March 6, 2019

National Capital Planning Commission 401 9th Street NW Suite 500N Washington, DC 20004

Re: NCPC File Number 7986, National Zoological Supplemental Perimeter Fencing

Dear Commissioners:

On July 11, 2018, the American Society of Architects (ASLA) submitted comments in opposition to the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) File Number 7986, National Zoological Park Supplemental Perimeter Fencing. Based on the minor changes made by the Smithsonian, we remain in opposition to this proposal, as amended.

ASLA, founded in 1899, is a professional association for landscape architects in the United States. ASLA has 49 chapters, representing all 50 states and U.S. territories. Our members are community leaders in the stewardship, planning, and design of our built and natural environments. On behalf of the 15,000 members of ASLA, we appreciate the opportunity to provide comments opposing the project outlined in NCPC File Number 7986, National Zoological Park Supplemental Perimeter Fencing.

In 1890, Smithsonian Secretary Samuel P. Langley recruited the preeminent Frederick Law Olmsted to design the National Zoological Park. Inspired by Olmsted’s design of in , Secretary Langley felt Central Park perfectly represented his vision for the zoo. Olmsted, who had long lobbied for a park alongside Rock Creek in Northwest Washington, eagerly agreed to help develop the zoo site. Olmsted’s major design elements remain the bedrock of the zoo today.

The zoo, much like Central Park, was designed to be a respite from, yet fully integrated into, the overall fabric of the city. Inspired by the zoological park, civic leaders successfully pressured Congress to create Rock Creek Park in September 1890. The park begins right at the northern boundaries of the zoo and was designed by Frederick Law Olmsted Jr. and John C. Olmsted, the senior Olmsted’s sons and founding members of ASLA. The zoo and park are integrated with each other as well as with the neighborhoods surrounding them. The openness and connectivity are what make both the park and zoo popular with tourists and locals alike, similar to Central Park. The zoo, according to the Smithsonian’s own archives, was partially built with funds and input from the District of Columbia and was intended not only for national use but to be enjoyed by those living in and around Washington, D.C.

With more than a century of openness and integration with the community, it is regrettable that the Smithsonian and the National Zoological Park continue to propose plans that would erect barriers and limit access to the people they were created to serve.

ASLA does appreciate that, after hearing from us and other stakeholders, the zoo was willing to step back and take a second look at its proposal. First, we applaud the zoo for conducting community meetings on this issue to learn about the concerns and recommendations of those who interact with the space on a regular basis. Landscape architects know that community engagement is one of the most important steps in the design process of any successful project. We are also grateful to the zoo for dropping its plans to build security booths, which would have dramatically and negatively altered the zoo’s atmosphere. While we feel the zoo does not need to reduce the number of entrances, we do appreciate that it has kept more entrances open in this proposal than its previous submission. However, despite these positive steps taken by the zoo, ASLA still has serious reservations about the new Smithsonian proposal and continues to express similar concerns we detailed in our previous comments.

The proposed additional fencing alone is a detrimental change to the design of Frederick Law Olmsted and his sons. Creating choke points and limiting access to the zoo by removing more than half of the entrances into and through the zoo only serve to make it seem less welcoming and open to the community. Limiting the number of entrances also has the adverse effect of limiting the number of exits, impeding the egress of visitors in everyday use or in the unlikely case of an emergency. During the day the zoo is free-flowing with movement up and down the aptly named Olmsted Walk, with connections to other sections of the zoo, Rock Creek Park, and the surrounding neighborhoods naturally flowing from this main artery.

In its proposal, the Smithsonian states that the proposal is designed to enhance visitor experience. We question how limiting the freedom of movement, as well as disconnecting the zoo from its surrounding environment, enhances visitor experience. If anything it creates a less-welcoming experience that is out of line with the zoo’s design and purpose.

However, ASLA understands there may be a need to restrict unauthorized vehicular movement onto the Olmsted Walk. In doing so, ASLA recommends that the further refine its current fortresslike security proposal. The zoo’s proposal for a secure facility should enhance the public environment through design that respectfully integrates and is sensitive to the context of the site. Appropriately designed security measures can protect people and property, while clearly demonstrating that this nation continues to value an open society. The National Zoological Park must remain approachable, open, and integrated into the surrounding natural and built environments, as was intended in the Olmsted designs.

Furthermore, NCPC’s 2016 Comprehensive Plan clearly recognizes that one of the “foremost planning challenges” for the National Capital Region is “balancing security and accessibility.” The plan states, “Integrating security elements with other goals, such as design integrity, national image, and pedestrian experience, is also a priority.” NCPC should refer to this excellent planning document regarding its response to the Smithsonian’s proposal. Additionally, NCPC should look at other public sites, such as the Washington Monument and the Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial, for best practices in integrating design and security measures.

ASLA opposes these plans, as proposed, to significantly alter the design of and access to the National Zoological Park. The proposed changes do nothing to further the mission of the zoo or the Smithsonian and waste precious monetary resources on an inelegant and undignified proposed design. ASLA urges the NCPC to join with us in opposing these plans and to formally recommend that the National Zoological Park and the Smithsonian Institution continue to amend their proposal so that it better aligns with the original mission and design of the space.

Sincerely,

Nancy C. Somerville, Hon. ASLA Executive Vice President/CEO