Information Presentation Commission Meeting : July 10, 2014 PROJECT - - PDF document

Information Presentation

Commission Meeting: July 10, 2014

PROJECT Federal Urban Design Element of the Comprehensive Plan for the National Capital Washington, D.C. SUBMITTED BY NCPC Staff PRESENTER Lucy Kempf NCPC FILE NUMBER CP01C NCPC MAP FILE NUMBER N/A REVIEW AUTHORITY Preparation and Adoption of Federal Elements of the Comprehensive Plan pursuant to 40 U.S.C. § 8721 In 2011, the staff of the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) began crafting a new Urban Design Element for inclusion within the Federal Elements of the Comprehensive Plan for the National Capital. While the existing Federal Elements contain policies that pertain to urban design, a focused Federal Urban Design Element had not been prepared. In July 2011, an Urban Design Task Force worked with staff and guided policy development for the new Element. NCPC also held two separate workshops to gain stakeholder and public input. Staff released a draft Urban Design Element on November 1, 2012 for a 60-day public comment period. Following the release of the Urban Design Element, the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform directed NCPC to jointly prepare a study of the 1910 Height of Buildings Act with the District of Columbia. NCPC staff placed the Urban Design Element on hold until completion of the Height Master Plan Study (Height Study), which produced relevant technical information, visual modeling studies, and extensive public input. NCPC submitted its portion of the final Height Study to Congress in November 2013, which addressed national interests in the form and character of the city. In 2014, Congress passed H.R. 4192, which President Obama signed into law. The limited scope of the law’s language is consistent with NCPC’s final recommendations to Congress, which both affirm the continuing importance of the Height Act and federal interests in the form and character of the city. NCPC staff are now preparing an updated and expanded draft Urban Design Element. This updated draft reflects the earlier guidance and contributions of the Task Force and the public comments received on the original draft. It will also incorporate new material related to height, views, and the public realm derived from technical work for the Height Study and the Commission’s final recommendations. Over the next several months, staff intends to share the new material related to height, views and the public realm with the public online and through informal public meetings and anticipates providing informational briefings to the Commission. Staff plans to bring the updated draft Urban Design Element to the full Commission in the fall for formal public comment.

Information Presentation Page 2 NCPC File No. CP01C

ATTACHED:

• A. Draft Introduction to the Urban Design Element
• B. Proposed Urban Design Element Policy Outline

PROJECT TIMELINE Previous actions

November 18, 2013 – Commission approval of the Final Recommendations and Final Height Study Report for Washington, DC November 1, 2012 – Commission release draft Urban Design Element for public comment.

Remaining actions

(anticipated)

Fall 2014 – Release draft Urban Design Element for a 60-day public comment period. Summer and Fall 2014 – Public and Stakeholder Outreach. Winter 2014 – Final adoption of the Urban Design Element.

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY – URBAN DESIGN ELEMENT BRIEFING MATERIALS 1

ATTACHMENT A DRAFT INTRODUCTION TO THE FEDERAL URBAN DESIGN ELEMENT

Urban design is the practice of shaping the built environment of a city, town or neighborhood. Urban design operates on two scales: the larger scale, which addresses entire streetscapes, public spaces, and other urban systems; and the smaller scale, which addresses the on-the-ground pedestrian experience. Urban design establishes practices for creating functional, sustainable, lively, and engaging places. Urban design policy in Washington must meet these objectives but also an elevated standard. As the nation’s capital and one of the great planned cities of the world, Washington is a study of how emblematic meaning is attached to physical form. Thus, the shape

• f the cityscape is strongly linked to its nationally symbolic image and civic character, and

perhaps most importantly, how it is experienced. Engaging people in the public realm is a vital part of American civic life, and it is rooted in L’Enfant’s original plan for the city, which reinforces many democratic ideals. Washington’s urban design policy must capture those elements of form, character and experience that make the city an authentic, distinctive place. In addition to its role as national symbol, Washington must also confront issues that all cities face, such as managing long-term growth and providing necessary infrastructure and services. The need to innovate and to evolve to address key challenges are hallmarks of city planning and an important dimension of urban design. How can we balance Washington’s role as national symbol with its aspirations for a vital 21st century city? The implication of this question prompts many issues for urban design policy. For example, is our public realm sacred, adaptable, or both? Can we infuse vitality into the street-level experience, while continuing to visually reinforce the city’s iconic civic character? How can we locate federal facilities in local communities within the city and region in a way that meets mutual goals and promotes sound urban design principles? The central purpose of the Urban Design Element is to assert a vision for the form, character and experience of the nation’s capital and environs, with an emphasis on national resources. The Element should operate at two levels. First, it should set forth goals that enhance Washington’s unique urban design framework, including its public realm, natural setting, and symbolic image. Of particular emphasis are the streets and public spaces that frame or contribute to major scenic

• r symbolic areas or that serve as important connections, edges or boundaries to special settings
• f national importance. Second, the Element should set forth urban design principles related to

Washington’s role as the seat of the federal government, such as best planning practices for federal buildings and campus master plans. The federal element should complement the District

• f Columbia’s urban design element and related County plans, which provide a fine-grained,

detailed level of guidance for the area’s many neighborhoods and commercial areas.

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY – URBAN DESIGN ELEMENT BRIEFING MATERIALS 2

I. The Form and Character of the Nation’s Capital Great cities evolve in a way that is authentic to their character and their aspirations for the future. Deep-rooted in Washington’s DNA are signature qualities such as its broad, sun-lit streets; its human scale; and its unmistakable, symbolic skyline. Equally authentic to Washington’s character is the tradition of long-range planning that asserts that the capital’s cityscape must be more than the random result of economic activity over time; rather, it has aspired to a more explicit civic form. Built Washington – situated and scaled to the natural environment – has emerged as both a city of form and experience for District residents, the nation’s citizens, and millions of people who visit annually. Washington’s iconic cityscape is intentional. It is one of the great planned capital cities in the world and distinguishes itself through the close relationship between its form and the functional and visual symbols of national civic life – whether a public building, ceremonial avenue, memorial, or national park. At the broadest scale, several important hallmarks of the capital city’s urban design framework include: a three dimensional spatial and visual order that reinforces the preeminence of national symbols and democratic institutions; an interconnected system of streets, parks, and public spaces; and sweeping vistas of the skyline. These features are particularly distinctive within the original L’Enfant City. Here, the combination of the public spaces created by the L’Enfant and McMillan Plans, together with the Height Act, have resulted in an expansive, elegantly proportioned capital city. An urban design expression of particular importance is the functional and visual aspects of the public realm. This includes a broad umbrella of open space typologies, including viewsheds, the spaces between buildings, the settings of federal buildings and cultural institutions, and other parks and open spaces. Decisions about how the public realm is programmed and designed influence how people experience the nation’s capital and their perceptions about its image and

• character. Washington is the setting for national institutions of government and culture, and it

hosts related ceremonies, festivals, and first amendment activities, particularly within the monumental core. Commemoration, another hallmark of Washington’s character, is both ceremony and permanent fixture. Memorials are often located on national parks among Washington’s high-profile structures, viewsheds and promontories. They may inspire and broaden civic engagement; enhance their surroundings; and introduce cultural resources to parks. One of the hallmarks of a successful public realm is adaptability; thus, it is important to sensitively locate and design permanent memorials with respect to urban design goals and other

• pen space uses.

Another example of a public realm feature that is unique to Washington is the long-standing practice of hiding or diminishing views of functional infrastructure. Examples include: the ban

• n overhead streetcar and utility wires within the L’Enfant City; the 1:1 penthouse setback

within the Height Act, which hides mechanical equipment for buildings; and the design of many metro rail stations, which tend to cover the infrastructure that supports the rail system (unlike

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY – URBAN DESIGN ELEMENT BRIEFING MATERIALS 3

• ther cities which often leave these elements exposed). Together with the Height Act, these

practices have created an elegant and open quality to Washington’s character that reinforces a visual order where views of symbolic and natural elements predominate. Urban design policy related to the public realm should consider the pedestrian experience, streetscape elements, and the civic character of the capital city, particularly within the monumental core. A final hallmark of Washington’s urban design framework is its natural setting, which is integral to L’Enfant’s original plan. The built city is anchored by two rivers, a ridge, and an expanse of

• pen sky. From across the Potomac River to many of the city’s elevated locations and at the end
• f its grand boulevards, a glimpse of the low green hills provides the natural setting for the

L’Enfant City. These hills comprise what has come to be known as the Topographic Bowl, and include Arlington Ridge, the Anacostia Hills, Rock Creek Park, and the Civil War Defenses of

• Washington. Because many of these sites are under the control of U.S. National Park Service,

they have been protected from development. Together, these built and natural features create an elegant composition of spaces and an important natural setting for ceremonies and activities. Beyond the Topographic Bowl, the federal presence is less concentrated and more site specific. Urban design policy within these areas should emphasize principles for sensitively locating federal facilities within the city and region. It should include best practices and planning guidance for federal buildings and campuses that meet goals for the agency and the surrounding community. Key trends that Influence Urban Design Policy While this introduction includes many of the nationally significant components of Washington’s urban design framework, it is not the complete picture of what should be considered within an urban design policy. This Element should also address current challenges and opportunities of a dynamic city. For example, after decades of population decline, the District has had a recent increase in residential growth.1 And, the city and region may continue to grow more populous and dense in the decades to come. Where people live and work influences both local and federal goals for the environment and transportation; these will in turn shape urban design policy. Other examples of external drivers of urban design policy include security and digital signage

• programs. Security is a leading factor in decisions about how agencies locate, design and

program federal facilities and the setting around them. Integrating security elements with other urban design goals, such as for pedestrian experience, is a key planning challenge. Digital signage, including light displays, is another element that may alter the street level atmosphere and skyline views of iconic national resources. This prompts an important discussion about balancing efforts to enhance the city’s commercial and retail presence while also protecting its civic qualities.

1 In 2012, there are approximately 630,000 residents, up from 570,000 in 2000, but well below the District’s peak population of

800,000 in 1950See the Washington Post, December 20, 2012: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/mike- debonis/wp/2012/12/20/census-d-c-added-30000-residents-in-27-months/

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY – URBAN DESIGN ELEMENT BRIEFING MATERIALS 4

II. Draft Principles for the Urban Design Element Urban design policy is closely linked to the federal government’s interests in Washington’s role as the

seat of the federal government (federal interests) and those related to Washington’s role as the nation’s capital (national interests), which includes the image and character of the nation’s capital. For

discussion purposes, the following broad principles articulate some of the underlying values that shape this Element: (1) Foster a distinctive experience that befits the nation’s capital. Adhere to high standards already established by the planning legacy of the nation’s capital. This legacy encompasses both the old and the new-the capital’s rich architectural heritage, continually augmented by the design contributions of each new generation. (2) Cultivate the exceptional visual and functional qualities that distinguish the nation’s capital from all other cities. In particular, visualize the capital as a singular, three- dimensional composition of spaces that shapes the human experience both at street-level and from afar. These spaces include: a visual order that emphasizes preeminent civic symbols, an interconnected system of open spaces, and relationships between the built city and its natural setting. (3) Nurture a civic character within the monumental core that inspires people and cultivates a sense of permanence and dignity; layer with other built and programmatic elements that delight and are more adaptable. (4) Reinforce the character of the national capital as a city set in natural beauty. (5) Support a vital, comfortable and accessible public realm, a hallmark of a good pedestrian experience and an important component of American civic life. (6) Balance public realm goals that protect the historic character of the city with goals to innovate and confront important planning challenges such as those related to transportation and the environment.

FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY – DRAFT URBAN DESIGN ELEMENT BRIEFING MATERIALS

ATTACHMENT B PROPOSED POLICY OUTLINE: DRAFT URBAN DESIGN ELEMENT Part 1. The Form and Character of the Nation’s Capital: Symbol, Public Realm, and the Natural Setting Part A: National Capital Image A1 General Policies A2 Viewsheds (Revised and New)* Part B. Urban Design Framework: L’Enfant Plan Area Part C: The Public Realm C1 Streetscape and Public Realm Elements: Settings of National Significance (Revised and New)* C2 The Pedestrian Experience (New) * C3 Urban Design and Security (Based on existing policies) Part D: The Natural Setting Part 2. Urban Design Principles: Federal Facilities and Property Part E: Inspiring Building Design Part F: Integrating Federal Buildings and Campuses *New from the 2012 Urban Design Element Draft.