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

Center Leg Constriction To Start Today

Project to illegally constrict the I-395 sunken right of way, blocking off the outer 2 lanes in each direction and narrowing the median shoulder to start today- February 24, 2015.

Rejection of late 2014 developer proposal to fully close highway segment during construction, means that motoring public gets to witness the rip off of the right of way as it physically happens.

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

February 23, 2015

Media Contacts

Reggie Sanders — (202) 437-0809, reggie.sanders@dc.govreggie.sanders@dc.gov

reggie.sanders@dc.gov%3cmailto:reggie.sanders@dc.gov>>

Michelle Phipps-Evans — (202) 497-0124, michelle.phipps-evans@dc.govmichelle.phipps-evans@dc.govmichelle.phipps-evans@dc.gov%3cmailto:michelle.phipps-evans@dc.gov>>

Phase One of I-395/3rd Street Tunnel Construction Project Begins February 24th Two-lane traffic will be maintained in each direction during peak hours with limited closures during off-peak hours

(Washington DC) The District Department of Transportation (DDOT) announced today that Property Group Partners (PGP), the developer of Capitol Crossing, will begin construction in the I-395/3rd Street Tunnel on February 24th, 2015. Work in northbound and southbound lanes will be performed between D Street and New York Avenue, NW, and have no significant impact on traffic during daytime hours. Minor traffic impacts, which will be primarily overnight, will occur to accommodate this enabling work.

Motorists should anticipate delays during this first phase due to periodic lane and ramp closures at night and one permanent ramp closure (I-395 3rd Street off-ramp). This phase of the construction project will take approximately five to six months to complete, weather permitting.

Motorists can anticipate the following impact on traffic in the area:

·        The I-395 southbound off-ramp to the 3rd Street Tunnel will be closed permanently during this phase. There will be no vehicle parking on the ramp, and motorists should seek alternative routes.

·        The southbound travel lanes will be reduced to a single lane of traffic on a limited number of weekdays during off-peak hours, from 11 pm to 5 am; and on certain weekends from midnight to 7 am.

·        The I-395 northbound 3rd Street Tunnel on-ramp will close on a limited number of weekdays during off-peak hours from midnight to 5 am; and on certain weekends from midnight to 8 am. During the 3rd Street on-ramp closures, traffic will be diverted to the 3rd and D Street on-ramp.

·        The northbound travel lanes will be reduced to a single lane of traffic during off-peak hours from 9 pm to 5 am for a limited number of weekdays; and on certain weekends from midnight to 8 am.

·        The northbound off-ramp at 2nd Street, NW, will remain open.

·        Motorists will experience more delays at the following intersections:

o  New York Avenue and the 3rd Street Tunnel entrance.

o  New York Avenue and 4th Street, NW

o  New York and New Jersey Avenue, NW

o  2nd Street and D Street, NW

o  3rd and D Street Tunnel Entrance

Truck traffic must follow truck detours and adhere to over-height restrictions. Traffic on northbound and southbound I-395 will experience slower speeds through the work zones.

At this time, no parking restrictions are anticipated. Pedestrians and bicyclists should pay attention to changing traffic patterns as well.

Motorists are urged to stay alert and use caution when traveling through the work zones. Fines are doubled for speeding in work zones. Motorists are also advised to plan for additional travel time, use alternate routes or seek alternate means of transportation, as traffic delays are likely to occur.

For additional details, please contact the project’s public outreach office at (202) 719-0196.

For more information about the project, visit www.3rdsttunnel.com<http://www.3rdsttunnel.com<http://www.3rdsttunnel.com%3chttp/www.3rdsttunnel.com>>

See more articles on this constriction project:

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2015/01/choking-i-395-center-leg.html

EYA Fostered & Exploited Buyer Ignorance & Lack of Forethought

"Capitol Quarter" project

http://www.nbcwashington.com/investigations/Dangerous-Cargo-Hazardous-Materials-That-Travel-Through-DC-287852791.html

When Maureen Cohen Harrington moved into her home on Virginia Avenue Southeast, she said she never thought about trains. But she said she started paying attention when she realized CSX wants to temporarily reroute trains through her front yard, as close as eight steps from her front door by her count, so CSX can double the size of its nearby tunnel.

See:

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2014/12/newcomer-development-residents-threaten.html

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2015/02/wheres-dc-safe-rail-on-takoma-transit.html

Where's DC Safe Rail on Takoma Transit Oriented Development?

D.C. Safe Rail opposes the project to rebuild the freight rail tunnel under Virginia Avenue (with temporary open trench at lower grade) adjacent to a group of EYA townhouses constructed within the past decade.

What do they, and such allied groups as the 'Committee of 100 on the Federal City' have to say about the far more egregious case of new transit oriented development adjacent to an ELEVATED freight railroad in a different part of Washington, D.C. -Takoma?

from a recent search

http://dcsaferail.org/

 Elevation 314 next to elevated heavy freight rail at the Takoma Metro Station

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2011/08/forgotten-elephant-building-too-damn.html

Spring Place- with wood framed construction to reduce costs.

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2011/11/takoma-dc-death-trap-residential.html

http://dc.urbanturf.com/articles/blog/two_five-story_apartment_to_go_up_in_takoma/4662

Choking the SW-SE Freeway/Virginia Avenue Tunnel

to block augmentation and burial- keeping the city locally divided for the sake of badly placed real estate development

U.S. NCPC's sensible basic design 

for under-grounding the SW Freeway 

via a Washington Channel Tunnel

SW Freeway

In 2008 US National Capital Planning Commission releases an interesting design proposal for the SW Freeway

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2008/07/new-i-395-gateway-if-its-coordinated.html

Yet developers and their friends in government work to place new buildings too close thereby locking in the existing SW Freeway design.

 New proposed development planning 

to prevent extra capacity 

and prevent Washington Channel Tunnel

EYA- the developer that built the townhouses next to the Virginia Avenue Tunnel,

 effectively placing opposition to that rail freight tunnel's reconstruction, 

placed this row of 28 townhouses only 16 feet from the SW Freeway- 

right where an extra few lanes and a lid atop the freeway would make far better sense

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2012/02/preserving-elevated-i-395.html

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2012/02/preserving-elevated-i-395.html

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2012/07/ncpc-eco-district-to-lock-in-existing-i.html

SE Freeway- Virginia Tunnel

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2010/04/planning-in-vacuum-csx-se-freeway.html

"Committee of 100" seeks suit blocking tunnel reconstruction, seeks to relocate railroad from tunnel alongside more affluent area to less affluent area without a tunnel wile requiring new river crossing.

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2014/11/getting-over-committee-of-100-seeks-to.html

Much of the opposition to the freight rail tunnel reconstruction in more affluent area comes from people living in townhouses built only within the past decade by EYA

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2014/12/newcomer-development-residents-threaten.html

June 1, 1967 Duncan Wall Letter To Spiro Agnew

"...The reduced, re-routed proposal was made public last year with endorsement of D.C. And Maryland highway authorities. The D.C. Portion was forced through the National Capital Planning Commission by votes of representatives of the D.C. Highway Department and of the U.S. Bureau of Public Roads. From this we concluded, reasonably enough, that the highway authorities of the two jurisdictions (Maryland and D.C.) had reached a firm understanding with the Bureau of Public Roads.

Many of us were therefore astonished and aroused to preparations for renewed protests when Washington newspapers recently reported that the Bureau has acted to open it all up again. We have not found the Bureau forthcoming with candid information, but the press articles intimate an intention to force Maryland to accept modifications of route or design ostensibly “cheaper.”

The result is that the whole controversy, which had been somewhat quiescent, is beginning to agitate the communities again. I can assure you this is so, for although I recently resigned chairmanship of the Metropolitan Citizens Council for Rapid Transit and write this simply as an individual citizen who wishes your administration well, I do remain in close touch with neighborhood sentiment on transportation-related issues..."

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/quiescent

qui·es·cent

 (kwē-ĕs′ənt, kwī-)adj.

1. Quiet, still, or inactive. See Synonyms at inactive.

2. Characterized by an absence of upheaval or discord


                                                                                    June 1, 1967
Governor Spiro T. Agnew,
State Capital
Annapolis, Maryland

Dear Governor Agnew;

Citizens of Takoma Park and Silver Spring had reason for their demonstrations of bitter dissatisfaction with the highway authorities of your predecessor’s administration. After we had been given reason to believe that the causes of our protests had been in at least some part overcome, the matter now threatens to break into renewed bitterness. I am sure you will wish to avoid this as much as many of us.

We showed that the methods of traffic projections which were claimed to justify the North Central were fallacious, the results in error by as much as 400 percent. Our contention was tacitly admitted in “re-studied” versions of the proposal made public last year, sharply reducing the original plan of 5 lanes each way.

The re-studied proposal also tacitly admitted that the route first proposed was needlessly, even carelessly if not ruthlessly, destructive of our communities. The new version hugged both sides of the existing Baltimore and Ohio railway, thus avoiding a new swath of destruction to divide our communities and sharply reducing the number of homes to be taken.

The reduced, re-routed proposal was made public last year with endorsement of D.C. And Maryland highway authorities. The D.C. Portion was forced through the National Capital Planning Commission by votes of representatives of the D.C. Highway Department and of the U.S. Bureau of Public Roads. From this we concluded, reasonably enough, that the highway authorities of the two jurisdictions (Maryland and D.C.) had reached a firm understanding with the Bureau of Public Roads.

Many of us were therefore astonished and aroused to preparations for renewed protests when Washington newspapers recently reported that the Bureau has acted to open it all up again. We have not found the Bureau forthcoming with candid information, but the press articles intimate an intention to force Maryland to accept modifications of route or design ostensibly “cheaper.”

The result is that the whole controversy, which had been somewhat quiescent, is beginning to agitate the communities again. I can assure you this is so, for although I recently resigned chairmanship of the Metropolitan Citizens Council for Rapid Transit and write this simply as an individual citizen who wishes your administration well, I do remain in close touch with neighborhood sentiment on transportation-related issues.

                                                  Sincerely yours

                                                  Duncan Wall

7311 Holly Ave
Takoma Park, Maryland 20012

The controversy had largely died down, only to become inflamed when the Feds began making noises that they were going to replace the 1966 plan that more or less followed the 1962 JFK plan, with extremely unpopular 1964 plan.

The Feds would likewise stoke the freeway opposition by technically ignoring the 1966 and 1971 design studies, by keeping the extremely unpopular 1964 plan for the North Central Freeway and the 1955 plan for the North Leg technically on the books right up to the mid 1970s when the freeways were 'de-mapped'.

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2015/01/feds-stoked-controversy-over-dc.html

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2012/01/crafted-controversy-scuttling-of-jfks-b.html

1966 'Supplementary' Study North Central Freeway

the 'supplementary' study that should have been the initial study
of the step in the right direction betrayed by the US FHWA















Blair Park-Montgomery Community College Tunnels



Entering Washington, D.C. alongside Takoma Park- 3 lane carriageways flanking the railroad transitioning to an elevated configuration

November 29, 1966

Gentlemen:

In accordance with the provisions of Change Order No. 2 to District of Columbia Formal Agreement No. 2224, we submit herewith our Engineering Feasibility Report which records the study of the location for the north Central Freeway within the corridor of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad between Rhode Island Avenue and the Capital Beltway.

The study, which supplements the comprehensive location studies for the Project presented in the Engineering Feasibility Report of October 1964, was conducted to determine the feasibility of constructing the freeway throughout its route in close proximity to the existing railroad and the proposed rail rapid transit line in order to minimize displacement and disruption to established neighborhoods.

As a result of the study, it has been determined that location of the Freeway within the Railroad corridor for the full length of the project is feasible and will effect the desired reduction in displacement and neighborhood disruption. It has been further concluded, after investigation of alternative alignments and concepts, that if the freeway is constructed within the Railroad Corridor, it should conform to the low level concept which is developed and described in the Report. Under this concept the Freeway would be located contiguous to the Railroad, with a grade line generally at or below the elevation of the Railroad.

The Report examines alternative alignments and concepts within the designated corridor, and presents data, drawings, and suggested design treatments pertaining to the low level concept.

We appreciate the cooperation received from the members of your staffs the staffs of the District of Columbia and Maryland Divisions of the Bureau of Public Roads and the staffs of the departments and agencies in the District of Columbia and Montgomery County who have furnished data and have participated in the review of our work.

Very Truly Yours

J.E. Geiner Company

E.J. Donnelly

As the Washington Post would report, May 8, 1967:

Top officials of the Bureau have ordered a full review of the plans for the 3 ½ mile road … While it is good practice to disrupt as few people as possible in road building, is it worth the added cost of $22 million?

… Rejection by the Bureau would certainly fan the embers of one of the Washington area’s freeway controversies spearheaded by a group called the Save Takoma Park Committee. It rallied the residents of the middle income suburb composed largely of turn of the century homes on tree lined streets to strident opposition at hearings in Washington and Silver Spring on the original [1964] alignment.

This cheap skate attitude surely served the purpose of poisoning popular sentiment against the B&O North Central Freeway. According to a letter dated June 1, 1967 from Takoma Park resident and former --- to Maryland Governor Spiro Agnew:

Citizens of Takoma Park and Silver Spring had reason for their demonstrations of bitter dissatisfaction with the highway authorities of your predecessor's administration. After we had been given reason to believe that the causes of our protests had been in at least some part overcome, the matter now threatens to break into renewed bitterness. I am sure you will wish to avoid this as much as many of us.

We showed that the methods of traffic projections which were claimed to justify the North Central were fallacious, the results in error by as much as 400 percent. Our contention was tacitly admitted in "re-studied" versions of the proposal made public last year, sharply reducing the original plan of 5 lanes each way.

The re-studied proposal also tacitly admitted that the route first proposed was needlessly, even carelessly if not ruthlessly, destructive of our communities. The new version hugged both sides of the existing Baltimore and Ohio railway, thus avoiding a new swath of destruction to divide our communities and sharply reducing the number of homes to be taken.

The reduced, re-routed proposal was made public last year with endorsement of D.C. And Maryland highway authorities. The D.C. Portion was forced through the National Capital Planning Commission by votes of representatives of the D.C. Highway Department and of the U.S. Bureau of Public Roads. From this we concluded, reasonably enough, that the highway authorities of the two jurisdictions (Maryland and D.C.) had reached a firm understanding with the Bureau of Public Roads.

Many of us were therefore astonished and aroused to preparations for renewed protests when Washington newspapers recently reported that the Bureau has acted to open it all up again. We have not found the Bureau forthcoming with candid information, but the press articles intimate an intention to force Maryland to accept modifications of route or design ostensibly "cheaper."

The result is that the whole controversy, which had been somewhat quiescent, is beginning to agitate the communities again. I can assure you this is so, for although I recently resigned chairmanship of the Metropolitan Citizens Council for Rapid Transit and write this simply as an individual citizen who wishes your administration well, I do remain in close touch with neighborhood sentiment on transportation-related issues.

Notably latter 1966- early 1967 was a time of transition and bureaucratic reorganization, with the U.S. Bureau of Roads being replaced by the then brand new U.S. Federal Highway Authority, with the outgoing administrator Rex Marion Whitton, who served from 1961 to 1966, quoted by the Kansas Evening Star about his retirement that at [the age of] 68

"I want to get out while I am still winning or at least that I am still winning"

as if on que of an impending planned scuttling.

Rex Marion Whitton- retires while still winning

Lowell K Bridwell- given the assignment to assist in the scuttling of the assassinated JFK's B&O North Central Freeway concept

Was the conclusion of a two year dialog amongst neighborhood groups. Adopted in November 1962 by the JFK Administration; a June 1963 letter signed by JFK ..

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2006/11/1966-north-central-freeway.html

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2012/01/crafted-controversy-scuttling-of-jfks-b.html