Alternative 3:
No New Federal Action
CONCEPT AND PHILOSOPHY
No new federal action means that existing conditions on the highway, including
currently active federal programs, would continue without any additional federal action or
involvement related to this study. Should Congress choose to continue the current
conditions on Route 66 and not involve the federal government in new programs, these
conditions would persist unless others took action. This alternative recognizes that it
would be advantageous to existing Route 66 organizations to combine their assets and
energies under an umbrella organization and offers a possible scenario for such action.
There is no single, designated management entity responsible for activities along Route
66. States, local governments, and the private sector independently designate, protect,
and provide interpretive experiences along Route 66. A nonfederal consortium would help
present and interpret the resources associated with a corridor following the various
alignments of Route 66. Although the consortium could require significant expenditures of
nonfederal public funds and a professional staff, there would be no new federal programs.
Despite the need for local funds, existing federal, state, and other programs could help
to fund the consortium. However, state historic preservation officers traditionally have
limited funding to provide matching grants for preservation of historic properties and to
provide technical assistance for preservation-related activities. The consortium could be
made up of representatives from the eight states the corridor would pass through.
Numerous groups and organizations have an interest in the history and future of Route
66. These groups include chambers of commerce, state historic preservation offices, civic
clubs, state Route 66 associations, the National Trust for Historic Preservation, tourist
industry groups and other public and private organizations. This alternative suggests the
concept of bringing together as many interested parties as possible in an umbrella
organization to focus energy and resources on Route 66.
Because of the potential diversity of its members, the consortium's focus could be
broad and interstate in scope preservation of key resources, standards for a quality
visitor experience for the road, sign standards for the entire highway, etc. These issues
could have local as well as regional and transregional impacts, motivating participation
in the consortium. The consortium could also function as a clearing house for information
on Route 66 activities.
MANAGEMENT
A comprehensive interstate program could be administered through a consortium of
cooperating state agencies, local Route 66 organizations, local government
representatives, and other interested parties. Forming an overhead organization could
allow priorities to be set for needs and would provide the forum for a concerted appeal to
aid programs. Although each organization could also continue to operate as a separate
entity, the consortium could focus on the entire route and could coordinate activities and
resources among the participating organizations. Consortium members could act locally but
the effects of their coordinated actions could be comprehensive to Route 66.
Through established programs and mandates, the consortium could have limited land
acquisition authority and the authority to enter into contractual or cooperative
agreements with other public and private entities to carry out its programs. Acquisition
authority also might be gained through individual state charters and used for sighting
facilities or for ensuring resource protection. The consortium could contract with state
tourism offices and park and historic presentation agencies, historical societies,
universities, or other organizations for the development of interpretive programs or the
presentation of resources and promotion. The consortium could identify goals and
objectives and work as an advocacy group to promote cooperation among different Route 66
organizations.
In order to support long-term strategies, the consortium could maintain a paid staff or
dedicate certain existing positions to consortium functions to carry out its programs and
activities.
RESOURCE TREATMENT
The consortium role in presentation would be to set overall priorities, establish
presentation guidelines, provide technical assistance in presentation and interpretation,
and facilitate funding and action by member groups. Segments of Route 66 could be
maintained at current levels and conditions. The opportunity to drive the road could be
provided or promoted wherever practical. Those historic segments that cannot meet the
standards for automobile travel could be evaluated for presentation and adaptive uses such
as biking and hiking trails. These evaluations would consider the implications of adaptive
uses.
The corridor could provide a broad resource base that could incorporate a wide range of
structures and other features. Landowners and businesses in the corridor could voluntarily
participate in presentation and interpretive programs.
The consortium could establish resource presentation criteria and implementation
programs for resources. The consortium could also have the option of adopting a sign
program.
VISITOR EXPERIENCE AND INTERPRETATION
Visitors could be encouraged to explore areas within a broad heritage corridor along
Route 66 that would function as a central linking spine. The experience could be loosely
focused on the whole corridor. No formal interpretive structure would have to be in place
to direct the visitor experience. There would be a variety of opportunities for visitors
to experience national and state parks or other similar attractions near the route.
Interpretation could include a comprehensive guidebook and multimedia information.
Visitor information points could be tied together through existing links between local
chambers of commerce and state highway information centers. A cooperative effort with
university television and radio stations could augment the interpretive programs. Existing
state or local welcome stations could dispense information, and signs could direct
visitors. Distinctions could be made between original Route 66 alignments and the various
portions of the corridor that merely serve to enrich the overall experience.
IMPLICATIONS
State and local tourism and commercial development programs could be crucial to the
success of this alternative. Historic resource preservation needs might be less important
than interpretive and visitor experience programs. The focus on experiences rather than
resource preservation could give visitors a more traditional discovery experience in line
with the spirit of Route 66.
This alternative would also require a high degree of cooperation and coordination
between government and private organizations. Without the development of a guiding
administrative organization with a comprehensive focus, programs could continue to falter
through duplication of effort and a lack of cooperation. The consortium's success would
depend totally on the active participation of its members.
There would be no federal programs established to carry out this alternative. The
consortium would still compete for program funding. Any funding shortfalls might have to
be made up by the private sector. Thus fund-raising would become one of the consortium's
purposes.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES
Some public or private group or individual would call an organizational meeting of the
various parties interested in the future of Route 66. Subsequent steps necessary to
implement this alternative would be decided at that initial meeting.
Reprinted from:
Special Resource Study Route 66
United States Department of the Interior
National Park Service (See Credits)
NPS D-4 July 1995.
|
