Modify WMATA Farragut Connector Tunnel To Accomodate K Street Tunnel For Crosstown I-66

Years ago, during the 1960s, the idea of a vehicular tunnel beneath K Street was advocated as the best way for achieving the crosstown D.C. link for I-66.  It was promoted by opponents to the previous plan from the 1955 Inner Loop study for a new right of way swath freeway along the southern edge of Florida Avenues and U Street, requiring removing hundreds of buildings; the K Street tunnel meanwhile would have removed only a relative handful at its eastern connection, largely to clear the Carnegie Library at Franklin Square.

As such, the I-66 K Street Tunnel and had the support of US NCPC's Elizabeth Rowe, who was also connected with the private organization, the Committee of 100 on the Federal City that had been founded by Delano during the 1920s..

Planning for the WMATA rail subway system had accommodated that with space above the southern end of the Farragut North subway station platform.  The need for this connection was initially created by a decision to provide two separate stations for Farragut North and West, rather than a consolidated facility accommodating both station-stops, to avoid excavating beneath the Farragut Square park just south of K Street that would have required removing a number of trees.

During the mid 1970s, the I-66 K Street Tunnel would be 'de-mapped' to scavenge its funds for speeding construction of the WMATA rail subway system, with such reasoning that the world was going to run out of petro by the 1990s hence somehow rendering private automobiles obsolete, and that Virginia was not going to build their connecting inside the Beltway segment of I-66- both which proved to be false.

Subsequent planning following the 1970s 'de-mapping' of the I-66 K Street Tunnel now fails to respect its underground right of way space, and thus needs modification for such.

A recent article in Greater Greater Washington details the two main design options now/recently under formal consideration, with an estimated total monetary construction cost of $130 million.  See official report.

Option One places a staircase from the proposed connector tunnel to the platform below in the way.

Option Two places a new connecting section from the proposed connector tunnel to the existing mezzanine platform.

As it is the area of the southern platform of the Farragut North station that would be connected to the new pedestrian tunnel at the area beneath K Street, this existing area would need an extension to just south of K Street in order to provide the space for this connect that would avoid the space beneath K Street and hence accommodate both this new underground pedestrian connection and the K Street tunnel.   This would have to be a variant of Option One, as a continuous mezzanine level platform conflicts with the space for the K Street tunnel.

A google map photo shows three trees along the Farragut Square park's northern edge, which extends northward past the customary southern edge of the K Street right of way.

I-66 Additional Decking Contemplated In Rosslyn

Eleven companies as reported here, have formally shown interest; these include Akridge, Vornado Realty Trust, Monday Properties, The JBG Cos.  Brandywine Realty Trust.Developers, and Comstock Partners LC- infamous for their 'Hampshires townhouse development project upon the least environmentally impactive route for DC I-95

"Site 4" would likely be the easiest new cover-way to construct, for involving a new roof atop an existing trenched freeway segment and have the best potential for reconnecting existing developed areas.

"Site 3" involves taking the western portion of the existing Gateway Park that was built as the surface atop the cut and cover tunnel segment of I-66.  As this park was part of the design to mitigate I-66 upon downtown Roslyn which is heavily built up, "Site 3" may logically the likeliest to be opposed.

"Site 1" and especially "Site 2"are upon the side of a hill and hence would likely involve either a wall or terracing.  if such were extended to also cover the adjacent George Washington Memorial Parkway, local access to the Potomac River waterfront could be enhanced.

Sites "4", 1, and 2" all involving essentially extending the tunnel portion of I-66 that was built with only 2 lanes plus one shoulder in each direction.

From my recollection of reviewing Washington Post indexes of the controversies regarding the construction of I-66, activists sought to so constrict this, meaning that only 3 lanes per direction without shoulders could be accommodated without relatively expensive reconstruction- whether demolishing the outer walls and constructing replacements spaced further out, or constructing parallel tunnel-ways.  

Given that the Roosevelt Bridge into Washington D.C. has 7 lanes total with a movable center divider to provide 4 lanes in the peak traffic direction, it would be sensible to treat the covered portion of I-66 as at least a potentially 6 lane highway.   Hence, any extension of the tunnel-cap should provide space for at least 3 lanes plus one shoulder per direction, and hence be somewhat wider than the existing facility.

IMHO the focus upon reducing the width of I-66 as misguided, that local concerns were better met with further mitigation, such as additional cover/air rights atop the freeway, as well as a 4 rather than a 2 track WMATA rail line thus providing express service to potentially reduce traffic pressure from the highway..  As that portion of I-66 had been earlier planned with 3 lanes per direction plus one or two shoulders per direction, the decision to construct each of its directional covered carriageways with only 2 lanes and a single shoulder saved nothing in the way of right of way/displacement and simply reflected the dictates of that time.

For more on the history of I-66, see the link from Scott Kozel's site "Roads To The Future":

http://www.roadstothefuture.com/Int66_MetroViennaRte.html

FHWA BOGUS Finding of No Significant Impacts for I-395 Air Rights Project

The U.S. FHWA document "Finding of No Significant Impact for the I-395 Air Rights Project" FAILS to acknowledge the significant impact of the Capitol Crossing Air Rights Project in permanently blocking off 50% of the I-395 8 lane sunken right of way.  This includes pinching the median shoulders, impacting safety and the feasibility of the yet to be built freeway connections at its northern end; and the further impacts upon livability and future development potential along the New York Avenue corridor.

Christopher Lawson

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/dcdiv/staff/clawson.cfm

http://www.i395ea.com/public/documents/i395_FONSI.pdf

 Analysis of Significant Impacts 40CFR 1508.27

(b) intensity

The degree to which the proposed action affects public health or safety

The degree to which the action may establish a precedent for future action with significant effect or represents a decision in principle about a future consideration

The "Finding of No Significant Impact for the I-395 Air Rights Project"statement neglects to mention the permanent pinch of the I-395 Center Leg design right of way, placing walls with load bearing columns directly within the right of way, impacting flexibility for accommodating connections rather than keeping I-395 forever truncated at New York Avenue.

I-395 Air Rights Project Gives Away 50% Of The Right Of Way

Neglects to mention safety.  Fails to mention the permanent pinch of the median shoulders.

Pinched Median Shoulders

It also neglects to mention the permanent of the overall right of way, forever denying the use of the outer 2 lanes in each direction as if assuming that I-395 would never be extended, nor that the connecting east-west interstate highway, the I-66 Tunnel primarily beneath K Street would ever be built.

Both the I-395 (once I-95) and I-66 extensions were official plans.

Each underwent massive redesign from unpopular earlier planning to comply with concerns over building displacement and permanent impacts by being re-routed and redesigned as tunnels primarily beneath existing street right of way.

I-66 Tunnel with interchange with Center Leg

The northernmost Center Leg Tunnel segment was designed to connect with these later plans, with a pair of 3 lane connections for the I-395 extension and a pair of one lane connections to the I-66 Tunnel.  Though appearing to be a 4 lane facility, the northern I-395 Center Leg Tunnel is actually an 8+ lane design with non-load-bearing knockout walls that were added in a second construction phase, as noted by the expansion joints visible atop on K Street.

I-395 Center Leg Built for 8 Lanes

Both the I-66 Tunnel and the I-395 (I-95) extensions were 'de-mapped' during the 1970s.

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/highwayhistory/data/page05.cfm

On December 29, 1976, Mayor Walter E. Washington requested the withdrawal of two more segments from the Interstate System: (a) the portion of I-66 between I-266 and I-395, and (b) the I-266 Three Sisters Bridge over the Potomac River to the Virginia State line. The two route portions total 2.50 miles.

On April 29, 1977, Federal Highway Administrator William M. Cox and Urban Mass Transportation Acting Administrator Charles F. Bingman approved the withdrawal of the two routes under the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 103(e)(4).

In accordance with Section 103(e)(4), DC's unobligated balance of IC funds was decreased by approximately $103.5 million accomplished by decreasing DC's IC apportionment for FY 1977.

On August 7, 1978, Mayor Walter E. Washington requested the withdrawal of portions of the East leg and North Leg Freeways (I-295 and I-395).

On September 8, 1978, Federal Highway Administrator Karl S. Bowers and Urban Mass Transportation Administrator Richard S. Page approved the withdrawal under the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 103(e)(4). The two route portions total 4.70 miles.

In accordance with Section 103(e)(4), DC's unobligated balance of IC funds was decreased by approximately $130.1 million accomplished by decreasing DC's IC apportionment for FY 1977.

The reasons given for this by Peter S. Craig, a one time Covington & Burling attorney on behalf of the "Committee of 100 On The Federal City" were:

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2007/02/doctrinaire-anti-new-highways-position.html 

"... Section 137(b) of the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1973 (codified as 23 U.S.C. 103(4)), which authorized the Governor (Mayor Washington, in the case of D.C.), and the responsible locally elected officials (the D.C. City Council) to jointly request the U.S. Department of Transportation to transfer federal aid, formerly earmarked for freeways, for 80% of the cost of transit improvements. Such fund transfers may occur on either of two alternatives: 

First, that the Interstate segment being deleted "is not essential to the completion of a unified and connected interstate System." 

Second, and independently of the first reason it, freeways may be deleted and the federal aid transferred to mass transit -- even if the freeway segment might be deemed essential for a "unified and connected Interstate system" if such freeway segment "would not be essential after completion of one or more substitute public mass transit projects." See 23 C.F.R. 476.304(3).

(5) North Leg-West Section of Inner Loop (K Street Freeway)(I-66). This Council already has urged that Virginia abandon I-66 inside the Beltway in Virginia. Consistent with this action, I-66, within the city should also be scrapped.

(6) North Leg-East Section (Center Leg and I-66 to East Leg). Also not essential."

A finding of "not essential" means the I-395 being forever truncated at the intersection of 4th Street and New York Avenue NW: a situation not meeting the definition of a unified and connecting interstate system, that somehow pretends the WMATA rail system not as a supplement but as a replacement for somehow handling the mass of vehicular traffic to and from the northern edn of I-95 along New York Avenue.

The Craig memo additionally gets it wrong about I-66: since Virginia DID build inside the Beltway I-66 through Arlington, than constructing the I-66 Tunnel within Washington, D.C. is essential for a unified and connected interstate highway system, along with the I-395 (I-95) connection-continuation, along New York Avenue to MD 50 and/or the general JFK B&O Route , and arguably as well the I-295 East Leg Inner Loop to RFK Stadium and the SE Freeway.

The "Finding of No Significant Impact for the I-395 Air Rights Project" completely neglects the matter of the unbuilt freeway segments that were so "de-mapped".  It further neglects the matter of more recent official planning starting in 1996 with a report by via the DC Mayor's Office under Marion Barry for an I-395 New York Avenue Tunnel within and beneath that Avenue's existing 134 foot right of way showing a 4 lane extension, though with sufficient space for a 6 lane version with no reason given for the arbitrary restriction to only 4 lanes total.

1996 I-395 New York Avenue Tunnel

NOT building the I-66 Tunnel and the I-395 (I-95) negatively impacts the neighborhoods along New York Avenue and additionally adversely affects development potential along that New York Avenue corridor: additional factors NOT considered by this FHWA "Finding of No Significant Impact for the I-395 Air Rights Project".

Under 23 USC 103, these highways can be 'remapped'.

 http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/23/103

 (4) Interstate system designations.—

(A) Additions.— If the Secretary determines that a highway on the National Highway System meets all standards of a highway on the Interstate System and that the highway is a logical addition or connection to the Interstate System, the Secretary may, upon the affirmative recommendation of the State or States in which the highway is located, designate the highway as a route on the Interstate System.

(B) Designations as future interstate system routes.—

(i) In general.— Subject to clauses (ii) through (vi), if the Secretary determines that a highway on the National Highway System would be a logical addition or connection to the Interstate System and would qualify for designation as a route on the Interstate System under subparagraph (A) if the highway met all standards of a highway on the Interstate System, the Secretary may, upon the affirmative recommendation of the State or States in which the highway is located, designate the highway as a future Interstate System route.

(ii) Written agreement.— A designation under clause (i) shall be made only upon the written agreement of each State described in that clause that the highway will be constructed to meet all standards of a highway on the Interstate System by not later than the date that is 25 years after the date of the agreement.

(iii) Failure to complete construction.— If a State described in clause (i) has not substantially completed the construction of a highway designated under this subparagraph by the date specified in clause (ii), the Secretary shall remove the designation of the highway as a future Interstate System route.

(iv) Effect of removal.— Removal of the designation of a highway under clause (iii) shall not preclude the Secretary from designating the highway as a route on the Interstate System under subparagraph (A) or under any other provision of law providing for addition to the Interstate System.

The FHWA "Finding of No Significant Impact for the I-395 Air Rights Project" signed by D.C. Division Administrator is a false document.

As the I-395 Air Rights Project rests upon this document, it should be barred from further construction, until its design is modified to fully respect the 8 lane plus shoulders Center Leg right of way.


Also see:

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2014/12/fhwa-bogus-finding-of-no-significant.html

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2014/12/open-letter-to-del-eleanor-holmes.html

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2014/12/current-i-395-center-leg-air-rights-row.html

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2014/12/unanswered-questions-3rd-street-tunnel.html

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2014/12/erased-comments-from-wp-article-dc.html

Open Letter To Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, the Feds, DDOT and Congress

http://dc.curbed.com/archives/2014/12/capitol-crossing-developers-outrage-congress-over-i395-closing.php

Dear Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, The U.S. Department of Transportation/Federal Highway Authority and Members of the U.S. Congress;

It is good that the proposed temporary closure of the I-395 segment was averted for the construction of the Capitol Crossing I-395 Air Rights Project..

But are you aware that the Capital Crossing I-395 Air Rights Project PERMANENTLY shuts off 50% of the  I-395 right of way?

 Capitol Crossing Center Leg Right of Way PINCH

http://pgp.us.com/pdf/395_air_rights_property.pdf

Perhaps not, as that fact has not been reported in any of the newspaper or real estate cheerleader web sites.  This includes so far the site Greater, Greater Washington.

That freeway was designed and built with a 8 lane right of way plus shoulders.

I-395 Center Leg showing extra capacity

That includes its northern tunnel segment, built from 1975 to 1978, but unopened until a 1983-1986 finishing project was completed, after the cancellation of the extensions.  Hence it includes non-load bearing walls to block off the extra space for storage space for such things as the Lions from the Taft Bridge.  Supposedly I-395 is to end simply at New York Avenue, dumping its traffic there.  That can be seen by an aerial showing the expansion joints upon K Street that mark off its 4 lane southbound, 5 lane northbound and one lane northbound on-ramp.

Note the expansion joints showing the true capacity potential

Non load-bearing wall- I-395 northbound
http://www.dcroads.net/roads/center-leg/

That is because the Center Leg was not supposed to simply end at New York Avenue making that road itself the main artery.

 Northern Center Leg Tunnel with connections to the northeast and to the west.

Rather it was to have continuations.

I-395 was to continue as planned through the 1970s alongside New York Avenue, previously being designated as I-95.

And there was to be a freeway heading due west as an extension of I-66.

Planning for these urban highways dated back at least to 1955 for plans that were largely unpopular for their potential building displacement and permanent impacts.

The original 1955 Plan

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2006/12/1950-62-plans.html

Emergency Committee on the Transportation Crisis (ECTC) poster 

showing the 1955 Center Leg-North Leg routing, 
plus the highly politicized and sabotaged B&O North Central Freeway

Above ECTC poster close-up of names showing Marion Barry

However the design of the built northernmost Center Leg segment was to accomodate later plans designed to largely avoid these displacement problems and to avoid the permanent disruptions via being built as cut and cover tunnels.

The crosstown I-66 link by the mid to late 1960s has been envisioned as a tunnel entirely beneath K Street for most of its length, with its western connection beneath Washington Circle and a brief stretch of Pennsylvania Avenue: a plan initially promoted by opponents of the 1955 plan such as Elizabeth Rowe.

The I-395/I-95 continuation meanwhile had been redesigned to a cut and cover tunnel starting  alongside New York Avenue, limiting a cutting of a new swath for the 3 to 4 block segment from 4th Street NW to North Capitol Street and 1st Street NE displacing about 600 dwellings (those between North Capital and 1st Street NE were torn down under the administration of Anthony Williams), plus 148 for the I-66 connection westward to Mt Vernon Square.   These were the plans featured in the November 1971 DeLeuw, Cather and Harry Weese study "District of Columbia Interstate Highway System".

Center Leg-North Leg Interchange

DeLeuw, Cather, with Harry Weese "District of Columbia Interstate System" November 1971

These extensions avoided almost all of the displacement of the 1955 planning.

Yet they were 'demapped' during the 1970s.  That was primarily for the sake of jumpstarting the funding for the WMATA rail system which had been design together with the freeway system, along with two other ideas: that private automobiles would become obsolete by the 1990s when it was envisioned that the world was going to run out of petroleum (with zero consideration of alternative fuels nor electric propulsion); and assuming that Virginia was not going to build their inside the Beltway segment of I-66 which was in fact completed and opened by 1982.


In the years since, an alternative design for the I-395 tunnel continuation was promoted through the Office of the D.C. Mayor, Marion Barry, who himself was a 1960s era activist against earlier planning efforts, known as the Ron Linton plan.  That was for a tunnel not alongside but rather beneath New York Avenue, thus avoiding the 600 or so dwelling displacement of the plans in the above mentioned 1971 plans.

That plan featured a total of 4 lanes within a street right of way sufficiently wide to accommodate 6 lanes with shoulders.  It also featured a pair of one lane connections to the west into an underground loading and perhaps parking area of the new D.C. Convention Center.  This 1996 study additionally included consideration of new WMATA rail line for the New York Avenue corridor, as a shot of life for new development opportunities along the New York Avenue corridor towards the Maryland border.  Although that would also be true for a revived crosstown I-66 K Street Tunnel, such was not included, as the 1996 study simply viewed the right of way beneath New York Avenue only for I-395.

This 1996 'Ron Linton' tunnel was favorably received, but was formally allowed to languish owing to the idea that a nation as wealthy as the United States of America was somehow too poor to afford even such a tunnel beneath New York Avenue to the vicinity of Florida Avenue and the B&O-CSX-WMATA Red Line railroad corridor.  Strangely it did not even consider the idea of swinging this tunnel alongside New York Avenue in the area to the east, despite the ample brownfields area.

Even more strangely, an alternative design concept for an I-395 was never considered: one that would avoid the traffic construction disturbances of a cut and cover tunnel beneath New York Avenue between New Jersey Avenue and Florida Avenue NE without an alternative means of routing traffic, displacing as few as 33 dwelling (a 95% reduction from the 1971 plans) while providing vastly superior geometrics, and accommodating an I-66 K Street  New York Avenue Tunnel, that I devised as a private citizen: a tunnel arcing beneath the intersection of New Jersey Avenue and N Street and outwards as a double stack beneath O Street, taking advantage of the corner of the open recreation field of Dunbar High School.

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2007/11/i-395-extension-superior-option.html

The existing 2009-2001 planning makes ZERO consideration of any of this.

It even pinches the Center Leg median further than an unjustified restriction to only 2 lanes per direction by virtually eliminating the media shoulder.

It gives away this existing design flexibility to further maximize developer profits, simply assuming that there shall never be an extension from I-395, either to the west or the northeast.

Again- this permanent right of way constriction was not reported to the public by the news media.

Though the project was planned with the idea of keeping the I-395 open through the construction, it is like the developer was recently proposing its closure in order to largely prevent people from seeing for themselves the right of way constriction until completed.

That and the fact that the project's web site fails to show the portion of the plans with the right of way constriction further suggests such a cover-up, until it is too late to change without massive expense.

What is the public going to think about the lack of attention given to stopping the proposed permanent I-395 right of way pinch, following all of the attention given to the proposed temporary closure?

However, it is not too late- yet.

Suspend this project now, until it is redesigned to fully respect the sunken I-395 8 lane plus shoulders right of way.

Current I-395 Center Leg Air Rights ROW PINCH- Shoddy Consideration & Misrepresentations

Developer give-way ZERO consideration of I-395 flexibility
Needlessly assumes I-395 will never have an extension,
nor consideration for an I-66 crosstown tunnel

This right of way PINCH is unreported in every article that I have seen on this project outside of A Trip Within the Beltway.

I-395 Center Leg Capital Crossing right of way pinch

from 4 to only 2 lanes per direction

"Typical I-395 cross section"  page 10 2009 Air Rights EIS

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2014/12/erased-comments-from-wp-article-dc.html

DDOT's behavior here reeks of behind the scenes deals and bribes.

Their weird silence, stonewalling of the WP requests for information, and then their idiotic stance that since it's part of 395 that they can't weigh in was absurd.

New email message to info@3rdstunnel.com   --  December 12, 2014

I received no reply to my email of November 21, 2014.

Does your project use the designs shown in the 2009 report that pinch the I-395 right of way?

What is the width of the northbound and southbound mainlines once the project is completed?

A Trip Within the Beltway: Unanswered Questions- 3rd Street Tunnel Support Columns and Tunnel Roof

Facts:

The underground I-395 Center Leg was designed to feature 4 lanes in each direction within the tunnel segments on both the north and the south sides of the open trench that is the site of the current air rights project.

As the segment to the south may have issues of inadequate merge-split lanes it may be viewed as a 3 through lane plus one axillary lane in each direction facility, unless the outer walls are re-located outwards beneath the mall.

However, the northern tunnel being a newer design and with its potential merge area to the north of K Street, is properly an 8 through lane tunnel.

Center Leg trench looking north showing the unused righthand lanes- 

the jersey barrier separates the 3rd lane which is now used as a shoulder from the 4th and rightmost lane which remains in its original concrete with the original right-hand shoulder in asphalt.

Center Leg northbound transition to the southern portal of the northern tunnel segment at Massachusetts avenue- note the non-load-bearing wall coordining the space off for the 2 outer lanes

The North Segment:

The segment to the north, between Massachusetts avenue and K Street NW, was built between 1975 and 1978, with a finishing project from 1983 to 1986.  It features a design for a full 4 lanes in each direction, plus shoulders, plus space for an additional - 5th - northbound lane for a left lane ramp to the planned crosstown I-66 Tunnel that would have been under K Street between Franklin Square and Washington circle.  Additionally it features a separate one lane northbound on ramp that would have merged with the northbound mainline to the north of its northern portal at K Street.   Although what people may see today is only a 2 lane plus shoulder in each direction tunnel, that is only because of walls that were added as part of the 1983-1986 finishing project- as the K Street Tunnel and the I-395 extension to the northeast were both canceled once the initial project was underway. These walls are not load-bearing, as can be seen in the expansion joints visible on the surface of K Street and thus could be easily removed.

Northern Center Leg Tunnel 

showing pair of 3 lane continuations to 1971 plan for freeway extension to the northeast, with pair of one lane connections towards I-66 K Street Tunnel

Note the expansion joints on the surface of K Street marking the load-bearing walls.
Note the unused northbound on-ramp, with its merge area north past the tunnel's portal at K Street.

This design with the 4 southbound lanes and the 5 northbound lanes was designed to connect to a pair of 3 lane connections to the northeast, and a pair of one lane connections to the west.

The South Segment (The Mall Tunnel)

The Center Leg tunnel segment to the south, known as the Mall Tunnel, extending from D Street NW to just south of C Street SW,  was constructed between 1966 and 1973.

Unlike the newer northern tunnel segment, the older southern tunnel segment has no afterthought walls, and features an unobstructed space for 4 lanes in each direction.  The site DCRoads, by Steve Anderson states that each direction is 66 feet wide- which would allow 4 lanes at 12 feet each - 48 feet -- plus 18 feet for shoulders.

That appears to be the case with the northbound carriageway.  It starts at its southern end just south of C Street SW where it intercepts a 3 lane roadway and a single lane on-ramp from D Street SW that converge into a 4 lane roadway just inside the tunnel.   (The 3 lane roadway intercepts a single lane for the I-395 northbound transition from the SW Freeway, and a 2 lane roadway that intercepts one lane apiece from the westbound SE freeway and from South Capitol Street).

These 4 northbound lanes continue northward beneath the Mall before 'loosing' the rightmost lane with the two lane off-ramp at C Street, with the second to right hand lane being an 'indecision' lane where one can take that off-ramp or continue upon the center leg now as the outermost of 3 northbound lanes next to an extra wide shoulder that is subsequently striped as a 4th northbound lane.

Further north in the vicinity of the Mall Tunnel's northern portal at D street NW, the right hand two lanes split off from the mainline to the 2 lane exit ramp at Georgetown Law Center, leaving two northbound lanes in the trench with the space for the 2 additional lanes unused.

The Mall Tunnel's southbound carriageway appears to be somewhat narrower at its northern end beneath the Labor Department Building.   There, it intercepts the two open lanes from the trenchway, picking up a 3rd lane from the southbound on-ramp from 3rd Street, re-aligned from its original design, with an extra wide right-hand shoulder that though marked by an overhead light, is unused as a 4th lane, apparently to provide extra space for the subsequent southbound on-ramp from D Street just south of the labor Department Building.

Ideally, the Mall tunnel should have its walls eventually relocated outwards in the area south of the Labor Building to allow a continuous 5th lane between the southbound on and of ramps, as well as perhaps providing somewhat wider shoulders. Without doing that it may be best viewed as a 6 through lane plus 2 auxiliary lane facility.   If the space beneath the Labor Department Building is considered inadequate for a proper merge area for the on-ramp currently scheduled for reconstruction, than a new design that carries that on-ramp in a separate tube carrying it past the Labor Department Building ought to be considered.  THAT would thus allow maintaining the southbound off-ramp that is to be eliminated by the current air rights project: its elimination is another stupid idea that assumes the freeway shall never be extended.  (Rather, that ramp should be retained.)  Such actions would become more needed once a northern extension from the Center Leg is constructed.

The 2009 Center Leg Air Rights Study fails not only for misrepresenting the Center Leg capacity, but also for assuming that the freeway shall never be extended, nor that an I-66 K Street Tunnel project would never be built.

It fails to consider the feasibility of either project, even as a 1996 design for a New York Avenue tunnel employing that avenue's existing right of way, and shown with 2 lanes in each direction is actually wide enough for 3 lanes in each direction.  That plan, by using the existing right of way beneath New York Avenue, would avoid the displacement of 600+ dwellings along that Avenue's north side between New Jersey Avenue and North Capitol Street.

1996 'Ron Linton' New York Avenue Tunnel proposal for 4 lane tunnel 

within right of way sufficient for 6 lane version

Both the 1996 I-395 extension proposal and the I-66 K Street Tunnel would use existing right of way.

An alternative concept for a tunneled extension arcing beneath the intersection of New Jersey Avenue and N Street and continuing as a double stack beneath O Street meanwhile would only displace about 33 or 34 dwellings while providing vastly superior geometric operationabilty then either the 1971 or 1996 plan.

Yet the 2009 EIS fails to consider flexibility for any of these proposals with its willful and unnecessary pinching of the I-395 Center Leg right of way to a fixed 2 lanes in each direction.  It even pinches the median shoulder, trading away safety, simply to maximize developer profits.

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2014/12/unanswered-questions-3rd-street-tunnel.html

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2014/12/erased-comments-from-wp-article-dc.html

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2007/03/i-66-north-leg-west-k-street-tunnel.html

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2009/01/i-395-extension

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2011/02/us-ncpc-perjury-2006.html

If people can get so upset over the recent developer suggestion to entirely shut down the Center Leg segment north of the Labor Department Building, why than should they be so complacent about the permanent giveaway of 50% of its right of way?

And why should this permanent right of way giveaway go so unreported by newspapers as The Washington Post, numerous real estate development blogs, including of course Greater, Greater Washington, which has so far declined A Trip Within The Beltway suggestion to include it in their breakfast links recently?

On Top NOT

Emily Badger writes:

http://www.theatlanticcities.com/commute/2011/12/imagining-city-without-its-public-transportation/690/

"Today, where that behemoth of an interchange would have sat right on top of Mount Vernon Square, there is instead a metro line below ground, and a mixed-use grocery store and apartment complex above."

Actually no.

The freeway was to be a TUNNEL, with any of the exposed roadways BELOW GROUND-LEVEL, and accommodating new real estate development.











As Scott M. Kozel correctly describes it:

http://www.roadstothefuture.com/DC_Interstate_Fwy.html

The I-66 portion of the North Leg of the Inner Loop would have extended from the present I-66 terminus near the Watergate Apartments at K Street NW, extending as the North Leg under K Street NW in a tunnel, and emerging east of Mount Vernon Square and junctioning with I-95 about a mile north of the U.S. Capitol Building.

The I-66 portion of the North Leg would have had 6 lanes. The I-66 K Street Tunnel was the solution to the original I-66 alignment that would have run east-west through urban neighborhoods alongside Florida Avenue NW, and between T and U Streets NW about a half mile north of K Street NW. If the K Street Tunnel had been built, it would have been a cut and cover design, about 1.5 miles long, buried out of sight under the straight 147-foot wide avenue, and passing under Mount Vernon Square, and it would have run from near Watergate almost to today's New York Ave./I-395 junction.

The underscores how writers must check facts rather then simply relying upon entities as WMATA, or 'mainstream' media such as The Washington Post, which can't even be honest about the route for I-95, let alone the I-66 K Street Tunnel.

I-66 K Street Tunnel
http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2007/03/i-66-north-leg-west-k-street-tunnel.html

I-395 (I-95) Extension
http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2009/01/i-395-extension.html