National Capital Planning Commission Meeting - USA - March 1, 2012

CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Good afternoon and welcome to the National Capital Planning Commission's March 1, 2012 meeting. If you would please all stand and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance? CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Thank you. For everyone in attendance today, I'll remind you that today's meeting is being livestreamed. And also I note the presence of a quorum. So without objection, we'll proceed with the agenda that's been publicly advertised. CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Agenda item number 1 is Report of the Chairman, and I'll note that we are exceedingly pleased to have back with us Mike Sherman, a member of the staff who for the last year has been on his second tour in Iraq engaged in reconstruction of much of the nation's infrastructure. So Mike, welcome back. And please. MR. SHERMAN: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Commission. I want to just take a moment to say thank you, the staff and the Commissioners, for your small and large gestures towards me and my family while I was deployed. Many of you may not know but I am a Lieutenant Colonel in the United States Army Corps of Engineers. So this last year was pretty tough in terms of what we had to do over there. But the Agency made sure that I was taken care of and my family was taken care of. So I came across a quote that kind of summarizes my appreciation and my family's appreciation. And it's by a French author, Voltaire. And it goes like this. It says, "By showing one's appreciation, we make excellence in others our own property." And I think that kind of summarizes how I feel. And as a token of my family's appreciation, I wanted to present this flag and certificate that was flown over the Embassy of Iraq on Veterans' Day last year. I pulled some strings and was able to get that flag. And I'd like to present this flag to the Commission. And there's also a certificate that reads, "This is to certify that this flag, a symbol of the freedom and resolve of the United States of America was flown over the United States Embassy, Baghdad, Iraq on this 11th day of November, 2011, presented to the National Capital Planning Commission. This flag was flown in the face of the enemy and bears witness to the strength and resolve of the American spirit. This flag represents the sustained sacrifices of the American soldier and the willingness and depth of the values of honor, duty and selfless sacrifice. This flag honors those who made the ultimate sacrifice in the War Against Terrorism and those whose lives will be forever changed as a result of the American fighting spirit displayed during Operation Iraqi Freedom." So thank you, Mr. Chairman. (APPLAUSE.) CHAIRMAN BRYANT: I'll say again that we are so pleased to have Mike return to us safely. And we will display this proudly, and we'll think of you every time we pass by it. (APPLAUSE.) CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Thank you, Mike. The second item under the Chairman's report is I'd like to make a brief report on the Southwest Ecodistrict Task Force. The Task Force met last on February 3, 2012 to review and discuss the urban development and design recommendations, the results of the general transportation analysis and also to continue discussing the implementation strategies on how to move forward the Ecodistrict Task Force recommendations. A physical model had been prepared to help visualize the complex vertical relationships among the rail lines, highways, streets and buildings. And in mid-January, just prior to last month's meeting, the working group and the Task Force members were invited to attend a detailed briefing on the model and the urban design development recommendations. Many of the comments that we heard that day were incorporated into the recommendations presented in February. Based on the direction provided by the Task Force, staff is currently drafting the Southwest Ecodistrict report and recommendations. This report will be sort of the culmination of nearly two years' worth of work. The report before it is finalized obviously will be peer reviewed in late April. And the draft report will then be forwarded to the Task Force for review and approval in May. And then it will go to a 30-day public comment period. Staff also will schedule an informational briefing for this Commission -- this full Commission. We hope to do that in the late spring. Related to the Southwest Ecodistrict work, the D.C. Office of Planning held a Mayoral public hearing on the City's Maryland Avenue Southwest Small Area Plan. That was done on February 1, 2012, and NCPC staff attended that meeting as well. And the staff has transmitted formal comments to the City for the public record regarding the Small Area Plan. And then third, my last item under the Chairman's report is a delegated action that I report to you on March 1 pursuant to delegations of authority adopted by the Commission on December 14, 1977. I found that the proposed closing of a public alley in Square 393 bounded by 8th Street, Florida Avenue, 9th Street and T Street, N.W. would not be inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan for the National Capital, nor would it adversely affect any other federal interests. And so that was found and signed. Any questions? (No audible response.) CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Hearing none, Agenda item number 2 is Report of the Executive Director. MR. ACOSTA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And good afternoon. I'd also like to take this opportunity to welcome Mike Sherman back to NCPC. We're glad that you're back with us safe and sound. I just have a few items that may be of interest to the public. We have two speaker series events that are coming up. As part of our Comprehensive Plan Urban Design Initiative, NCPC and the Urban Land Institute Washington Council will host a forum with the Regional Planning Directors sharing their thoughts on the impacts of federal facilities on local communities. The Speaker Series Event, Agent of Change, Local Perspective on Federal Design, will feature D.C. Planning Director Harry Tregoning, Montgomery County Planning Director Rollin Stanley, and Alexandria Planning Director Faroll Hammer. The event will be held on Thursday, March 29 at 6:30 p.m. right here at NCPC. Also on April 11, the Shades of Green Speaker Series Event will look at the similarities and differences of local proposals -- there are several of them -- for ecodistricts. The panel will showcase ecodistrict initiatives at our new Walter Reed Campus of which the District is now in the process of developing, the Downtown D.C. Bid Effort, the University of the District of Columbia as well as NCPC's own Southwest Ecodistrict. The event will be held on Wednesday, April 11 at 6:30 p.m. at NCPC. And finally, I just want to announce that the Agency has received an award for their Federal Triangle Stormwater Drainage Study which is the winner of the Outstanding Collaborative Planning Project Award from the Federal Planning Division of the American Planning Association. This award speaks to the strong partnership between the many federal and District agencies involved and the technical staff that worked together on this very important study. We applied for this award on behalf of the D.C. Department of Environment, the Office of Planning, D.C. Water, Federal Emergency Management Agency, the General Services Administration, the Smithsonian Institution. And also I'd like to thank the staff -- Amy Tarce, Julia Koster, Bill Dowd and Christine Saum -- for their good work on this effort. So thanks to all of you. And it's a good recognition of the Commission's fine work in this area. And that concludes my report, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Thank you, Mr. Acosta. Yes? MR. DIXON: One question on delegated actions regarding first Sterling Avenue. I wasn't quite clear what that might be dealing with. MR. ACOSTA: Carlton Hart will handle this. This also deals with a road access project to Saint Elizabeth's campus. MR. HART: Yes, it is. It's the connection from First Sterling to the west campus access road. The Commission took an action a couple of months ago on the west campus access road that will basically allow traffic to go down to the west campus of Saint Elizabeth's. So it's really just the intersection with First Sterling and this access road that actually doesn't exist really yet. But it will in the next couple of years. MR. DIXON: Thank you. MR. ACOSTA: Thank you, Mr. Acosta. The next item -- MR. PROVANCHA: Mr. Chairman? CHAIRMAN BRYANT: I'm sorry? MR. PROVANCHA: Just one quick question. What are the differences in the revised EDR that we received today as opposed to the one that we received as a read ahead. Was there anything substantive? MR. ACOSTA: It's the same except it's a delegation of the Chairman. I had to recuse myself because this was a matter dealing with a WMATA project which was the sale of a piece of property. So in this case, the Chairman signed this delegated action. MR. PROVANCHA: And the final comment, I think the staff and the Director should be commended. This is a tremendous number of activities just in the last 30 days of local, regional and international scope, all very, very worthwhile. And I think it reflects very well on the staff -- the types of activities that they're involved in. CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Indeed. Thank you for your comment. Other questions or comments? (No audible response.) CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Hearing none, Agenda Item number three is the legislative update. Ms. Schuyler? MS. SCHUYLER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have one brief item, and that is I'd like to report on the status of the Civilian Property Realignment Act. It's a bill that was before the House of Representatives that establishes a civilian property realignment commission whose purpose is to receive and to act upon recommendations from federal agencies through GSA and OMB to reduce the federal inventory of properties. On February 6, the House considered the bill, passed it and referred it to the Senate. It has now been received in the Senate and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Thank you. Questions for Ms. Schuyler? (No audible response.) CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Thank you. Agenda Item Number 4 is the Consent Calendar, and we have four items. CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Item 4A is a new antenna installation for the Department of Energy's Germantown Campus. 4B is the temporary perimeter security and plaza barriers at the Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden. Item 4C is the distributed antenna system at the Department of State at the Harry S. Truman Building. And last, Agenda Item 4D is the Consolidated Planned Unit Development and Related Map Amendment at Square 37. Are there any questions on any items on the Consent Calendar? (No audible response.) CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Hearing none, is there a motion on the Consent Calendar? MR. HART: Move. MR. PROVANCHA: Second. CHAIRMAN BRYANT: It's been moved and seconded that the Consent Calendar be approved. All in favor say aye. (A CHORUS OF AYES.) CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Opposed no. (No audible response.) CHAIRMAN BRYANT: It's adopted unanimously. CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Agenda Item number 5A is the turf and soil reconstruction project, Phases II and III, of the National Mall. And we have Ms. Hirsch. MS. HIRSCH: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Commission. The National Park Service has submitted Phases II and III. Sorry. We have the wrong presentation on the screen here. The National Park Service has submitted Phases II and III of the Turf and Soil Reconstruction Project on the National Mall for a concept to zoning review. The National Mall stretches from the U.S. Capitol west to the Potomac River and north from the Jefferson Memorial to Constitution Avenue. Within the National Mall, the smaller area between lst, 14th Street, Madison and Jefferson is commonly referred to as The Mall. The National Mall plan developed and adopted by the Park Service and also approved by this Commission in late 2010 expressed a vision for the Mall for its rehabilitation in order to continue the high levels of use that currently exist. One of the recommendations in the Mall plan was to improve the turf and soil on the Mall. In addition, one of the recommendations in the plan called to increase the walkways on the Mall in order to facilitate the types of events that currently take place. And the turf reconstruction project has been split into multiple phases. Phase I was approved by the Commission in February of 2011 and addressed the three easternmost lawn panels. The Phases II and III which are before you today for your comment address the remaining panels between 7th Street and 14th Street. As I mentioned, there are numerous activities on the National Mall including inaugurations, national celebrations, a variety of festivals, concerts as well as active and passive recreation. Over the years, many of these events require a variety of tents, structures, stages and all sorts of types of equipment. And over the years, placing this equipment on the Mall has caused the turf to deteriorate. In certain areas, the turf is completely worn away. In other areas, the soil is heavily compacted and it does not drain very well. To address these conditions, the Park Service as part of Phase I has designed and curb and gutter system. This will be the same system then as applied to all the lawn panels as part of Phase II and III. And essentially, this was approved by the Commission in late February last year and involves a granite curb and gutter system on the edges of the lawn panels in order to provide structure for the panels but also to mark clearly the edge of the lawn panel from the walkways. And in addition to that, there will be several improvements underground. All the turf and soil will be removed, re-engineered and stormwater management systems will be put in place underneath including an irrigation system and the installation of cisterns. Phases II and III as I mentioned incorporate recommendations from the Mall plan in terms of widening the walkways and in developing a strategy for how to go about widening the walkways, the Park Service looked at some of the largest events that are held on the Mall every year, including the Smithsonian Folklife Festival. And as you can see here, as I was saying, the tents and equipment are often placed directly on the lawn panels. And so in developing a strategy on how to widen the walkways, the Park Service looked at the types of tents, the sizes and started diagramming ways in which how wide the walkways would need to be in order to move them off of the lawn panels onto hardscape, a more sustainable practice, to accommodate both the tent and equipment as well as a space for circulation. The Park Service is proposing three different alternatives for widening the walkways. They're all based on historical plans for the Mall. Alternative 1 looks to the Skidmore, Owings and Merrill Plan from the 1970s and maximizes the greenspace on the Mall. Alternative 2 looks to the Olmstead Junior Plan from the 1930s. And the idea in that plan was that the Mall would be divided into equal panels with the system of active streets and sidewalks. And then the final alternative -- Alternative 3 -- looks to the McMillan Plan and the idea of creating some kind of central or civic gathering space on the 8th Street access. I'll briefly run through some of the features in each of these three alternatives. Alternative 1 looks to use what is being called sacrificial turf panels along the 12th and 9th Streets access. What is meant by that is that these panels would be the areas which would accommodate some of the tents and equipment during these larger events, and that after the event the sponsor would be responsible for re-sodding those two areas. In addition, particular walkways -- north-south walkways -- would be widened from their existing 40 foot configuration to 80 feet. And that would be done between panels 18 and 19 on the 13th Street access and panels 21 and 22 along 10th Street. In addition, a walkway would be added on the 9th Street access to be approximately 40 feet wide. And then the panels towards the eastern end of the project area are divided right now into three or four smaller panels would be combined into one larger panel. And then directly adjacent to 7th Street, there would be an 80-foot wide walkway or nonturf area. The idea there, the Park Service is required by a recent federal regulation update to provide additional space for media during inauguration events. Alternative 2 is in some ways very similar to Alterative 1. It does look to the Olsted Junior plan and the idea of creating equal sized panels. And then rather than using sacrificial turf along the 12th and 9th Street axis, these would be gravel and approximately 146 feet wide. The idea there is that tents and structures could be placed in these areas and easily taken down and replaced during different types of events. And then the proposal is to widen the walkways between panels 18 and 19 along the 10th Street axis as well to be 80 feet. And that is identical to what is proposed in Alternative 1. And the same condition is also proposed for the eastern end of the project area and that one large panel would be created. This would be to allow different types of recreation in that particular area. Alternative 3 is the McMillan-inspired vision and perhaps would bring the greatest degree of alteration to the Mall. It looks to the idea in the McMillan plan to create some kind of central gathering or civic space along the 8th Street axis. And the idea would be or that was expressed was to have some kind of central water feature, and then on either side of that here would be sacrificial turf panels, again to accommodate structures that would be needed for the different types of events on the Mall. But it would also just be a central place that would in some ways McMillan's idea was to break up the long stretch of green, provide a place for people who are visiting the Mall to rest and relax. In addition, another sacrificial turf panel would be placed on the 12th Street axis. And again modifications would be made to smaller walkways in the middle of the Mall. So based on these three alternatives, the Park Service modeled the Smithsonian Folklife Festival. And as you can see with all three alternatives, they were able to move the tens off of the larger lawn panels in an effort to preserve and protect them. However, what would be required would be to put some of the larger tents and equipment on Madison Drive. So in comparing all the alternatives, staff looked to the comprehensive plan and the National Mall plan and generally found all alternatives are consistent with the elements and policies in both of those plans and is supportive of the project and the Park Service efforts to develop three viable alternatives for modifying the walkways on the Mall in a way that both balances preservation of the historic landscape but also would allow for these large national celebrations and different types of events to continue to occur. Alternative 1, staff has raised some questions regarding use of the sacrificial turf panels and how often they would need to be replaced. Would this be after event or only after particular events and also the sustainable of that kind of a practice with continual replacement. The advantage to Alternative 2 would be that the sacrificial turf would not need to be replaced. However, it does bring into question from the National Mall plan another recommendation which is not being proposed at this time. However the walkways in the Mall plan were proposed to be paved. And staff feels it's important to consider what material would perhaps be used in the future to pave these when we're looking at perhaps a different size and configuration than the existing condition. And then for Alternative 3, staff is very supportive of perhaps creating some kind of civic or central gathering space along the 8th Street axis, but believes additional consultation with the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts and the District of Columbia State Historic Preservation Officer as well as NCPC would be needed in order to come to some kind of agreement in terms of what exact shape or form that kind of intervention would take. So with that, the Executive Director's recommendation is for the Commission to provide the following comments on Phases II and III of the Turf and Reconstruction Project: To support the project and the National Park Service's efforts to improve the condition of the Mall turf and ability to accommodate high levels of use for a variety of events that will preserve and protect the Mall's historic continuous landscape; supports the idea of establishing a civic multi-purpose gathering space along the 8th Street axis that provides additional leisure recreation events but is planned and designed in a manner that takes into consideration visual impacts, historic preservation and required maintenance and notes that all of the alternatives take into account recommendations from the National Mall Plan to widen the non-turf areas on the Mall in order to accommodate large public events. And that's if the proposed alternatives require a further refinement especially with regard to the extent to which the walkways will need to be widened and the impacts that this will have on the historic landscape of the Mall, and recommends that the Park Service continue consultation with NCPC, the Commission of Fine Arts and the District of Columbia State Historic Preservation Officer prior to coming in for preliminary or final review, and recommends that the Park Service coordinate any changes to the walkways with the District of Columbia Department of Transportation as well as the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority in order to coordinate any kinds of projects that may be ongoing in the areas that are under the jurisdiction of these agencies and requests the following information: the factors that are influencing the proposed dimensions of the walkways, calculations of the existing and proposed percentage of turf and walkways and for those areas to reflect the areas that are directly impacted by the project and that maintenance requirements of sacrificial turf panels as well as, if available, information on what kind of permanent paving material will be considered in the future to replace the gravel walkways. And that concludes my presentation. And I believe that the Park Service is here and wants to make a few comments. CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Thank you, Ms. Hirsch. First before we call on the Park Service, any immediate questions for Ms. Hirsch? You can hold them? Okay. Peter, you want to introduce your colleague? MR. MAY: I was hoping to introduce the Superintendent who apparently had to step out for a moment, but maybe he'll get a chance at some point to speak. In the meantime, Steve Lornezetti, who's the Deputy Superintendent. Did you want to say anything in particular with regard to this plan? MR. LORNEZETTI: No. I'll just make an apology for the Superintendent. Unfortunately Tom Sherrill has him locked up outside for a 25-second sound byte he promised. So he should be in less than that since it was five minutes ago. So he should be here in just a second. CHAIRMAN BRYANT: We'll look forward to hearing from him. While we're waiting, any questions among Commission Members? MR. DIXON: Sir, I do have two questions. Maybe I just didn't hear it. I'm assuming that given the anticipated re-alignment of the tents for the Smithsonian Fest, the Smithsonian is involved in this discussion about how that would impact on their programs. I'm assuming that's the case. MR. MAY: I'm sorry. MR. DIXON: Since you're going to have the tents moved from the Mall onto other areas for the Smithsonian's events and maybe others, particularly Smithsonian, how would that effect their program? Any way at all or not? MR. MAY: Well, at this point, this is just a diagram. And I wouldn't even call it a proposal at this point for where they're going to be relocated. We're just looking at if we were to take these steps, how could we possibly accommodate events as large and as long in duration as the Folklife Festival. And this is one way to do it and then stay within either the paved areas or the sacrificial turf areas. We recognize that the Folklife Festival will continue to occur in that area, and we're looking to find a way to accommodate it in a way that suits their needs but also gives us the best opportunity to preserve the turf. So we haven't gotten to the point of working out the particulars and how the Smithsonian will work, but we're starting to have those discussions with them. MR. DIXON: All right. I'm assuming that if it's a practical approach, then the Smithsonian should be aware of how it would affect their realignment of the tents and all of their structures. And I'm assuming that will be done at some point. MR. MAY: Yes. And we wouldn't do it unilaterally. MR. DIXON: I understand. MR. MAY: We would be doing it in consultation with them. MR. DIXON: And also, following that same line of questioning, the walkways that are there -- the texture of them and the composition of them -- I'm assuming they would accommodate the tents and all if they were to be put on it -- things that would go there. Because I know we're talking about changing that at some point. MR. MAY: That's right. If we were to change to a different paved surface, I don't believe that it would affect the ability to set up for events like this. Nowadays, a lot more of this is being done with ballasted barrels instead of driving stakes. So we won't be patching holes in whatever the paved surface is. MR. DIXON: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. May. MS. TREGONING: I have a couple of questions and maybe they'll be answered in the course of the remarks by the Superintendent. One of them was about the timing of all of this including the timing for the completion of the first panel. We do miss America's front yard, I will just say that. And I know that this is a big construction project. But I'm just curious as to how long it's going to take. And I have another question that I'd like the Park Service to consider if it should ultimately go with the recommended Alternative 3. I very much like the kind of new convivial space that's being created, and I was going to suggest that we might try to deliberately use the proliferation of food trucks in the District to either episodically or any time that the Park Service doesn't have another plan for that space allow it be a place where tables, chairs, seating, maybe some shade could pop up to provide a respite on the Mall that would be no dirty changing of money or exchange of any currency on the National Mall grounds -- it could happen on the public street -- with the food truck. But it would be a great amenity kind of in that area. And like I say, especially when the Park Service doesn't have a program for some other purpose, it could be a real addition to the City benefiting both the visitors and the residents of Washington. MR. MAY: Mr. Chairman, I might take that as an opportunity to introduce the Superintendent. So Superintendent Bob Vogel who -- I believe he's been here for prior meetings. Certainly he's participated in meetings with staff. But I want to make sure that everyone gets to know Bob since we have so many projects that come before NCPC. And I know that he knows the schedule for the completion of Phase I and maybe would want to try to field your other questions. MR. VOGEL: Well, thank you. It's great to be here. And I have never been before the full Commission. So I'm honored to be here. I apologize I'm a little late. I might digress to your conversation about the Smithsonian and say that we are working closely with the Smithsonian, and they are fully committed to working with us for the Folklife Festival. And we have a joint mission to preserve the Folklife Festival and also to preserve the turf on the National Mall. And we're committed to that broad agenda. There's a lot of logistical efforts. But they are fully on board in the planning efforts. The timeframes for Phase I -- that's about all I can answer -- is about another year? Winter of this year. Okay. I can't answer that one. Winter of this year. And of course, the subsequent phases are dependent upon federal funding which we're unsure of at this time. In regards to food services, we are currently working on a new concession prospectus for the entire National Mall Memorial Parks. And so we have identified the desire in our early planning efforts to have mobile food services that can help us be at key locations and be available for special events. So we are working on addressing that. We've just begun the process and haven't fully addressed it. But I think we could accommodate having effective food service in an appropriate location. MS. TREGONING: If I may -- I know you have a presentation -- should I come back to this when you're finished or should I ask my follow-up question? MR. VOGEL: I actually do not have a formal presentation. MS. TREGONING: Okay. Then I guess I can go ahead. So we've had a lot of very interesting dialogue with our colleague, Peter May, about the Park Service -- about the tourmobile. We have very good news in our next agenda item with the bikeshare. A lot of it has been around concession contracts and how unwieldy they've been and how hard to change. I just kind of wonder if there's not new model. We have more than 50 food trucks in the City. Is there a way to use the GPS just to make them pay you when they're on the Mall and not have to have these cumbersome contracts that seem to be so difficult to enter into and so difficult to get out of? If you look at what would benefit the tourists and the other visitors to the Mall, competition and lots of choice would seem to be a really good thing. I'll just throw that out there. Thank you. MR. VOGEL: Well, we would agree with you. And again, we have just begun this new process of developing a concession prospectus. Our existing concession contract is under an old authority. And so we do have new authorities. And it is certainly our strong goal to have a competitive environment, to have attractive, appropriate food services and souvenirs. We want to look to having flexibility so that in places such as on Pennsylvania Avenue. As you know, we're doing some planning efforts there which we'll keep you apprised of. And it would be our goal in some of our uptown parks to be able to appropriately offer food services and souvenirs as might be necessary to help to revitalize those important areas of the City. So I do think that with this new prospectus going into place, we're not necessarily looking at one large concession contract. We're looking at maybe a number of different approaches. This process will take several years, and we certainly will be including you in that prospect. I know that's a little painful timeframe, but I think it's a really important process, and I do think we have abilities within our law moving ahead to really improve the situation greatly. MS. TREGONING: Superintendent, just one final thing. Are we clear about the legality of vending -- of people vending on the D.C. public streets adjacent to the Mall, like is 7th one of those streets? Anyone know? Steve, do you know? Not on the Park Service land, per se, but on the street. MR. VOGEL: I know that the City -- and we have been in conversations with the City in addressing outside of our jurisdiction truck vending. So we're working with them. MS. TREGONING: Is 7th one of those streets though in the context of this Phase II and III proposal? MR. VOGEL: I can. Well, you can answer too. (LAUGHTER.) MR. LORNEZETTI: 7th Street is a D.C. street, but the land on both sides of the curbs are Park land. So it'd be the same rules there. MS. TREGONING: I'm sorry. The land -- MR. LORNEZETTI: The land on both sides of the curb -- back of the curb on 7th Street between Independence and Constitution is National Park Service jurisdiction. MR. MAY: So it's -- MS. TREGONING: So it stayed on the street and you -- MR. MAY: Within the street space, it's under District control. But on the sidewalk, it's subject to our laws and our complications. And that's a different situation from say the downtown parks where the sidewalk space is controlled by the District. There's a law that says that when we own the property on both sides of the street, we control the sidewalk. MS. TREGONING: Maybe that's something we could fix. Maybe you could give us an easement enough for people to stand in line. (LAUGHTER.) MS. TREGONING: Thank you. MR. MAY: What else? MS. TREGONING: We'll talk. MR. MAY: Could I just add that with regard to the good news that we'll be seeing in the next presentation that Superintendent Vogel was key in making that happen. And I expect other new and good things to occur in his superintendency. MR. VOGEL: Thank you. I look forward to working with you. CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Mr. Hart? MR. HART: In alternative 3, the section between 7th and 8th Street has a water feature proposed. What makes the remainder of that anything special other than the water feature? MR. MAY: At this point it's not been designed. It's just an idea about going to something that draws on the McMillan Plan. We'd looked at that as an opportunity to do something that was on a bit smaller scale than the very broad lawn panels that we have elsewhere, in part because if those were smaller scale division, if you will, it makes it a flexible space for our use, and it opens up the door for things, perhaps different surface treatments but also the sacrificial turf areas -- maybe smaller sacrificial turf areas and so on. So at this moment, it really is just a diagram. MR. HART: But we're talking about a horizontal area, not anything with vertical protrusions? MR. MAY: No. Nothing with vertical changes there of any substance at all. MR. HART: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Mr. Provancha? MR. PROVANCHA: A couple of questions. I think we're in general agreement that the expanse of green turf on the Mall is a very important feature of the Mall. And I think Mr. May used the term "preserve the turf," which seems to be an objective. However, each of the three options erode or reduce the turf. Perhaps that's one reason for the staff's request about calculations of existing versus proposed turf versus walkways. What's the position of the staff, for example, on the 24 February 2012 memo from the Fine Arts Commission? It talks about an initial proposal for sometimes paved areas as much as 200 feet wide. I don't see any 200-foot wide elements in either any of the three options that were presented. Are there some that had -- MS. HIRSCH: I don't know how the Commission of Fine Arts got that figure. But maybe Mr. May does. MR. MAY: Yes, I can answer that. I think it's flanking 7th Street is where we have proposed to widen the sidewalk. And so when you add the street right-of-way to the widened sidewalk, that would essentially join the sidewalk and take over the tree box area to the curb. That in combination with the street right-of-way will end up being in excess of 200 feet. That's what their concern was. MR. PROVANCHA: Does that show in which option? This one here? MR. MAY: Yes. MR. PROVANCHA: A couple of other things. I look at this greenspace a lot like conferencing space. It's useful to have either large conference rooms or large conference rooms that can be subdivided so it can have multiple assemblies. And it appears that each of the options provide that. A little trouble with option 3 with the water feature. Unless it's absolutely flat and doesn't impinge on the viewshed at all in any way, it also makes it more difficult to use some of those spaces. The good news there is it's at the extreme east end of the Mall area. So we have some concerns in general about how much the gravel walkways would be widened at the expense of the turf as well as what's the position now about -- do we hear at some point the gravel will become paved areas? My concern there is we have some graveled areas at the Pentagon Memorial. But we found that if we worked closely with the U.S. Accessibility Board, they recommended some honeycombed matrix stabilization measures and a particular size of gravel that helped to ensure that the graveled areas were handicapped accessible both for folks in wheelchairs as well as crutches. And then we provided adjacent paved small, narrow sidewalks to provide another option -- immediately adjacent option. What's the Park Service's position on that? MR. MAY: In this project, we're not contemplating any specific changes to the pathways themselves. It is something that we are studying because obviously what we're doing here raises that -- that question, that issue. But as you hint at with your questions, it is a very complicated thing because what we'd want to do for historical purposes -- in other words, to maintain something similar to what we have right now or for aesthetic purposes, the same thing. I know the Commission of Fine Arts feels strongly that the gravel is desirable. But that's at odds with accessibility issues. It's also more difficult to maintain in the long run. So those are the sorts of things that we're still examining. The Mall Plan did call for it to be I think a more finished surface than the gravel that we have right now. But we have not advanced that. MR. PROVANCHA: It appears that the options while they do significantly widen some of the north/south pathways, in general the east/west pathways are unaffected. They remain the current width with the addition of the small adjustable curb? MR. MAY: Yes. MR. PROVANCHA: Okay. And the water feature -- just to get back to that -- is there a value or a benefit of having a water feature at the far east end that would tilt this toward option 3? MR. MAY: I think what drove that was in part where the plan came from -- what its inspiration was. It also does provide kind of a different focal point that could be beneficial in focusing events and also could provide an area that lends itself well to many of the events -- maybe not the common area in the Folklife Festival, but other smaller events that might be focused around that point and would be more easily managed in that circumstance. MR. PROVANCHA: The last question is about the turf. We saw a presentation a few years ago where turf is used in high- traffic, high-impact I believe there was an application in Texas at a large stadium, and they found some turf that even withstood vehicle traffic. Does the Park Service have some experience somewhere else within D.C. in a high-traffic area where we're putting, for example, proven resilient turf, or should there be a strategic pause after Phase I is completed to give us time to evaluate the resiliency of the turf materials that are selected? MR. MAY: What I can tell you from my level of involvement is that we have done a lot of study of turf, and we certainly have a lot of experience with turf. I think that it would be helpful at this point to ask Suzette Goldstein who is our consultant on this with HOK to come up a talk a little bit about the various explorations of turf and turf management. MR. PROVANCHA: One potential answer is the funding stream may create that strategic pause between Phase I and 11 and III to give us some practical experience with the use of the turf. MR. MAY: We really don't want to invite strategic pauses based on funding. MR. PROVANCHA: It's a frequent occurrence in the Department of Defense is why I raised it. MR. MAY: We all have to live with them. And we of course want to take advantage of the benefits when we have to. MS. GOLDSTEIN: Good afternoon. My name is Suzette Goldstein. I'm with HOK, and we are the contractor working with the Park Service for the turf reconstruction project. So that mud pile you see out there is partly our fault. We'll try to get it out of there as quickly as we can. With regards to the turf, in developing this project, we did extensive research and brought in a number of consultants that are nationally known on turf. The farther you go south, the more likely you are to find more durable turf products. In this part of the country, the turf that we're proposing like -- I actually find it very hard to believe that there's any turf that can really withstand the kind of traffic that the Mall proposes. However, if we were farther south, there are things like Bermuda grass and other things we could have suggested. They're not practical in this climate zone. So we will be planting a combination of tall fescue and -- it just slipped out of my head -- but it's zone appropriate turf for this area. MR. PROVANCHA: The research you refer to, we would expect nothing less from a prestigious company like HOK. MS. GOLDSTEIN: Thank you. CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Other questions, comments? (No audible response.) CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Hearing none, before we proceed, we do have one public commenter, Mr. Cy Palmer or Paumier. Paumier? Caught up in my Voltaire moment from earlier. MR. PAUMIER: Thank you for the opportunity to speak. I've had the privilege of working with the Park Service for the last five years as a volunteer. They are quite welcome to have people help them out. And most of you, I'm sure, saw this particular document here and very thankful that Susan Spain, who I've been working with for the last five years, said well, you know all those great sketches that you've prepared at your cost, we would like to use them in our brochure. And there are some nine sketches in here that illustrate various things related to the Mall. The reason I come before you today is that over particularly the last two years, a lot of the conversation that I've had with Susan and some of the staff is the idea of trying to really utilize Jefferson and Madison. There's a huge amount of paving. There's a 40-foot wide paved area, both sidewalk and crushed stone, on the north side of Jefferson and on the south side of Madison. If you combined those two stretches of paved area and you go from 7th Street to 14th, we're talking about the equivalent of six-foot ball fields in length. So there's this opportunity to create a great area for the tents and for the activity and have a really high quality environment for all of the various festivals. One of the things that I'm concerned about is that the long-term opportunity -- do you mind if we just pass these around? I brought these four or five panels. I had the good fortune obviously of being in private practice for 40 years. And I've looked at almost every major city that has situations similar -- this happens to be in Boston -- where they created these paved zones around the greenspace. And so in this picture, you see there's 40 feet of paving here between the curb and the grass. And I'm suggesting that that kind of opportunity exists and we don't end up having to really utilize the Mall for our major events. This happens to be a sketch that I prepared. In fact, it was just completed yesterday. And it's a sketch looking down the Mall with the idea of some paved area at 8th Street. But what's more important is to look at the sketch showing on the two sides -- on Jefferson and on Madison -- the opportunity to have a lineal space devoted to tents. This sketch again was just prepared yesterday. And I had this prepared for the specific purpose of showing you that if you're standing anywhere on the Mall, particularly on the west end of the Mall, and you're looking east towards the Capitol, a roughly ten or 15-foot-high series of tents coming across on one of these widened pathways completely eliminates the view of the Capitol. You cannot see the Capitol if you're standing anywhere in the Mall and you're looking down the Mall to the Capitol. You won't see it. So maybe this is a good solution in terms of getting the tends off of the paving. But it does also create what I call a visual lull which I would hope and pray that we would not have. And so I'm here to suggest to you that I think that the Smithsonian's leadership could be convinced to work with the Park Service to create a much, much better alternative which would be kind of a win, win, win for everyone. For five years I was a manager of an office that we set up in London. I had a daughter that lived there. I spent a lot of time looking at the spaces. And on one particular day, I took some great pictures of one of the most actively used green spaces in London, and I compared that to this wonderful space that we tend to ruin every year, namely the Mall with the tents. So I'm trying to really make a point that we have the ability to have not only a great greenspace and a great central greensward when we also have the ability then to have some great places for these festivals. Thank you, Chairman. CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Thank you so much. MR. PAUMIER: I left packages for everyone and hopefully the key drawings are in there. CHAIRMAN BRYANT: That's terrific. Thank you, Mr. Paumier, very much. MR. PAUMIER: Thank you. CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Any other comments or questions? Ms. Tregoning? MS. TREGONING: I'll just say I appreciate hearing the presentation and the work that Mr. Paumier has done. And I think it's actually quite a clever idea. I mean, I'd love it if the Park Service could explore it further as a way to accommodate the many users who want to be on the Mall. And what a great way to keep everybody moving. We have actually quite a bit of real estate, block after block. And if we were to make it more linear and less kind of all in one big place, it might be able to accommodate even more activity. Thank you. CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Thank you. Mr. May, any parting comments? MR. MAY: No, I would just want to move the EDR. MR. HART: Second. CHAIRMAN BRYANT: It's moved and seconded that the EDR as presented be approved. No further discussion I hear. So all in favor, say aye. (A CHORUS OF AYES.) CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Opposed no. (No audible response.) CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Thank you very much. Thank you, Ms. Hirsch. Agenda item 5B is next, and it's the Installation of Five Capital Bikeshare Stations on the National Mall. And we have Mr. Weil. MR. WEIL: Thank you. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. This is a proposal to install five Capital Bikeshare Stations on the National Mall by the National Park Service, in for preliminary and final site development plan and review. So as a little background, Capital Bikeshare is a bicycle-sharing system that serves the District of Columbia and Arlington County, Virginia which was launched about a year and a half ago in September 2010 with 400 bicycles and 49 rental stations. And now the system is one of the largest bikesharing services in the United States with currently more than 1,200 bicycles operating from 140 stations. And there are plans to add about 50 more stations in 2012. This basically a public/private partnership between the local jurisdictions and a private operator where the private operator operates the stations in the District in Arlington County, Virginia in this case, actually owns the stations. As you can see from the map, this is taken from the existing Capital Bikeshare website. There are currently a number of existing Capitol Bikeshare Stations throughout the downtown District of Columbia. And this table actually shows a number of membership types from three-day to 24-hour passes, monthly and annual passes. And you can see the dramatic growth in memberships, especially 24-hour memberships, over the past year. These existing share of photos show some stations that are currently up and running. This photo right here shows a single-loaded station. So bicycles are accessed from one side of the station. This station right here -- this photo -- shows a double-loaded or a double-wide station where bicycles are accessed from both sides of the station. Four out of the five proposed locations on the National Mall would be this type of station known as the single-loaded station. You will also note that a station consists of a kiosk where people pay for the service. A double-sided map frame are usually a way of finding information that's provided at the bicycle station as well as two solar panels that provide for the power needs of the station. These stations require no utility or infrastructure improvements to install. And so they're fairly flexible and easy to install. And most can be installed in a matter of a few hours. So here's a map that shows again the existing Capital Bikehare Stations. And these are the five proposed locations as part of this project. One is proposed for the Smithsonian Metro Rail near the Smithsonian Metro Rail Station entrance on the National Mall. One station is proposed near the Washington Monument, a station near the Lincoln Memorial, a fourth station proposed near the FDR and Martin Luther King Memorials, and a fifth station proposed near the Jefferson Memorial. Basically, the National Park Service developed these station locations in close coordination with the District of Columbia Department of Transportation. And their sites were based on a number of factors including the proximity to visitor destinations, access to Metro Rail and Metro Bus. Locations were selected that are near existing and future bicycle lanes, proximity to other bikeshare stations, and all of these station locations were included in the vicinity of visitor transportation stops which were included in the preferred alternative of the 2010 National Mall Plan. So this is the easternmost station near the Smithsonian Metro Rail Station entrance. You will note that it is located along the north side of Jefferson Drive, almost directly across the street from the U.S. Department of Agriculture building. This would be a single-loaded station with the maximum bicycle capacity of 23 bicycles. And here are some existing site shops taken by NCPC staff. The proposed station site is located between these two bicycles. As part of the proposal, the National Park Service has indicated that this temporary asphalt path would have to be moved. You will note that the dimensions of this proposed station are 60 feet long by six feet in width. And the bicycles would be accessed from the sidewalk side of the station. Here's the second station location close to the Washington Monument located inside on the inside part of the sidewalk near this old tourmobile information kiosk and transit lay-by area located along Jefferson Drive between 14th and 15th Streets. Again, here's some existing site photos. The proposal notes that these existing benches, trash receptacles and this existing information sign frame would have to be removed as part of this station installation. Again, this would be a single-loaded station with a maximum capacity of 23 bikes. This is the only double-wide station proposed at this point located near the Lincoln Memorial near the intersection of Lincoln Memorial Circle and Daniel French Drive. Because it's double-loaded, this would have different dimensions than the other single-loaded stations -- a length of 32 feet and a width of 15 feet. And as part of the project submission, it indicates that there would have to be some sort of a paved pad extended from the existing concrete base that used to have an old information kiosk on top of it. Here's the fourth location, again a single-loaded station located along the inside of the existing sidewalk along Ohio Drive. And again, the dimensions would be a length of 60 feet by six feet wide. Again, there would have to be several existing benches and trash receptacles removed as part of this installation. And here's the fifth location close to the Jefferson Memorial. The site is located between this asphalt path that comes off of the 14th Street Bridge and the concrete sidewalk along East Basin Drive. And it shares the existing site. Again, currently it's grass and some sort of a pad would have to be put down for the station to sit on top. So staff reviewed the project against the Comprehensive Plan for the National Capitol. In particular, the project is consistent with several policies including supporting supplemental forms of transportation, encouraging increased use of bicycles to access attractions in the region and to create a transportation infrastructure consistent with the pedestrian character of the L'Enfant city and other historic settings. Staff reviewed the project against the 2010 National Mall Plan. In particular, staff noted several objectives taken from that plan such as providing public access and circulation that are convenient on the National Mall, to integrate the National Mall better with and connect it to the urban fabric of downtown Washington, D.C. , and to ensure that the National Mall is a role model and a sustainable urban park development which includes circulation and park operations. I'd also like to note that this graphic shown at the bottom of the slide shows a future proposed bicycle lane network throughout the Mall and the five proposed station locations which are shown here by the red dots are located directly adjacent or in close proximity to these future bike lanes contained in the National Mall Plan. And lastly, although the Monumental Core Framework Plan really dealt with these four federal precincts which are located directly adjacent to the Mall rather than the Mall itself, the Monumental Core Framework Plan calls for supporting a multi-modal transit system and really promoting bicycle usage throughout these four federal precincts which are located directly to the Mall. So again, staff felt that the Framework Plan complements this project very nicely. And again, this is a graphic taken from the Framework Plan, and you can see a future network of proposed bike lanes. And again, all five of those station locations are located in fairly close proximity to these future bike lanes. So with that, it's the Executive Director's recommendation to the Commission to approve the preliminary and final site development plans for the installation of five Capital Bikeshare stations near the following locations on the National Mall: the Smithsonian Metro Rail Station, the Washington Monument, the Jefferson Memorial, the Lincoln Memorial and the FDR and Martin Luther King Memorials; to comment the National Park Service for its effort to extend the Capital Bikeshare program to the National Mall in order to expand the range of available transportation alternatives on the National Mall; and to increase the convenience of bikesharing as a viable mode of transportation for visitors, workers and residents both in the District of Columbia and in parts of the National Capital Region; and since this project represents the first extension of Capital Bikeshare onto the National Mall, to encourage the National Park Service to work closely with the District of Columbia Department of Transportation to monitor the demand for the bicycles at the new bikeshare stations and to identify how the stations could be expanded and their positioning optimized in the future if needed, and to determine where additional stations could be located in East Potomac Park and elsewhere on the National Mall. And that concludes my presentation. I'm now available for any questions. Thank you. CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Thank you, Michael. We have one public commenter. But before we go to the public comment period, are there any immediate questions for Mr. Weil? MR. HART: I have a question. CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Mr. Hart? MR. HART: You showed a prototypical layout of the bike stations, the meter where you get your authorization and then there was an information kiosk. MR. WEIL: Yes. MR. HART: Is that to be included in all these stations? This Commission not long ago approving a whole series of graphics for the park, and I thought that this is one of the things we were trying to do is to eliminate a lot of these miscellaneous signs and informational pieces that would go in the Mall. MR. WEIL: It's my understanding that those map frames are standard on these particular bike system stations so that the National Mall stations would include those. However, the proposal would not allow private commercial advertising since they're on the Mall, but rather more way-finding information such as local and vicinity maps. MR. HART: Peter, do you want to comment about the way-finding part? MR. MAY: Actually, I'd like to ask the Mall staff to comment. Superintendent Vogel, did you want to comment on the use of those map locations? MR. VOGEL: We would propose to use these standard Capital Bikeshare signage which is part of their whole branding and identification of Capital Bikeshare. And we would say that it would be similar to the Metro Station signage that we have in the Park. So whereas we are trying to closely adhere to our own internal sign standards, we feel like those signs are very important because not only do they tell you how to use the bikes but they also tell you where the different locations are where you need to return the bicycles. MR. HART: Second, I think this is a great idea. When I looked at the map, I was struck by the location at Lincoln being south of the Memorial as opposed to being north where you have the Memorial and the future visitors' center which I would think might argue for moving the bike station to a location where you get a lot of use. And then there was two stations close to the Washington Monument where there was none to the east, either outside the Mall or on the Mall. I was curious to see the locations of those. That can't be ignored. MR. MAY: I was not closely involved in all of the sitings of these stations. But this is anticipated to be a first step. And locations may wind up changing a bit. Also, additional stations might be added. So I think that we're trying to tune this to what the demand will be. And well, we're actually trying to get them implemented as quickly as possible as well. I think that's part of the reason why we've started with five. We do have a commitment to get at least one station installed in time for the Cherry Blossom Festival, maybe a second one as well. MS. TREGONING: I just wanted to say a couple of things. I don't mean to be self-congratulatory, but I do want to thank my fellow Commissioners. I think we really have encouraged the Park Service and encouraged Commissioner May to look at innovations like bikeshare and to do what they can do to help make them available to visitors to the Mall. And I couldn't be more pleased with the proposal that's before us today. And I just wanted to thank Peter and to thank the Superintendent and the Deputy Superintendent for working so hard to make this happen. I mean, we've only had it for just about a year and a half. And that's got to be a land speed record. So you have it a year and a half after we first had it, and that is really terrific. And I think we all have plans to expand. I know that at least in one document, the District said we'd like to have 10,000 bikes in the City. So that would imply a lot greater density of bikeshare vehicles all around the Mall, perhaps even on the Mall. But I think this is a fantastic first step, and I just wanted to thank everyone for helping to make it happen. CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Mr. Wells? COUNCILMEMBER WELLS: Yes. While I recognize this is a first step, still thinking about the second steps, that there are other sites that the National Park Service owns around the City that would be extremely helpful if they were available to site some of the locations where the City sites, public sites are really too narrow and they can impede on the right-of-way or people being able to get by. Is this now a process that we can use for looking at other sites that's owned by the National Park Service in other parts of the City? MR. MAY: We have started to have the discussion in other locations around the City. One of the subtle complications that we have to deal with is that the different parks around the City are divided into different jurisdictions. And so, all of the work that's been done to site these stations has been done by the staff of the National Mall which is one management organization. But for example, the parks in my neighborhood on the eastern side of the City, those are all part of National Capital Parks East. So it's a different superintendent and a different team of staff who are working on it. What this means for us is just means bringing more people into it and getting them involved in it. And we have started having all of those conversations. When this first came up, it was being addressed at the regional level. But the strongest heat was on the National Mall. But we're well aware that this is something that we should be looking at throughout the City. And as I said, we've started having those conversations. We just haven't advanced it very far yet. COUNCILMEMBER WELLS: So I understand what you're saying, I don't know how independent the jurisdictions are, but that whatever impediments that have been solved legally about vending and such in terms of a bike -- it's not really bike rental; it's bikeshare -- so that whatever the terminology is that makes it work, that does not necessarily work for the other park areas around the City? MR. MAY: Well, we're all subject to the same law, regulation and policy. There are some slightly different situations depending on what contracts might be in place, for example, what rights have been granted to a concessioner and so on. So those do make for some subtle differences in the management of those jurisdictions. It also has to do with doing things that are in line with park purposes. Again, this is sort of a subtlety of our own management. But we need to be doing things that are supportive of the park's purpose and not just supportive of the stadium that's across the street or what have you. It has to be part of the mission of the park or supportive of the mission of the park. So that's where it does get a little bit more subtle in the distinction and those kind of policy implications. But again, even though it took a year and a half to get to this point, I think there has been a general and I think fairly immediate consensus that the Park Service wants to be supportive of bikeshare. It's just been a matter of how do we go about doing it. And frankly, if we had heard about it more than a month before it was rolled out, we might have been a little bit closer on the heels of when it was first established. But it was announced without much advance coordination with us. And I'm not complaining about that. I understand why that happened too. But it does take some time for us to get through this kind of decision making. COUNCILMEMBER WELLS: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Thank you, Mr. Wells. Mr. Provancha? MR. PROVANCHA: A couple of questions and comments. So many positive things about this whole initiative that I concur that it does seems to be fast tracked. Minimal site preparation is a wonderful thing. No utilities. The site selection criteria has been established and apparently used repetitively and successfully each time. These bikes seem to in a round about way partially fulfill a void left by the demise of the Tourmobile. Use of solar panels I think -- have we had a positive experience with solar panels and that they've been durable -- they're not high maintenance for cleaning, the locking mechanisms are reliable and durable -- that type of thing? MR. WEIL: I believe that is the case. MR. PROVANCHA: Outstanding. How about the revenue? From my research, it appears that the stations -- at least the single stations about $50K each, and the funding comes from the Federal Highway Administration. Where are we in the maturity, if you will, of the program? And is it now self-sustained, or are we going to continue to rely on Highway Administration funding for each of these stations? What's the status of that? MR. WEIL: Unfortunately, I don't have that information. But I'd be happy to find that out. MS. TREGONING: I will speak to it a little bit. We used capital funds to fund the bikeshare stations and we continue to be committed to that. I think the Park Service got funds from the federal Department of Transportation for these stations. But I'm sure they can clarify that. The good news is that the bikeshare system at this point is operating in the black, so that unlike any other public transit system I can think of, I can name, it supports itself on operating. And no small part, it was that red line that you saw which is the 24-hour passes that are the visitor passes. The tourists that are visiting our City are actually maybe doing more than their share to support the overall system -- the bikeshare system. So we're delighted about that also. MR. PROVANCHA: As I read in the papers too, a very good safety schedule. I think there's been minimal numbers of accidents or injuries. Seventeen? Not bad considering the volume. Numerator, denominator, that's remarkable. And no nefarious use of the transportation system, at least to this point. Have we also had experience on relocation of stations, removal of stations, going from singles to doubles as usage? MR. WEIL: In talking to DDOT, they have had to adjust the siting of some of the stations. So they have had a positive experience with that. MR. PROVANCHA: It sounds like a very dynamic and flexible program. Last question was did I see it at least on two other sites we needed to remove benches and/or trash cans or both and they're either adjacent trash cans and/or benches for folks to use, or those will be relocated and re-established somewhere else? MR. WEIL: To my knowledge, they're believe at three of the sites. MR. PROVANCHA: Three? MR. WEIL: There will have to be trash receptacles and benches removed. However, there are fairly close benches that will remain and trash receptacles. MR. PROVANCHA: Fine. Thank you. CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Mr. May? MR. MAY: I just had one question. The siting -- the location that's shown for the Jefferson Memorial location, that's a little bit different from what was originally proposed. And I understand why it was shifted. But I understand there may be reasons why it would want to shift again but still within that same vicinity. And I hope that whatever approval we're giving us today is going to allow us the flexibility to fine tune that and place the station in the right place because I think there are some issues with what was actually shown in the graphic. Is that -- MR. WEIL: Yes. We understand that you can only plan so much for these station installations. And I think that's what staff was trying to do and the Executive Director in developing our recommendations with that last bullet is to allow the flexibility to adjust and re-site as needed. So I feel that would be included. MR. MAY: Okay. CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Mr. Dixon? MR. DIXON: Chairman, first of all I think we all support this and encourage it. But I'm curious about the bike riders who don't rent bikes. Are we making an effort here to accommodate a vendor and it's a useful accommodation because it offers vehicles that they can take and move around with. But I'm just wondering what kind of space and accommodations we need -- and maybe this is the wrong forum for it but we are looking at the Mall, we're looking at the City -- for those people who own their own bikes and may need to mount them and put them someplace and lock them up so that they are safe and have space to do it because in some places, we're all aware, you see these in Amsterdam and all over Europe. After we get this thing going, people will be riding a lot of bikes and they'll be a lot of need for storage of bikes and there won't be any nice, neat little slots that you can stick them in and pull them out of. So I just raise that at this time for the broader population of bike riders and wonder whether or not we're thinking about that as we move forward here. CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Thank you. Let's go to the public comment period. We have one person signed up, Mr. David Alpert. Mr. Alpert represents Greater Greater Washington. So as such, you have five minutes. Welcome. MR. ALPERT: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Commission. My name is David Alpert. I run the website Greater Greater Washington which covers issues of transportation and urban planning in the Washington Metropolitan Area. And we have talked a great deal about Capital Bikeshare since it was first announced on the site. I also am a Capital Bikeshare member, and I use Capital Bikeshare a fair amount. Mainly I wanted to just come to thank the Park Service for moving forward on this project, moving forward fairly quickly, and for placing these stations, and express my hope that the stations will in fact be able to be installed as soon as possible. Last year during the Cherry Blossom Festival or the Cherry Blossom time, I was on the northern shore of the Tidal Basin and I noticed a number of people rode over with Capital Bikeshare bikes basically put the kickstand down, left them there in this sort of parking area -- that paved area that's near the edge of the Tidal Basin -- walked down, sort of enjoyed the cherry trees, and then got back on their bikes a little bit later and left. So there's not going to be a bikeshare station at that particular site though maybe one day there can be, but having these bikeshare stations on the Mall will allow people to more easily get to and from its many attractions and enjoy them. So I'm very pleased to see this happening especially given as some of the Commissioners mentioned, I know that sometimes things take many years to wend their way through the process. So I really do appreciate that the Park Service has moved quickly on this project. Also, I think Commissioner Wells sort of mentioned another point I was going to make as well, but I also hope that the Park Service can develop a partnership with the District to be able to consider locating more stations on Park Service property, especially when there's small amounts of Park Service property all around the City. As you all know, sort of our neighborhood parks and a lot of our neighborhood just serves spaces in between things are in the District are federally-controlled. And it would be great to be able to consider many of those spaces for bikeshare stations when appropriate as well as some other larger areas -- Pennsylvania Avenue, for example. I understand all those sidewalks are controlled by the Park Service and perhaps some of those locations can be good for bikeshare stations as well. So I'm very much looking forward to these stations on the Mall and very much looking forward to hopefully many more stations on Park Service property in the future. Thank you. CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Thank you, Mr. Alpert, very much. Any further discussion among Commission Members? (No audible response.) CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Hearing none, is there a motion on the EDR? MR. MAY: So moved. CHAIRMAN BRYANT: It's been moved and seconded that the EDR be adopted as before us. All in favor say aye. (A CHORUS OF AYES.) CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Opposed no. (No audible response.) CHAIRMAN BRYANT: The EDR is approved. That ends our open agenda session. Is there any other business to come before us? CHAIRMAN BRYANT: Hearing none, thank you very much. And we are adjourned.