Browse the feedback provided online during the public comment period for the proposed federal urban design policies.
Policies Related To Regional Federal Interests
Section C: The National Capital RegionThe federal government should implement and support policies that: | |||
| C2. | Maintain the prominence of federal icons and federal park land by ensuring surrounding development is complementary. What others think about this policy: What others have said: "Ditto C1." "Yes, but do not reject private development from complementing it." | ||
| C3. | Maintain or enhance the characteristics of the National Park Service Parkways by: What others think about this policy: What others have said: "Road and directional signs could be improved for traffic safety and customer service." "Providing safe pedestrian and bike trails with map boards. " "Do parkways only have to be for cars? Can trails be established/expanded for better multi-modal transport? Of course, Interstates are off-limits for bikes and pedestrians but can the parkways beef up their multi-modal options?" | a) Maintaining parkways as scenic landscape corridors and protecting their historic character. What others think about this policy: What others have said: "Parkways first and foremost are roads built for transportation." "Get the landscape part, what is the historic character to be protected? They are congested commuter routes now." "The region could benefit from better management of the parkways as part of the transportation network." "Better management of the parkways is important. Mileage- and congestion-based pricing would be part of a better management approach." "Enhance the parkways and protect the trees with reasonable annual fees collected from commuters. " | b) Encouraging local jurisdictions to plan and zone development so that it is not visible from parkways. What others think about this policy: What others have said: "This depends on the area and project." "It is not the job of the federal government to regulate development." "These regulations would amount to condemnation without compensation. The subjectivity of these regulations would inevitably lead to ongoing disputes." "The NCR is a metropolitan area, not a wilderness. This is going too far." "Parkway landscaping can be deep enough so that this is not a major issue. It is also important to remember that the District and the metro region is not a park. The parkways are beautiful and pleasant to drive on by they are in a large urban area." "Does depend though" "Local jurisdictions are often beholden to developers. " | c) Encouraging local jurisdictions to minimize — through planning, regulation, and thoughtful design — the impact of development that is visible from parkways. What others think about this policy: | d) Requiring actions to minimize and mitigate negative impacts to maintain parkway characteristics where transportation system impacts are unavoidable. What others think about this policy: What others have said: "Prohibit transportation system impacts - these parkways are national treasures." "The function of roads - including parkways - is transportation." "If one wants to maintain parkway characteristics, restrict access to them at a volume that existed when they were built. Not very practical, is it?" "It may be appropriate to consider the parkways, in some areas, as boulevards, which would allow a non-conflicting interface with pedestrian and bicycle traffic." "What negative impacts?" |
