| | |
| | |
| October 17, 2007 Dear Coalition Friends, We were wondering what inspired The Washington Times to publish the article about the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Visitor Center last week. Now we know. The National Park Service will go before the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts tomorrow, Thursday, October 18, to seek approval of the design concept for the Visitor Center. The Coalition will present testimony opposing any approval of this controversial project at this time, for reasons stated below. Although the Commission of Fine Arts is an advisory body, it plays a strong role in the design review and public consultation process. Its approval is a major step that locks in concepts, after which significant change is unlikely. Therefore, the Coalition's testimony will urge the Commission of Fine Arts not to accept the concept design and to advise the National Park Service that it is premature to seek approval and to return only after the requirements of the public consultation process have been met. We also include, below, the email to the Coalition from the NPS dismissing our concerns about the project. This NPS response is, unfortunately, typical of NPS's attitude toward public concerns over a number of recent projects proposed for the National Mall. The meeting starts at 10 a.m. in the National Building Museum, 401 F Street, NW, Suite 312. Contact information: http://www.cfa.gov / 202-504-2200. The public may email the Commission members at commissioners@cfa.gov. You may call to sign up to speak at the meeting or simply tell the commissioners at the meeting of your desire to comment. Also of importance: The second item on the CFA agenda is St. Elizabeths Hospital, another controversial project that proposes turning that historical property on the hills of Anacostia, with one of the great views of Washington DC, over to Homeland Security, thus effectively sealing it off from public access and public uses. Organizations and agencies that have questioned the logic of concentrating Homeland Security personnel in one place, in a highly sensitive security area in close proximity to the US Capitol and government buildings, still await answers. The National Trust for Historic Preservation named St. Elizabeths one of its Most Endanger Places for 2007. See the reasons here. BACKGROUND ON THE VIETNAM VETERANS MEMORIAL VISITOR CENTER: (See our update from October 12 at where we state that during a September 12 public consultation meeting "It became clear...that 'underground' does not mean invisible. The proposed design includes a large open-air courtyard to allow natural light into the subterranean spaces, as well as uncovered ramps leading from ground level down into the museum and office areas.) At the September 12 meeting the NPS did not take minutes, so the Coalition did. During the meeting, the Coalition noted that Congress has put the NPS in an untenable position by designating NPS the partner for privately sponsored projects such as the Vietnam Visitor Center. The public expects the National Park Service, as steward of the National Mall, to protect and preserve the historical and cultural resource from degradation. But the NPS ends up, instead, aggressively promoting private projects and rejecting public concerns, as it had during the meeting. The NPS representative rejected that observation as irrelevant. Can NPS be an effective steward of the nation's cultural resources and public lands while also advocating for new privately sponsored and funded projects to be located on them? Also at the meeting, participants requested that NPS provide drawings, plans, views of the project, preferably in digital form, so that they could share them with their agencies, members, and the public. We heard nothing from NPS until October 11, when hard copies of plans and views were delivered by FedEx. The accompanying letter provided notice of the October 18 CFA meeting mentioned above. And it stated that the NPS plans to hold the next public consultation meeting, where the public will be invited to comment on the newly released plans and views, on October 24, after seeking CFA approval. In our email to NPS on October 12, the National Coalition to Save Our Mall includes the following points. The NPS reply follows, below. The NPS should remove the design concept from the CFA agenda and resubmit it for CFA consideration at a later date after the public has had an opportunity to comment on the materials at the October 24 meeting. Otherwise, the public process is undermined. The FedEx'd materials include new information that we have never seen before and that has not yet been discussed in the public consultation process, including at the September 12 meeting. For example, the view simulations of the Visitor Center show dramatic and extensive effects on this part of the Lincoln Memorial's historic landscape and the National Mall, as well as on the experience of The Wall itself, and need to be subject to public review and discussion prior to NPS seeking any design concept approvals. Several of the participating agencies and organizations stated their strong desire to discuss the location of the Visitor Center in the middle of the site instead of elsewhere on the 5.2-acre plot of land, but that did not happen before the Sept. 12 meeting adjourned. The Sept. 12 meeting notes sent by the Coalition to the NPS and other participants recorded a number of concerns stated by those in attendance but which NPS does not address in the materials sent to us on October 11. These include questions about flooding and flood control, public safety, security, Congressional intent, cumulative effects, the Commemorative Works Act, and the adequacy of the public process as pertains to this project, which we believe will have serious adverse effects on historic and cultural resources. For these reasons, the Coalition has strongly urged NPS to remove the project from the Commission of Fine Arts October 18 agenda until the public consultation process addresses the potential serious adverse effects posed by the project on the National Mall, The Wall, and the Lincoln Memorial. THE NPS RESPONSE: From: Sally_Blumenthal@nps.gov Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 12:31:23 -0400 Judy, I am in receipt of your email of October 12. Since you have formally requested the section 106 consultation meeting proposed for October 24, we look forward to discussing the design concept further with you at that time. In our judgment, review of the design concept by the Commission of Fine Arts is one of the concurrent reviews of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Center that the NPS must obtain during the approval process and is not sequential to the section 106 consultation. Our design concept submission is a formalization and further refinement of the design alternative 3 which was the subject of the September 12 section 106 consultation meeting and is not "substantial new information" as you describe in your email. Its basic form, site circulation and location on the approved site have not changed. Rather, the materials and architectural detailing have been further developed. Therefore, we are proceeding with the October 18 presentation to the Commission of Fine Arts. We have not yet submitted the design concept to the National Capital Planning Commission and will do so in the future and after our October 24 meeting.
With respect to the request for electronic copies of the materials forwarded to the consulting parties via Fed Ex, we do not have copies of most of the information in electronic format. We did refer all of the consulting parties to the website and you can obtain an electronic copy of the Environmental Assessment should you wish.
The site for the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Center has not changed since it was proposed in a preliminary Alternative Sites Study in 2005 as "Site A". The approved site is the trapezoid bounded by Constitution Avenue, 23rd Street, Henry Bacon Drive and Lincoln Memorial Circle. Although a preliminary analysis done in 2004 proposed placing the building on the northwest corner of the site, we determined that it would be intrusive on the entrance to the city and would be too remote for visitors to the Center. The location of the Center on the site and its orientation to Henry Bacon Drive was the subject of the 2006 EA and was approved by the both the Commission of Fine Arts and the National Capital Planning Commission in 2006.
With respect to the notes which you and others prepared, we believe that our Meeting Summary and Additional Information and Documentation addresses all of the points raised by various participants at the September 12 consultation meeting and we see no need to respond to the meeting notes of individual participants.
Sally |
|
Copyright © 2004 National Coalition to Save Our Mall Inc. All Rights Reserved |