3.3 The Regulatory Framework

coordination aspect can include promoting an identity such as the Northern Gateway CDC, implementing agency standards such as for WMATA or the National Parks Service, or thematic standards like those linked to promoting historic Maryland by the Anacostia Trails Heritage Area. These projects often require enlisting the support of municipal or private landowners to adopt the initiative in a capital funding and maintenance partnership.

2. City initiatives: Some municipalities have produced local projects that build off partnership initiatives, such as local trail building, or local objectives in downtowns or visitor attractions. There are relatively few examples of these in

Prince George’s County and those that do exist tend to be for shared-use paths or pedestrians. These examples are not typically required to follow the MDOT

SHA regulations, can exhibit more creativity, and generally require the use of an experienced wayfinding consultant to achieve the desired results. While there are few city-led wayfinding projects, there are many examples of “welcome”-type signs, known formally as jurisdictional gateways. Maryland’s Jurisdictional

Gateway Program is a combined effort of

SHA’s Office of Traffic and Safety, Office of

Environmental Design, and the District

Offices. MD SHA must approve gateway signage where it is proposed on state routes, and DPW&T must approve signage on County roads. Examples of this type of community wayfinding are along County or municipal right-of-way and display a wide range of designs and content. 3. Community initiatives: Wayfinding also appears frequently in relation to specific municipal or private destinations. This does not refer to the numerous commercial signs that appear on private land for advertising purposes, which are not considered wayfinding. These community signs direct the traveling public, usually vehicular traffic, to locally determined community destinations using a range of simple turn and confirmation signs. Many are placed in the public right-of-way and have been designed with similar features to the MDMUTCD guidelines. Often, however, they are not in full compliance with regulations. Others are located on park, civic, or private land, but are visible from the roadway. While it must be assumed that these signs have originated from an identified need and through local coordination, design problems have been identified such as inadequate text sizes, confusing messaging, poor layout, and inappropriate application of MDMUTCD guidelines. These design issues detract from their authority and usefulness.

The feedback from stakeholder outreach, conducted for this manual, confirms some confusion and knowledge gaps concerning how wayfinding principals and the MDMUTCD apply to wayfinding initiatives. The community initiatives are usually aimed at promoting local identity, facilitating navigation to visitor attractions, and supplementing shared-use path and pedestrianfocused projects. It is common for these types of projects to desire enhanced wayfinding ideas that do not fall under the jurisdiction of the MDMUTCD. This has led some communities to experience problems when their plans encounter the existing regulatory framework in the County.

There is a hierarchy of agencies responsible for highways in Prince George’s County. The variety of regulations, guidelines, and code they produce and oversee forms a regulatory framework for wayfinding. This framework is necessary for coordinating maintenance and ensuring safety; it should be carefully understood for its relevance to and implications on any wayfinding project by