Pennsylvania

Avenue. An underground corridor will

connect the storage area and the

Executive Residence. Other storage will

also be provided in the lower level of

the west colonnade. The maintenance

facility on the south grounds of the

White House will be redesigned for

efficiency within the footprint of the

current structure.

Executive Office Support Services

Official visitors and White House

guests will continue to use multiple

entry points. West Executive Avenue

will be redesigned to appear similar to

East Executive Park. Utility systems will

be replaced and relocated to meet the

changing and expanding needs of the

White House complex and grounds.

Staging for motorcades and parking

for senior staff will be provided in a

290-space parking garage beneath

Pennsylvania Avenue, with a

belowground access corridor to the

White House complex. Parking for other

staff will be provided by constructing an

850-space garage beneath the Ellipse.

Pending the completion of this facility,

parking will be leased in private parking

garages within about a 10-minute walk

of the White House complex.

To accommodate existing needs, new

meeting/conference space will be

constructed under West Executive

Avenue. To facilitate staff circulation

and deliveries throughout the site and to

minimize conflicts with Executive

Residence operations, a belowground

corridor will connect the Dwight D.

Eisenhower Executive Office Building,

the White House and the Treasury

Building. Deliveries will be made at

docks in the New Executive Office

Building and distributed throughout the

site by way of underground service

corridors. Facilities for the news media

will be upgraded on the first floor of the

west colonnade, with additional new

facilities provided beneath West Wing

Drive.

Visitor Use and Services

Complete information and orientation

for visitors will be provided at

entryways to the park, using staff and

interactive computer monitors.

The White House Visitor Center in the

Commerce Building will be expanded

below ground in existing and new space

to provide small theaters for staging the

public tour, a museum, and exhibit,

program and educational areas.

Expanded interpretive programs about

the White House and the presidency

will be offered, with specially designed

programs for visitors and

schoolchildren. Visitors taking a public

tour of the White House will watch a

short orientation film and then move

through a naturally lighted pedestrian

corridor to just outside the fenced

portion of the White House grounds.

From there they will walk on the surface

sidewalk to the existing visitor entrance

building.

To improve the appearance and

dignity of President’s Park, no

commercial vending will be allowed

along adjacent sidewalks and curb

lanes. Informal recreational activities

will continue on the Ellipse.

Special Events

For special events, a new plaza/

performance area will be constructed in

the panel just northeast of the Ellipse.

The plaza will provide permanent

infrastructure to reduce impacts

associated with staging events. Events

will need to reflect the purpose and

dignity of the site, be small scale and of

short duration, involve minimal

commercialism, and reflect multiple

cultures. Any temporary facilities used

for staging events will be promptly

removed.

Transportation

In the long term, the plan seeks to

reduce the pedestrian vehicle conflicts

in President’s Park and thus calls for E

Street to be two lanes eastbound with an

access lane for official White House

traffic and a landscaped median to

create a more parklike atmosphere. Long

term major improvements will be made

to enhance E Street’s appearance,

including changing the shape of some

medians, planting along medians and

pavement and other material changes

along the roadway to create a more

parklike setting. The intent of all such

improvements will be to help blend the

road into the vista and minimize its

intrusion. Changes in paving pattern or

materials will signify a special place for

all vehicles entering the park.

However, the plan recognizes that

severe traffic problems exist in the

downtown District of Columbia street

system. Further, the plan recognizes that

interim measures involving E Street

within President’s Park must be taken to

help alleviate these problems. The

Federal Highway Administration, with

the cooperation of the District of

Columbia and the National Park Service,

will complete a project during 2000 to

restore westbound traffic between 15th

and 17th Streets, thus re-opening twoway traffic on E Street.

Proposals have also been introduced

for the E Street area, such as tunnels,

which are beyond the scope of this plan,

but that may be considered in the

future. Reducing surface traffic within

President’s Park remains a long-term

goal of the plan. To enhance the

pedestrian experience and safety, the

National Park Service may experiment

with options such as timed access and

crossing assistance.

The roadways on the Ellipse will be

closed to vehicular traffic except for

limited access by emergency and

authorized traffic. The roads’ historic

configuration and character will be

retained for use as wide pedestrian

paths leading to adjacent gardens in the

side panels.

Site Management and Operations

To make park operations more

efficient, a satellite maintenance facility

will be developed near President’s Park.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 86 / Wednesday, May 3, 2000 / Notices 25751

The steam line under the center of the

Ellipse will be relocated, subject to

criteria to protect park resources.

Other Alternatives Considered

The No Action Alternative

Comprehensive Design

The no-action alternative would

continue current management strategies.

Management decisions regarding the

development and appropriate design of

elements within the park (e.g.,

monuments, paving materials, fences

and barriers, and infrastructure for

special events) would be made on a

project-by-project basis. Construction

and development would be undertaken

to address immediate needs and

pressures. No coordinated efforts by

agencies would be undertaken to

minimize impacts from overuse.

Home and Office of the President

No additional recreation space would

be provided for future first families.

Meetings and conferences would

continue to be held in available spaces

throughout the complex, including

historic rooms that are not equipped for

such functions. Frequently used

materials within the White House

complex would be stored offsite and

brought in as needed. Deliveries would

be made at various surface locations.

Facilities for the news media would

remain in the west colonnade. Staff

vehicles would be parked in currently

used areas.

Visitor Use and Services

Information and orientation sources

would be scattered throughout

President’s Park; visitors would

continue to stop at security guard

booths for information. The visitor

center would remain in the Commerce

Building. After picking up same-day

public tour tickets at the visitor center,

visitors would queue up for tours on the

Ellipse during the summer and along

the White House fence the rest of the

year, as they do now. Commercial

vending would continue along

sidewalks and curb lanes adjacent to

President’s Park.

Special Events

Special events on the Ellipse and

within the White House grounds would

continue to be accommodated, with no

controls on growth.

Transportation

E Street would remain as two lanes

eastbound across President’s Park.

Site Management and Operations

Maintenance operations would be

based at an existing facility about 1.5

miles away.

Alternatives 1, 2 and 3

As previously mentioned, alternatives

1, 2, and 3 were presented to the public

during the spring of 1995. The proposed

plan includes elements from all these

alternatives, and the following

discussion focuses on the different

approaches between the alternatives.

Comprehensive Design

Under each alternative, as described

for the proposed plan, pedestrian

entryways would signify to visitors that

they were coming into President’s Park.

Under alternative 1 traditional

patterns of use and site relationships

would be respected. All major support

operations would be accommodated

below ground within the White House

complex and President’s Park.

Under alternative 2 major support

operations and facilities for the

Executive Residence and the Office of

the President would be accommodated

as much as possible within the White

House complex and President’s Park.

All elements of President’s Park would

be visually unified by emphasizing

north/south views along East Executive

Park and West Executive Avenue, with

pedestrian plazas on the eastern and

western portions of South Executive

Avenue. E Street would be tunneled,

providing unobstructed views to and

from the White House and allowing the

Ellipse to be linked with the rest of

President’s Park.

Under alternative 3 operations and

support facilities would be smaller,

decentralized, and dispersed away from

the White House grounds and

President’s Park as much as possible.

Only those operations that must occur

within or near the White House would

remain. The use of existing structures

would be emphasized, with as little new

facility construction as possible. A

historical ambience would be evident

through President’s Park, and E Street

would be removed, helping link the

Ellipse with the rest of President’s Park.

Resource Conservation and Management

Under each alternative, resources

would be managed as described for the

proposed plan.

Home and Office of the President

Facilities under each alternative

would be similar to those under the

proposed plan, but locations would

differ.

Under alternative 1 indoor recreation

space for future first families, storage

space, and facilities for the news media

would be provided beneath West

Executive Avenue, in conjunction with

meeting space. Staff parking facilities

would be provided onsite. In addition to

a 290-space parking facility under

Pennsylvania Avenue and an 850-space

facility under the northern part of the

Ellipse, below ground parking would

also be provided south of the Treasury

Building (170 spaces). Deliveries would

be accommodated at the facility south of

Treasury, as well as through the New

Executive Office Building.

Under alternative 2 indoor recreation

space for future first families would be

provided below ground north of the

residence. A meeting and conference

facility, plus general storage space,

would be constructed beneath West

Executive Avenue; a motorcade staging

area and parking for diplomatic and

business visitors (290) would be

provided below ground south of the

Dwight D. Eisenhower Executive Office

Building. Parking for other staff (850

spaces) would be leased or provided in

a new facility within about a 10-minute

walk of the complex. For news media

facilities, either existing facilities in the

west colonnade would be upgraded or

the first floor of the colonnade would be

upgraded and additional facilities

constructed under West Wing Drive.

Under alternative 3 recreation space

for future first families would be

provided within the west colonnade

where press facilities are now. Facilities

for meetings and conferences and the

news media would be developed within

the north courtyard of the Dwight D.

Eisenhower Executive Office Building

rather than below West Executive

Avenue. As described for the proposed

plan, a 290-space parking facility for

motorcades, diplomatic and business

visitors, and some senior staff would be

constructed under Pennsylvania

Avenue. An additional 200 parking

spaces, as well as delivery facilities,

would be provided in the Office of

Thrift Supervision or under

Pennsylvania Avenue, and another 650

parking spaces would be leased or

provided in a new facility nearby.

Visitor Use and Services

Visitor information and orientation

functions would be provided at park

entryways under each alternative, as

described for the proposed plan. No

commercial vending would be allowed

along sidewalks or curb lanes adjacent

to President’s Park under any

alternative.

Under alternative 1 a new 66,000-

square-foot visitor center and museum

would be built underground in the

northeast quadrant of the Ellipse.

25752 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 86 / Wednesday, May 3, 2000 / Notices

Visitors would have additional

opportunities to learn about the

presidency and the White House

through interpretive programs,

including living history, conducted

throughout the park. Visitors on public

tours of the White House would move

through a below ground corridor from

the visitor center directly to the visitor

entrance building.

Under alternative 2 a 40,000-squarefoot visitor center would be constructed

below ground to the south and west of

the U.S. Treasury Building. Visitors on

public tours of the White House would

take escalators, elevators, or stairs

directly up to the visitor entrance

building. In lieu of interpretive exhibits

and activities at this smaller visitor

center, numerous interpretive and

educational experiences would be

provided throughout the site. (This

proposal could conflict with utility

work recently being planned south of

the Treasury Building.)

Under alternative 3 interpretive

programs and exhibits would be focused

at an expanded visitor center and

museum in the Commerce Building

(60,000 square feet), as described for the

proposed plan.

Special Events

Criteria would be established for

special events in President’s Park (other

than First Amendment demonstrations)

under alternatives 1 and 2, similar to

the proposed plan. Under alternative 1

all special events would be worthy of

attendance by the first family and reflect

the site’s dignity. Existing special events

on the Ellipse would be reduced in scale

and duration, and they would be

dispersed around the site to allow

sufficient time for turf and garden areas

to recover. Under alternative 2 a special

events plaza, as described for the

proposed plan, would be built in the

Ellipse area. Under alternative 3 all

special events currently held within

President’s Park would be moved to

other sites within the metropolitan area.

Under each alternative

recommendations would be developed

for events on the White House grounds

to protect resources.

Transportation

As described for the proposed plan,

Ellipse Drive and the adjacent roadways

would be closed to vehicular traffic,

although access would still be allowed

for emergency and authorized traffic.

The roadways would be redesigned as

pedestrian walkways, with pathways

leading to gardens and sitting areas in

the side panels.

Under alternative 1 E Street would be

widened to four lanes (two lanes in each

direction) across President’s Park and

between 17th and 18th Streets. A

pedestrian underpass would be

provided near 15th Street.

Under alternative 2 E Street would be

tunneled as a four-lane, two-way street

through President’s Park.

Under alternative 3 E Street would be

closed to traffic and replaced with a

broad walkway.

Site Management and Operations

Under each alternative a satellite

maintenance facility would be

developed to allow more efficient

maintenance operations throughout

President’s Park. Under alternative 1

this facility would be built in

conjunction with the Ellipse parking

facility, while under alternatives 2 and

3 it would be provided nearby. As

described for the proposed plan, the

steam line under the Ellipse would be

relocated, based on criteria to protect

park resources.

Environmentally Preferred Alternative

The environmentally preferred

alternative is defined as ‘‘the one that

will promote National Environmental

Policy as expressed in the National

Environmental Policy Act’s, Section

101. Ordinarily, this means the

alternative that causes the least damage

to the biological and physical

environment; it also means the

alternative which best protects,

preserves, and enhances the historic,

cultural and natural resources in the

area where the proposed action is to

take place.’’ (‘‘Forty Most Asked

Questions Concerning Council on

Environmental Quality’s (CEQ) National

Environmental Policy Act Regulations.’’

1981).

The no-action alternative would

eventually result in the deterioration or

loss of significant cultural and natural

resources as site staff respond to

immediate needs and pressures rather

than a coherent long term plan that

minimizes impacts.

All action alternatives have varying

cultural resources impacts that may be

considered adverse and they are

identified in the Environmental Impact

Statement. Section 106 Memorandum of

Agreements would be developed for

each project considered adverse and

located outside the area excluded by

Section 107 of the Historic Preservation

Act of 1966, as amended.

The selected action will result in

considerable ground disturbance for

construction of underground parking

facilities, the storage area and the news

media and meeting facilities.

Alternative 1 would result in

extensive ground disturbance for

construction of underground parking

facilities, the eastside parking/delivery

area, the visitor center and museum,

and the news media and meeting

facilities.

Alternative 2 would result in

extensive ground disturbance for the

visitor center, the westside parking/

delivery area, the news media and

meeting facilities, storage facilities and

the tunneling of E Street.

Alternative 3 would result in ground

disturbance for the visitor center

corridor, and the parking facilities and

delivery access.

Alternative 3 has the least impact on

vegetation and soils because much of

the new development would take place

under existing streets. However,

elements of Alternative 3 have serious

adverse effect upon the historic Dwight

D. Eisenhower Executive Office

Building. Alternative 3 also would have

significant impact upon the surrounding

fabric and existing functions of the city.

The selected action is the

environmentally preferred alternative

because while it causes considerable

disruption of soils and vegetation, it

does not have a serious adverse effect

upon the historic Dwight D. Eisenhower

Executive Office Building and does not

expand the White House complex into

new areas of the city beyond the present

security perimeter, thus minimizing

additional intrusion by the operational

needs of the site into the surrounding

fabric of the city. The natural

environment at the site, which is a

series of historic landscapes, has been

affected by human design and presence

since the 1790s. All areas where ground

disturbance takes place will be restored

and replanted following construction.

The selected action also provides for

maintenance of, and enhancement to,

the historic landscape and built

environment through creation of an

update to the Olmsted Plan and

implementing of design work based on

that document.

Basis for Decision

The selected action was created based

upon the ‘‘Planning Assumptions’’,

described in the foregoing material. In

addition, public involvement at the data

collection, alternatives and draft and

final plan stages provided further

insights as to how others saw the site

and its problems.

Many elements of the selected action

were common to all alternatives in order

to meet the ‘‘Planning Assumptions’’.

There are some places where differences

between the alternatives occur and in

those cases, the basis for the decision

included:

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 86 / Wednesday, May 3, 2000 / Notices 25753

Home and Office

For efficiency purposes, it is

important to have storage of commonly

used items immediately accessible to

the Executive Residence. To be effective

for future first families, the indoor

recreation space needs to be

immediately adjacent to the historic

White House structure.

Meeting space needs to be in

immediate proximity to the West Wing

and the Dwight D. Eisenhower

Executive Office Building, but not be

built within the courtyards of the

historic building.

Motorcade and staff parking need to

be consolidated into two facilities in

close proximity to the White House

complex. The access portals for the

facilities should not expand the

perimeter of the secure complex.

The new delivery facility should not

expand the perimeter of the secure

complex.

For the news media, new updated

facilities need to be provided and the

existing ground floor of the west

colonnade needs to be renovated.

Visitor Use and Services

The existing visitor center at the

Commerce Department has the

appropriate large entry area for the

numbers of people who take the White

House tours. The existing facility should

be expanded rather than impact historic

structures and landscapes at the site

with a new visitor center structure.

A full visitor education program is

needed for the White House and

President’s Park.

White House tour visitors should

spend a brief period of time along the

White House fence to experience the

historic context and vistas of the White

House as they wait for their tour.

The historic landscape of the Ellipse

needs to be maintained and preserved,

while providing traditional recreational

uses, encouraging passive recreation

and providing no permanent

infrastructure for active sports.

Special Events

An events plaza needs to be

constructed to provide the infrastructure

needed for special events at the site.

Special events are a part of the site’s

history and tradition. These need to be

continued while finding ways to

minimize the impacts and damage to the

historic landscape.

Transportation

Reducing pedestrian/vehicle conflicts

at the site, especially in the E Street

corridor, is the long-term goal of the

plan. However, the very difficult traffic

congestion problems in the downtown

area of the District of Columbia mean

that interim measures need to be taken

to improve traffic on E Street. The

Federal Highway Administration, in

cooperation with the National Park

Service and the District of Columbia,

will complete a project in 2000 to

restore westbound traffic to E Street

between 15th and 17th Streets.

Site Management and Operations

For efficiency, the President’s Park

maintenance facility needs to be

included in the Ellipse parking facility.

Measures to Minimize Harm

All practical measures to avoid or

minimize environmental impacts that

could result from implementation of the

selected action have been identified and

incorporated.

Representatives of the District of

Columbia and the Advisory Council on

Historic Preservation have been

involved in the development of the

selected action. Further consultation

will occur prior to implementation of

individual actions described within the

plan. Archeological evaluation and

mitigation will precede all ground

disturbances, if required.

The final plan recommends a

landscape management plan for the

White House and President’s Park be

undertaken to guide development and

aid preservation of significant historical

features of the landscape. In addition,

site-specific vegetation management

plans will be developed to guide

individual actions.

Site specific plans will be developed

to prevent storm water runoff in

construction areas that could result in

groundwater contamination.

Hazardous waste removal plans will

be developed as necessary in

construction areas where the potential

for contaminated materials exists. In

particular, studies for hazardous

materials will be conducted in the area

of the Ellipse parking garage during the

preliminary design development stages

of the project. Sampling will be

conducted as specified in the comments

from the Environmental Protection

Agency, and additional test samples

will be taken as required.

Public and Interagency Involvement

Throughout the planning process for

this Comprehensive Design for the

White House and President’s Park,

consultation and coordination

opportunities have been made available

to other agencies, organizations, visitors,

and the general public, as described

below. In addition, presentations were

made to a variety of organizations and

individuals interested in the status of

planning for the White House and

President’s Park.

Scoping Activities for the Plan

A Federal Register notice was

published by the National Park Service

on March 19, 1993, announcing the start

of the process for a Comprehensive

Design Plan for the White House and the

preparation of a draft environmental

impact statement.

Beginning in March 1993 and

throughout the spring and summer,

issue workshops were held to elicit the

concerns of two audiences: (1) Officials

and staffs of the 12 stewardship and

oversight agencies with management

responsibilities at the White House and

within President’s Park, and (2)

organizations, including adjacent

businesses and institutions, that have

specific interest or concerns at the site.

Approximately 50 different agencies

and organizations participated in the

workshops; more than 70 organizations

were invited to attend. Workshops

continued into the fall of 1993.

From April 30 through May 3, 1993,

an opportunity to hear from visitors and

the general public was provided on the

eastern side-panel of the Ellipse near

15th Street. Members of the planning

team were on the site to talk with local,

national, and international visitors

about their time in the study area. The

purpose of this activity was to listen to

concerns and comments from visitors,

in addition to agency concerns. Team

members talked to people on Friday and

Saturday, when the White House was

open for tours, and on Sunday and

Monday, when the White House is

closed for tours. Approximately 1,100

visitors were encouraged to provide

information for a series of exhibits to

find out how visitors arrived at the site,

what they saw while there, what they

wanted to know more about in

relationship to the presidency and the

White House, and their suggestions for

improvements in the area.

Desired Futures

In the fall of 1993 a total of 80 subject

matter experts were invited to

workshops on October 27 and 28 to

develop desired futures for what the

area should be like in the year 2015.

Nine working groups addressed support

services for the Executive Residence,

support services for the Executive Office

of the President, resource conservation

and protection, official functions,

security, special events, visitor use and

services, transportation, and site

character. Individuals represented both

the public and private sectors; some had

a long experience at the site, and others

had expertise in a particular field but no

25754 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 86 / Wednesday, May 3, 2000 / Notices

experience with the White House and

President’s Park. The desired futures

developed at these workshops can be

found on page 16, and a list of the

participants is included in Appendix G

of the Final Comprehensive Design Plan

for the White House and President’s

Park and Final Environmental Impact

Statement.

Executive Committee

To help guide the development of the

plan, the Director of the National Park

Service asked the leadership of

governmental stewardship and oversight

agencies (those federally chartered

organizations who have official

responsibilities within the study area) to

serve on an Executive Committee

chaired by the National Park Service

Director. The intent was to create a

forum for each member to be directly

involved and to be able to provide their

expertise and that of their agencies with

regard to the White House and

President’s Park.

Agencies serving on the Executive

Committee include:

Executive Office of the President—

National Park Service

Executive Residence at the White

House—District of Columbia

White House Military Office—

Commission of Fine Arts

Department of the Treasury—National

Capital Planning Commission

U.S. Secret Service—Advisory Council

on Historic Preservation

General Services Administration—

Pennsylvania Avenue Development

Corporation (until 4/96)

Beginning in spring 1993, the

committee met at the following key

stages to guide the development of the

plan: issue identification, desired

futures, conceptual alternatives,

alternatives, development of a preferred

alternative and development of the final

plan.

During its work the committee formed

two subcommittees: one helped develop

design guidelines for the site (chaired by

the National Park Service), and a second

helped develop a draft strategy for

implementing and financing the final

plan (chaired by the Pennsylvania

Avenue Development Corporation).

Design Guidelines

The Design Guidelines Subcommittee

held a workshop on August 3, 1994,

with a cross section of professionals in

landscape architecture, urban planning,

architecture, lighting, and land

management. Ideas generated during the

workshop helped develop the

foundations for the Design Guidelines.

The Design Guidelines can be found on

page 15, and the workshop participants

are listed in Appendix G of the Final

Comprehensive Design Plan for the

White House and President’s Park and

Final Environmental Impact Statement.

Interpretive Themes Workshop

A workshop was held on March 2,

1994, to develop interpretive themes for

the White House and President’s Park.

Participants used their expertise in

interpretation and the history of the site,

as well as the results of the Ellipse

public involvement from spring 1993

and the earlier visitor surveys done at

the site. The interpretive themes

developed at this workshop are

described in Appendix D, and the

participants are listed in Appendix G of

the Final Comprehensive Design Plan

for the White House and President’s

Park and Final Environmental Impact

Statement.

News Media Working Group

In March 1995 the National Park

Service presented the alternative

concepts being considered for the site to

the news media organizations that cover

the White House. At that time concerns

were expressed about proposals for

spaces they use at the site. As a result,

the Park Service invited the White

House Correspondents’ Association, the

White House News Photographers’

Association, and the Network Pool to

join in a news media working group.

The group worked with the Park Service

and other agencies at the site to develop

proposals for the space assigned to the

news media. The working group

meetings included a news media

desired futures workshop in August

1995. The participants in the news

media working group can be found in

Appendix G, and the news media

desired futures in Appendix H of the

Final Comprehensive Design Plan for

the White House and President’s Park

and Final Environmental Impact

Statement.

Public Forum and Alternatives

Newsletter

During April and May 1995 the

alternative concepts being considered

for the White House and President’s

Park were made available for the public

review and comment. Copies of the

planning newsletter were mailed to

approximately 5,000 persons and

organizations on the project mailing list.

Included in the newsletter was a

description of three alternative concepts

for the site plus a response form. The

alternative concepts were the subject of

widespread radio and television news

coverage and were the focus of public

forums held at the White House Visitor

Center in Washington, D.C., on April 10

and 11. During the forums some 2,400

people saw exhibits and a video on the

alternatives. Copies of the alternative

concepts and the newsletter response

form were available. Members of the

National Park Service planning team

were available to discuss problems at

the site and the three alternative

concepts. These concepts were the basis

for the three alternatives presented in

the Final Comprehensive Design Plan

for the White House and President’s

Park and Final Environmental Impact

Statement; the final plan draws

elements from each of the alternatives.

Development and Review of the Draft

Plan

After public review of the conceptual

alternatives further work was done to

refine the alternative elements. The

draft plan was developed in

coordination with members of the

Executive Committee.

The Draft Comprehensive Design Plan

for the White House and President’s

Park and Draft Environmental Impact

Statement was made available to the

public for review and comment from

December 2, 1998, until March 11, 1999.

Interested federal and local public

agencies, neighboring businesses and

organizations, interested individuals,

and the cooperating agencies on the

Executive Committee were provided an

opportunity to review and comment on

the document.

During the comment period, the

proposed plan was presented in many

media, including newspaper and

magazine articles, television and radio

broadcasts, public summaries of the

proposed plan (9,000 copies were

distributed), an Internet Web site,

National Park Service presentations to

interested groups, and an exhibit at the

White House Visitor Center. Public

forums were held on the draft document

at the White House Visitor Center on

January 27 and 28, 1999.

Public and agency review of the Draft

Comprehensive Design Plan for the

White House and President’s Park and

Draft Environmental Impact Statement

helped ensure that relevant issues and

alternatives were adequately considered

and evaluated, and that all pertinent

implications of the alternatives were

analyzed. The comments and responses

enabled interested parties to review and

assess how other agencies,

organizations, and individuals

responded to the proposed action, the

alternatives, and their potential impacts.

Summary of Comments

A total of 100 responses were

received—14 from governmental

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 86 / Wednesday, May 3, 2000 / Notices 25755

agencies, 15 from businesses and

organizations, 2 from students at

educational institutions, and 69 from

individuals. The responses represented

a wide geographic distribution, with

22% from the Washington, D.C., area

and 78% from the rest of the nation.

The comments came in various forms:

51 letters, 31 E-mails and Web site

responses, and 18 exhibit

questionnaires. The most frequently

mentioned topics in the responses

related to facilities, project cost or

funding, adjacent streets, parking,

landscape design, and the

implementation schedule.

Facilities

Six responders were not in favor of

improving White House recreation

facilities for the president. With regard

to facilities for the White House press

corps, the White House Correspondents’

Association was concerned about space

and access to the president (two letters

signed by nine individuals), while four

public commenters suggested removing

or restricting press space. Other

responses suggested improving the

Pageant of Peace location on the Ellipse

(2 comments) and improving existing

facilities and outdoor space at the White

House (2 comments).

Project Costs or Funding

Seventeen responders were concerned

about how the project would be

financed or the total cost of the project.

Adjacent Streets

Both E Street and Pennsylvania

Avenue were mentioned by several

responders. E Street comments included

the following range, as summarized

below:

• Tunnel E Street (5 comments).

• Do not tunnel E Street (1 comment).

• Eliminate/close E Street (2

comments).

• Do not close E Street (1 comment).

• Widen E Street to four lanes (2

comments).

• Provide reversible lanes on E Street

(1 comment).

• Clarify the short-term versus the

long-term action (1 comment).

Responders commented on

Pennsylvania Avenue even though the

draft document stated that public

vehicular access on the avenue had been

restricted by the U.S. Department of the

Treasury and that a future long-term

design for Pennsylvania Avenue would

be considered in a separate planning

document. The comments ranged from

supporting the permanent closure of

Pennsylvania Avenue (3 comments) to

objecting to the closure or requesting

that subsequent impacts on historic

buildings, traffic, and parking be

addressed (3 comments).

Parking

Parking comments related to support

for underground parking (4 comments),

support for removing cars from the

Ellipse (3 comments), security concerns

(4 comments), concerns about too much

staff parking (5 comments), a question

about cumulative impacts on parking

with a new Washington Convention

Center (1 comment), and a need to more

adequately assess the impacts of leasing

parking space (1 comment).

Three responders expressed concern

about security within an underground

parking garage beneath the Ellipse and

access to the White House. There were

also concerns about vegetative impacts

(2 comments), potential landfill

problems (1 comment), visual impacts

of the portals (1 comment), and traffic

impacts on Constitution Avenue

associated with the Ellipse parking

facility (1 comment). Three responders

suggested providing public parking

under the Ellipse, and six others

suggested promoting public

transportation instead of providing

additional parking.

Landscape Design

There were 13 comments either

supporting specific design elements or

offering suggestions pertaining to the

‘‘Greening of the White House,’’

memorial requests, the First Division

Monument, the use of native landscape

materials within the White House

grounds, and architectural design

features not provided in the framework

of the Design Guidelines for the White

House and President’s Park.

Implementation Schedule

Five individuals encouraged

shortening the proposed 20-year

implementation schedule.

Final Plan and Environmental Impact

Statement

Portions of the Draft Environmental

Impact Statement (DEIS) were clarified

and expanded upon, based upon the

comments received during review of the

draft plan and DEIS. The elements of the

Draft Comprehensive Design Plan for

the White House and President’s Park

were confirmed to be the elements of

the final plan.

The Final Comprehensive Design Plan

for the White House and President’s

Park and Final Environmental Impact

Statement (FEIS) was released December

13, 1999. The Environmental Protection

Agency 30-day no action period closed

January 21, 2000. A total of 351 copies

of the Final Plan/FEIS were distributed

to all who commented on the Draft

Plan/DEIS, park neighbors, interested

public and private organizations and

Members of Congress.

During the 30-day no action period,

comments were received: (1) from the

Environmental Protection Agency

stating that EPA has determined that the

National Park Service has adequately

addressed its comments within the

FEIS, and (2) from the Washington

Metropolitan Area Transit Authority

(METRO) complementing the plan and

confirming that the plan has no impacts

upon the existing Metrorail Red Line

tunnels that traverse Lafayette Park and

the northeast corner of the Treasury

Building. METRO stated that they are

looking at potential rail transit service

from Georgetown to Mt. Vernon Square

as well as other enhancements to the

capacity of their Core system. They

requested that as the project progresses

into detailed design, they would

appreciate an opportunity to review the

documents associated with the

underground parking and pedestrian

connections along Pennsylvania Avenue

between West Executive Avenue/

Jackson Place and Madison Place. The

National Park Service and the other

agencies involved in the planning look

forward to working together with

METRO as the project moves forward

through the implementation phase.

Conclusion

The National Park Service has

determined that the preferred

alternative described in the Final

Comprehensive Design Plan for the

White House and President’s Park and

Final Environmental Impact Statement

(and described in the foregoing as the

‘‘Selected Action’’) best meets the future

needs of the White House and

President’s Park while protecting the

natural and cultural resources located

here and the fabric of the city

surrounding the site.

Dated: March 29, 2000.

Robert Stanton,

Director, National Park Service.

[FR Doc. 00–10951 Filed 5–2–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–70–P