Public Art Conference Archive—2004

Key Panel Presentation: The Future of Our National Mall
Judy Feldman's Summary

Judy Scott Feldman, President and Chairman, National Coalition to Save Our Mall, and Founding Member, National Mall Conservancy.

Summary of Presentation:

Brief Introduction to the National Mall via Powerpoint Presentation

1. 1791 L’Enfant Plan; State of Mall at end 19th century
2. McMillan Plan of 1901-1902; Mall at mid-20th century with temporary WWI and WWII buildings
3. 1960s and 1970s Skidmore, Owings & Merrill Master Plan for Mall
4. current state of Mall with American Indian Museum, Vietnam and Korean Veterans Memorials, FDR, WWII Memorial, and security measures
5. 2003 Map of the “Reserve” moratorium area; map showing parts of the Mall under separate government jurisdiction—National Park Service, Smithsonian, Architect of the Capitol, American Battle Monuments Commission, White House, Department of Agriculture

How to plan for the Mall’s future?

Since January 2004, the National Coalition to Save Our Mall has been working with a group of private citizens—and including the Committee of 100 on the Federal City and George Washington University’s Center for Urban Environmental Research—to create a National Mall Conservancy, somewhat along the lines of the Central Park Conservancy and Golden Gate Conservancy, to help guide planning for the Mall’s long-term future. A primary goal is to develop—eventually in conjunction with the government agencies with jurisdiction over parts of the Mall—a new 100–year visionary plan (or planning process), in the tradition of the L’Enfant Plan of 1791 and the McMillan Plan of 1901-02.

Background

1. The National Coalition to Save Our Mall was founded by private citizens in 2000 to act as a much-needed advocate for the Mall as our national gathering place and symbol of American founding principles and democracy.
2. The Coalition released the first State of the Mall Report in October 2002 which identified threats to the Mall’s historic plan and open public space (pressures for new memorials, security, lack of updated master plan, no meaningful public participation). It recommended actions, including a new 100-year visionary planning process. Read the report at http://www.savethemall.org
3. The Washington Post published the Coalition’s Close To Home piece entitled “We Must Save America’s Mall” (September 28, 2003), which outlined the problems with administration and planning for the Mall and proposed the creation of a Mall Conservancy to engage the public as well as all government stakeholders in planning for the Mall’s future. Read the essay at http://www.savethemall.org.
4. January 28, 2004, the Conservancy group convened a public forum entitled The National Mall: The Next 100 Years, with the purpose of exploring the possibility of creating a Mall Conservancy. Read the report about that event at http://www.themallconservancy.org
5. May 5, 10, 19, three follow-up public workshops examined these topics: Design and Planning; the Mall and the City of Washington; the Mall and the Visitor. We are completing a Report—due out in June 2004—that will summarize the workshops and discuss the new findings about future needs for the Mall.
   

Some Preliminary Findings and Proposed Actions

1. Finding: There is a lack of public understanding of the importance of the Mall as our nation’s premier place for experiencing the core values of our democracy.
• Proposed Action: Nationwide public education program
2. Finding: The McMillan Plan has been declared a “completed work of civic art” by Congress, the National Park Service, and the National Capital Planning Commission. However, the public meaning of the Mall—and its emotional content—lies in its public uses, not solely in its physical development. The moratorium is not the answer.
• Proposed Action: Plan for the Mall as a work in progress, able to respond to social, cultural, and political change.
3. Finding: There is no updated visionary master plan for the Mall, more than 100 years after the McMillan Plan of 1901-02 and 200 years after the L’Enfant Plan of 1791. Since the 1970s, we have been filling in the open public spaces envisioned by those earlier plans.
• Proposed Action: Develop a visionary plan (or planning process) for the 21st century that preserves the historic visions while also meeting and anticipating the practical needs for improved public use and memorialization in the long-term future.
4. Finding: There is no coordinating planning among the various government agencies with jurisdiction over parts of the Mall.
• Proposed Action: Establish a single entity that will work with all stakeholders, including the general public nationwide, in coordinating a unified planning process and in developing priorities for implementation.