Whatever Happened With The Tunnelfication of Washington, D.C.'s SW-SE Freeway?

We ALL know that the District's SW-SE Freeway is a monstrosity.  BAD design.  NO safety shoulders.  Open trench bisecting SW, before rising up upon a hideous viaduct that crosses atop South Capital Street.  And continuing east, a Chinese wall along Virginia Avenue to the interchange with the 11th Street Bridge, and a brief surface segment, before its sole well designed segment, the pair of 4 lane rectangular box tunnels beneath Pennsylvania Avenue SE's Barney Circle.

30 years ago, the Washington Post published a good article, by Roger K. Lewis, March 27, 1993, "For The 21st Century A Capital Design Reach In Need of A Regional Reach".  Within was an illustration, indicating an underground replacement for the SW-SE Freeway.

 

 

Washington Post, March 27, 1993

During the late 1990s and early 2000s, U.S. National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) published a few brochures with illustrations of the South Capital Street area with the SW-SE Freeway viaduct removed.

In 2005, NCPC published a brochure showing a westernmost portion of an underground SW Freeway, extending further west to extend beneath Washington Channel.

Nevertheless, NCPC fails to show any plans that are workable.

Note how the renderings above have substandard capacity (refusing to correct the bottleneck), poor geometry (too sharp a curve), and impractical to build as it transitions upon exactly the same right of way, which must maintain traffic through the reconstruction.

Even worse, the 1990s NCPC planning with the South Capital Mall - what it would obviously be called, yet such a phrase appears nowhere in any of their public publications - did not even include an underground replacement for the SW-SE Freeway.  Instead it presents the unworkable-absolutely impractical notion of I-395 simply connecting to 14th and F Streets!  An anti express highway exemplified by such NCPC published statements at that time, that "amphibious cars - contemporary versions of the old Army ducks - could render bridges obsolete" - try picturing that!

Anyone looking at the situation can see the obvious, that a band of land MUST be cleared directly to the south.  And do note that the area WAS already cleared during the late 1950s-early 1960s for the SW Redevelopment Project.  Yet nonetheless, that area was subsequently filled with new residential development by the early 1970s. 

 

By 1993, that area had become developed except for the plot bordered by the SW Freeway southward to G Street, and extending west-east between 9th and 7th Streets SW.  That is the area that people likely saw as being reserved by the feds for serving as the staging area for a project to reconstruct the SW Freeway underground, as well as definitely widening that short stretch of expressway to the interchange with the Center Leg/3rd Street Tunnel.  Indeed that segment was built with inadequate capacity, lacking the must have minimum of two added lanes per direction, owing to the 1955 design report's excuse over aesthetics, never-mind the failure to design it as a cut and cover tunnel, and that the space was cleared anyway for the SW Redevelopment.

Nevertheless, and quite weirdly, in 1999, shortly after the start of the administration of D.C. Mayor Anthony Williams, motorists are horrified, seeing a new real estate development project there being erected- the "Capital Square" townhouse project.  It fills that parcel with townhouses, including a row of 28 at the northern side, a mere 16 or so feet from the open trench 1950s design expressway.  This "Capital Square" project is undertaken by an entity called "E.Y.A. Associates.

They are the same firm that subsequently constructs another townhouse project to the east, facing the southern side of the same expressway between 3rd and 4th Streets, between I Street to the south and Virginia Avenue, complicating not only ever under-grounding that segment (which is an elevated earth filled berm), but also complicating the indisputably required Virginia Avenue railroad tunnel reconstruction project.  E.Y.A. reportedly underplays the likelihood of that project to potential townhouse buyers.  These townhouses are filled with new dwellers. At least one of them gets to bring a law suit to block the project.  And that effort is supported by the "Committee of 100 on the Federal City", which instead sought to replace that railroad with one to the south side of the Anacostia River, and which would NOT be a tunnel.  Fortunately that effort failed, and the Virginia Avenue railroad tunnel project gets built.

Now, one would suppose that the SW-SE Freeway corridor would have undergone an effort to purchase properties for the space to construct an underground replacement.  As traffic MUST be maintained through the construction, a band of land MUST be assembled.  As this area includes existing occupied dwellings, simply purchase them over time, at least when they come onto the market, and either demolish, or at least have occupied by people told that the use is only for a set period of time.

But get this, one such area IS cleared out, with dwellings removed, and without any protest sufficient to block such dislocations- the area immediately west of 4th Street SW, right next to the expressway where it transitions from trench to viaduct.  And real estate developers are allowed to erect a new residential building- at 600 4th Street SW, called the "Kiley Apartments".

And this occurs in the same general area where the U.S. Departments of Housing and Urban Development, as well as the U.S. Department of Transportation/Federal Highway Authority are situated.

What is preventing the U.S. government from doing its duty?!

Who decried that only the City of Boston is to get a serious project to reconstruct its main existing expressways underground with its Central Artery Tunnel Project (with its mainline done sadly with NO shoulders)?  If Ted Kennedy and Tip O'Neil could get such for Boston, why NOTHING for the nation' Capital, Washington, D.C.?!?!

Why Is Biden Allowing the Continual Blight of the SW-SE Freeway Viaduct Atop South Capital Street?

30 years ago, in 1993, the Washington Post published an article about future planning for Washington, D.C., which featured reconstructing the SW-SE Freeway, removing the surface and elevated highway and submerging a replacement expressway within a new tunnel.

Illustration from the Washington Post, 1993

Yet, D.C. Department of Public Works is now embarking upon a project to reconstruct the existing horrifically blighting elevated facility.  See: https://seswbridges.ddot.dc.gov/

 DDOT is planning to rehabilitate the SE/SW Freeway (I-695) Bridges, which comprise the elevated interstate of I-695 over South Capitol Street SW, New Jersey Avenue SE, and Virginia Avenue SE / 2nd Street SE, along with the associated ramps. This series of bridges were built from 1958 to 1963 and rehabilitated in 1991. Due to the age of the bridges and continued deterioration to some elements, the main objective will be to rehabilitate the bridges and update key features to further extend their service life. Additional improvements to lighting, signing, lane striping, and drainage will be incorporated in conjunction with the bridge rehabilitations.

What gives?  If Boston, Massachusetts could have it Central Artery/3rd Harbor Tunnel project - the "Big Dig" - approved way back in 1986, started circa 1991, and completed about 2005, why can't Washington, D.C., our nations capital, have its project to replace its disgusting, badly designed, no safety shoulder 1959-67 SW-SE Freeway likewise replaced?

Strong Towns Misrepresents SW Freeway SW Displacement

 "Strong Towns" which is typically dogmatic against constructing any new expressways, misrepresents building demolition impacts of late 1950s, early 1960s construction of the SW-SE Freeway:

"Smart Growth America’s analysis puts numbers behind these arguments. It estimates that the construction of ... I-395/695 in DC destroyed 99% of buildings in the city’s southwest quadrant, displacing 4,700 people and causing an average of $483,000 in lost home equity."

https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2023/7/24/what-we-must-do-to-address-the-historic-harms-of-highways

This claim that the freeway/expressway destroyed 99% of the buildings in the district;s sw quadrant is false, it completely neglects the time periods SW Urban Renewal District program.  The expressway itself displaced a fraction of all of this.

Read about the SW Redevelopment at the blog Whose Downtown

The federal government established the Redevelopment Land Agency and the National Capital Planning Commission to design, monitor, and complete the redevelopment of Southwest D.C. under the District of Columbia Redevelopment Act of 1950.  The rationale provided for the urban renewal project included concerns about congestion in the downtown area and preoccupation over unhealthy slum conditions and unsightly dilapidated buildings.  The major expansion of the federal government during the New Deal and World War II created pressure to free up residential space for federal employees who worked downtown.  Additionally, Title I of the National Housing Act of 1949 stipulated that major urban cities would receive funds in order to renovate blighted areas, including neighborhoods classified as slums or buildings deemed unsafe and uninhabitable.  These acts gained judicial support when in 1954, the US Supreme Court ruled that a property could be condemned and taken by the federal government solely to beautify a community for the benefit the general public.^[2]

The implementation of the urban renewal project displaced the large number of African Americans living in Southwest D.C.  The project leveled 99 percent of buildings in the Southwestern quadrant of the city and forced the 4,500 African American Families who had previously resided in Southwest D.C. to relocate to other areas –mainly to Northeast and Southeast D.C.^[3]  Of the 5,900 new buildings constructed in the area, only 310 were classified as moderately-priced housing units.^[4]  The project tore apart the culture and history of historic African American neighborhoods.  Following resettlement in other areas of the city, 25% of displaced residents reported not making a single friend in their new neighborhood.^[5]  While local critics deemed the urban renewal program to be the “Negro Removal Program,” the project had a wide impact on the nation as it became a model for other large cities to emulate.^[6]

https://whosedowntown.wordpress.com/urban-renewal-the-story-of-southwest-d-c/

I challenge anyone to look at SW DC, whether on a map, or in person, to see the considerably larger area now occupied by post 1950s buildings.

The Strong Towns article misstating the 99 percent figure is titled "What We Must Do To Address The Historic Harms of Highways" offers nothing with regard to that with any of the existing urban expressways, such as the D.C. SW-SE Freeway (which really needs a major project to reconstruct with added capacity to deal with the bottleneck, within new tunnel shells equipped with vehicular exhaust filtration, underground.

Strong Towns does this typically in conformance to its jesuitical, neo medievalist opposition to any new roads.

Smart Towns needs to get its facts straight, as well as abandon its neo medievalist idiotology, and start consideration of reasonable design solutions for a host of major underground, filtrated urban highway projects for both existing and new roads.

May 1, 2012 Presentation On SW-SE Freeway Reconstruction-Removal

Found here.

May 1, 2012 www.planphilly.com "Highway Removal Studio"
presentation on Washington, D.C.'s Southeast/Southwest Freeway

http://www.viddler.com/v/dc2a5552

Good insofar of its inclusion of a Washington Channel Tunnel as proposed in 2008 by U.S. National Capital Planning Commission

Poor insofar of its zero discussion of construction feasibility, of tying the Washington Channel Tunnel into the existing freeway trench and in removing the elevated segment to the east with a lowered replacement.

Impractical in its renderings showing the row of Capitol Square Townhouses closest to the southern retaining wall of the SW Freeway between 10th and 7th Streets SW., as staging the freeway tunnel reconstruction project while maintaining traffic, would require a new excavation along the southern side.

Impractical in removing the freeway to the east of the Center Leg without a replacement tunnel, particularly given the recent 11th Street Bridges reconstruction which added new high capacity ramps to the south of the Anacostia River to and from the northeast with DC295.

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2016/03/renewed-silliness-to-remove-se-freeway.html

Renewed Silliness To Remove SE Freeway

disregarding the recent 11th Street Bridge replacement with its new ramp connections to the DC 295 Anacostia Freeway to and from the northeast.

via an article appearing February 29, 2016 in The Washingtonian "Let's Tear Down The South East Freeway And Build A New Neighborhood"

http://www.washingtonian.com/2016/02/29/southeast-freeway-development-construction-navy-yard-dc-neighborhood/

makes an interesting juxtaposition with the accompanying simplistic freeway removal ideology to discourage use of the New York Avenue corridor and the Center Leg and thus shift traffic to the SE Freeway-11th Street Bridge-DC 295 Anacostia Freeway combo.

http://www.washingtonian.com/2016/02/29/southeast-freeway-development-construction-navy-yard-dc-neighborhood/

The article is authored by Dan Reed, who studied for a Masters degree at the University of Pennsylvania, where he, with colleagues Susannah Henschel and Matt Wicklund, explored the possibilities and impacts of removing urban freeways,  particularly regarding Washington, D.C.'s  Southeast-Southwest Freeway, working with the National Capital Planning Commission.  He writes the following, which contains a number or serious flaws:

The Southwest Freeway, which carries a significant amount of traffic between the Potomac River and Fourth Street, Southwest, probably couldn’t be removed without overburdening the local street network. By the time it changes to the Center Leg Freeway and then to the Southeast Freeway, at South Capitol Street, the roadway carries a third fewer cars and could be replaced with a surface street that handles some of the traffic, with M Street, Southeast, and Pennsylvania Avenue picking up the excess. Biking and rapid transit could take care of the rest.

The amount of traffic upon the initial- western- segment of the Southeast Freeway is destined to carry significantly more traffic with the recent 11th Street Bridge replacement project that added new ramp connections on its southern end directly into the DC 295 Anacostia Freeway heading to and from the north-east, thus establishing a seem-less through D.C. connection.

The freeway changes dramatically along its path—sunken below street level here, rising onto an elevated there—so my colleagues and I developed three different treatments. At Fourth, Seventh, and Tenth streets, Southwest, the sunken Southwest Freeway is crossed by bridges. We thought about building a big cap over the freeway here, like Boston’s Big Dig, but decided it would be too expensive for the limited amount of new space it would create. Instead, we expanded each bridge to create a platform for small retail buildings, sort of like the Ponte Vecchio in Italy. They would help connect the north and south sides of the freeway visually for those crossing the bridges, while new retail could draw more street life to an area that has very little today.

The freeway is in a trench as it crosses 10th and 7th Streets SW, before rising to an elevated berm to the east thus crossing over 4th Street SW- thus the above statement is factually incorrect about the freeway being sunk below the 4th Street crossing.

How would a cap above the existing sunken segment be too expensive?  Other cities have had far more extensive cut and cover freeway projects, yet somehow this is "too expensive" for such a freeway within Washington, D.C., the Nation's Capital.  Rather, this would be a good time to remove the bottleneck with its dangerous two into one lane merge with the on ramp from Main Street, by replacing the existing retaining wall which is not designed to support a tunnel roof, with a new wall set out further to the south, allowing adding a couple lanes per direction, at the expense of a row of townhouses built in 1999 too close to the freeway- a mere 16 feet or so from the existing retaining wall.  This would be necessary to facilitate construction staging for the removal and replacement of the elevated segment to the east with a new lowered cut and cover tunnel segment.

Farther east, where I-395—now the submerged Center Leg Freeway—bends north toward New York Avenue, we’d build a platform, like the Capitol Crossing development, and place new retail, office, and apartment buildings atop it, reconnecting local streets that currently dead-end at the freeway. In the space where the 395/695 interchange now takes up nearly three square blocks, we’d create a grand new public square, similar to Farragut Square, granting this area much-needed open space.

This disregards that the freeway transitions from a trench at 7th Street SW to an elevated berm by the time it crosses 4th Street SW.   Any new platform to reconnect local streets, and such a "grand new pubic space" absolutely requires not simply covering an existing freeway segment but rather its removal and replacement with a new set of roadways constructed at a lower elevation.

East of there, we’d eradicate the Southeast Freeway entirely. Before the 1960s, Virginia Avenue—which still exists in fits and starts around Foggy Bottom and L’Enfant Plaza—was a broad boulevard not unlike Pennsylvania or Massachusetts Avenue. Our design puts it back. The new street would extend from just east of South Capitol Street to the 11th Street Bridge and all the way to the Anacostia, where it would end in a new waterfront park.

This disregards the above stated need to completely reconstruct the eastern portion of the SW Freeway at a lower elevation, as well as the recent 11th Street Bridge replacement project with its new ramp configurations making this a continuous through D.C. freeway route.   Without such a reconstruction, his platform atop the freeway would have to be likewise elevated, could not restore the street grid as the elevated highway would still be in the way, and would require a ramp to transition from the elevated freeway to the restored Virginia Avenue street level boulevard.

The idea of a restored boulevard could actually make sense if built atop a SW-SE freeway reconstructed underground.

Because of the need to maintain traffic throughout the construction project, the way to do this would be by a staged program:

- first constructing a parallel tunneled freeway facility, starting with a Washington Channel Tunnel akin to the 2008 U.S. National Capital Planning Commission proposal, continuing east beneath G Street SW-SE to Virginia Avenue, dipping under the new railroad tunnel, to a temporary merge into the SE Freeway, together with tunnel connections to the north along the Center Leg beneath 2nd and 3rd Streets.  This G Street Tunnel would be two levels, eastbound atop westbound.  Once completed, open the G Street Tunnel to SW-SE Freeway traffic heading to the 11th Street Bridges.

- secondly, remove the row of townhouses closest to the SW Freeway's southern side between 10th and 7th Streets SW, excavate that area, build a new retaining wall designed to support tunnel roof, framing additional freeway capacity, and continue this east, crossing beneath 4th Street SW, to the existing ramp to the Center Leg, and perhaps with an extension further east squeezed alongside the existing elevated SW-SE Freeway to minimize housing displacement, before merging to the east with the new G Street Tunnel to the existing SE Freeway.  Subsequently begin closing and removing the elevated SW-SE Freeway, and start constructing the underground replacement.  That could ultimately be shifted slightly southwards to improve the geometry of the connections with the Center Leg.  And it all would be opened together with the direction of the G Street Tunnel from the 11th Street Bridge. 

- subsequently, finish the new 2nd and 3rd Street Tunnels along the Center Leg.  Before these could be used as a through route, they would need a merge into northbound I-395, which would occur within a tunneled extension to the north-east, employing not the substandard geometry of the 1996 Ron Linton plan's curved transition at the rear of the Bibleway Church complex and then directly beneath New York Avenue, but rather a gentler radii curve arcing beneath the New Jersey Avenue/N Street intersection and the Dunbar field, to a straight line continuation under O Street NW/NE.   Optionally, build a temporary connection to New York Avenue near the location of the Fed Ex building.  Or expedite a permanent underground tunnel box freeway extension to the east along the northern side of New York Avenue featuring parallel box for a new WMATA rail transit line, and a decking over of the railroad chasm, with a new linear park and city scale real estate development atop; such would be easier than constructing that tunnel directly under New York Avenue as discussed during the late 1990s and early 2000s, and far more potentially profitable with the line of new real estate development.  

- This tunneled extension from the Center Leg to alongside New York Avenue should have design flexibility to ultimately accommodate tunnel box versions of freeway connections to the north along the Grand Arc reconstruction of the B&O Metropolitan Branch with a vast linear park atop, to an East Leg to RFK Stadium and the eastern end of the SE Freeway as a cover-way essentially extending the structure of Barney Circle, and for a tunnel directly under New York Avenue

Once the New York Avenue corridor box tunnel freeway is completed to Maryland Route 50, traffic could be shifted from the antiquated DC 295 Anacostia Freeway to facilitate the latter's reconstruction as a modernized cut and cover facility bring its specifications up to date while permitting opening up local access to the Anacostia River waterfront.

The failure of the Dan Reed article in addressing any of this, speaks volumes as to the deficit of thought with much of the trendy [anti] intellectualism of the ideology of outright freeway removal

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2016/03/may-1-2012-presentation-on-sw-se.html

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

SE 'Boulevard' Opens

 

Photo by JD

http://www.jdland.com/dc/seblvd.cfm

The SE Boulevard is essentially a narrowing of the existing-former SE Freeway segment between the 11th Street Bridges and Barney Circle/Pennsylvania Avenue.

Photo by JD

It is alas NOT connected to the remaining SE Freeway by a grade separated interchange as God intends, but rather a traffic light intersection, as its previous direct correction was eliminated with the option chosen for recent project to replace the 11th Street Bridges.

Meanwhile planning continues upon this roadway's ultimate configuration, with three options under formal consideration.

http://www.jdland.com/dc/pdf-view.cfm?filename=seblvd-141211-presentation.pdf

https://flahaven6b.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/2014-10-06-se-blvd-concepts-1.pdf

Of these, Options A and C show a decked over space to be used for underground bus parking.  Such could theoretically be used for an underground freeway that would essentially tie into to the existing pair of underpasses beneath Barney Circle.

Option A cross section

 Option C cross section

Option B meanwhile shows such space wasted via being simply filled in with dirt.  however any of these options could ultimately accommodate a future underground freeway, though Option B would require the greatest construction disruption by requiring excavating the streets rather than simply reuse the underground parking areas that would be provided by Options A and C.

NONE of these options show a true waterfront connection/continuation of the street grid.   All simply provide pedestrian-bicycle only continuations of the three north south streets, 13th , 14th and 15th Streets SE.  None provide a proper raising of the M Street right of way to meet the east-west boulevard, and with only a single pedestrian-bicycle path crossing the otherwise uncovered railway.

Such a proper build-out to the waterfront is thwarted by the current planning for the 1333 M Street real estate development project.

That project could and should be redesigned to accommodate not only at connecting a raised extension of eastern M Street into the new SE Boulevard, but also perhaps an extension of Virginia Avenue SE to a redesigned Water Street.

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2014/09/a-se-freeway-plan-benifiting-greatest.html

Video- The New Virginia Avenue Tunnel

within Washington, D.C. along the southern side of the SE Freeway

Note at the end of the video how the topography drops just past the Eastern Portal, in the area where M Street SE needs to be raised to allow a proper decking over of the SE Freeway segment to the east of the 11th Street Bridges- a need ignored by neglectors of comprehensive transportation planning/cheerleaders for real estate development, such as the blog Greater, Greater Washington.

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2014/09/a-se-freeway-plan-benifiting-greatest.html

A SE Freeway Plan Benifiting The Greatest Segment of Society

http://www.kirsten6b.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/2014-08-04-ANC-mtg-Concept-Alternatives.pdf

C1 [MODIFIED]

Shown as an underground bus depot, though clearly practical as underground box tunnel freeway
connecting into the existing set of box tunnels beneath Barney Circle

Freeway Cover should be modified to connect the north-south running streets to M Street 
and extend Water Street with appropriate waterfront terracing, 
reconnecting neighborhood to waterfront
NONE of the proposed options would do such 

Relatively Low Cost Underground SE Freeway - build box tunnel atop existing eastern SE Freeway and the adjacent railway with terracing down to the waterfront- low cost due to that the most expensive portion of an underground freeway is creating the new excavation, and this segment would not require any new excavation.   Build new linear park atop, flanked by 2+ lane surface roadways tied into the existing street grid, with some new development to the sides.

Extend to new interchanges at East Capitol Street and Benning Road - would require minimal excavation, being cut into side of hill along the western side of the Anacostia River, with northern portion a trench through parking lots, connecting to the New York Avenue Corridor-with access to the BW Parkway and design flexibility to the northwest.

Build such with surface roadways as "complete streets" tied into the street grid; line portions with new development alongside if not atop in areas.

http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/24147/breakfast-links-taxi-money/#comment-247419 

They could keep the freeway, extend it along the west bank of the Anacostia to Route 50/BW Parkway with interchanges at East Capitol St and Benning Rd and cover the whole thing with a platform containing a "complete street"-type boulevard lined with retail, entertainment, condos, and apartments that intersects with existing neighborhood streets .

This would make lot of sense considering DC's desire to get the 2024 Olympics. The housing could be built as housing for the teams and converted to market and affordable housing later. And since it would be a once in a lifetime project - located away from the historic core where people are obsessed with "views" - perhaps they could relax the height limits, allowing for some really creative and interesting architecture.

But that would require imagination and spunk. Something the District's "leaders" are severely lacking.

Provides underground freeway at considerably less cost then the much needed undergrounding of the existing Anacostia Freeway to the east of the Anacostia River that now cuts off those less affluent areas from the Anacostia Waterfront.

Provides alternative route- crucial for diverting traffic from the existing Anacostia Freeway, making that latter freeways undergrounding - which requires a new excavation -- more practical.  That would increase the likelihood of those less affluent areas to the east of the Anacostia Freeway to have that freeway undergrounded, hence increasing their access to the Anacostia Waterfront.

Opposition to the freeway to the west of the Anacostia River - whether the established portion or the extension -- would be a classic text book example of a wealthier area getting over on a less affluent area, and society at large.  Such is being pushed by officials as ANC 6B09 Commissioners Brian Flahaven and Kirsten Oldenburg.

http://flahaven6b.com/2014/08/07/residents-consider-improved-design-concepts-for-barney-circle-southeast-boulevard-project/#comment-20858 

In November 2013, the District Department of Transportation shared five design concepts for replacing the end of the Southeast Freeway with a boulevard and constructing a full traffic circle at Barney Circle SE. As I detailed at the time, all five DDOT concepts essentially replaced the freeway with….a freeway completely separated from the neighborhood grid. ANC 6B unanimously opposed DDOT’s concepts and urged the agency to reconsider their plans.

ANC 6B

Note that the freeway extension would run along the outer edge of ANC6B and NOT displace any homes there.  Built properly with the box tunnel cover with waterfront terrace, it would actually increase ANC6B's waterfront access.

A freeway extension is alas not being formally considered, only the long established portion to the west of Barney Circle-Pennsylvania Avenue and east of the 11th Street Bridge is being considered.

Recent planning was pushing to have this SE freeway segment decommissioned and replaced at best with a surface street, though DCDOT has apparently had second thoughts and is now moving for its restoration for re-opening.

http://flahaven6b.com/2014/08/07/residents-consider-improved-design-concepts-for-barney-circle-southeast-boulevard-project/ 

Bowing to political pressure from both DC and Maryland commuters, DDOT is planning to temporarily re-open the freeway between 11th Street and Barney Circle by the end of the year. Construction crews are already putting the old road back in place using funding from the 11th Street Bridge Project.

http://flahaven6b.com/2014/08/19/urge-mayor-gray-to-halt-reopening-of-southeast-freeway/#comment-19951

I watched while hundreds of dump truck loads of dirt were piled on the freeway over the last couple years. Now I’m watching as hundreds of dump truck loads of dirt are removed.

Some reasons given:

http://jdland.com/dc/index.cfm/4022/Southeast-Blvd.-New-Concepts-But-Also-an-Unexpected-Reopen/#comment10553 

Let DC reopen this road. It would relieved the operational problems on the other side of the river. Traffic bound for eastbound Pa. Ave enters DC 295 from the left side of the freeway trying to exit to Pa. Ave on the right side of the road. This is dangerous.

On the other hand, westbound Pa. Ave traffic entering DC 295 enters on a cloverleaf ramp trying to merge with DC 295 traffic exiting to Pa. Ave eastbound. Equally dangerous.

This is why I assume the SE freeway spur is being opened.

As for thinking that opening the road will increase traffic on 19th and 17th Streets, drivers were using the narrow ramp by the cemetery illegally. If it was blockaded, the traffic on those two streets would not increase.

Let DC reopen the road to relived the dangerous situation on the other side of the river before some gets injured or killed.

People from the Hillcrest neighborhood, on the eastern, less affluent side of the Anacostia, understandably see this as a positive development.   In response to a letter from Boyle Stuckey, 2d Vice President of the Hillcrest Community Civic Association (HCCA):

We at the District Department of Transportation (DDOT) have received your support for reopening the connection between the Southeast/Southwest Freeway (I-695) between 11th Street SE and Barney Circle.

This is an important connection for District residents east of the Anacostia River, primarily in Ward 7. Reopening this roadway segment will reestablish traffic movements (for example, eastbound I-695 to eastbound Pennsylvania Avenue SE toward Ward 7; westbound Pennsylvania Avenue SE to westbound I-695).

We appreciate your support and will take your concerns about closing the left-turn lane from Pennsylvania Avenue SE to northbound DC 295 into consideration. For further questions, please contact DDOT at 202-673-6813.

DCDOT is doing the right thing- as a foundation and start for a significant change for the better.

Links:

http://www.anacostiawaterfront.org/project-updates/meeting-materials-barney-circle-southeast-boulevard-112113-public-meeting/

http://jdland.com/dc/index.cfm/4022/Southeast-Blvd.-New-Concepts-But-Also-an-Unexpected-Reopen/#comment10553

http://flahaven6b.com/2014/08/07/residents-consider-improved-design-concepts-for-barney-circle-southeast-boulevard-project/

http://www.kirsten6b.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/01-14-DDOT-2nd-Public-Mtg-of-Barney-Circle-SE-Blvd-Transportation-Planning-Study.pdf

---

In the day and a half since I published this piece, not one but two articles have appeared on this freeway segment in David Alpert's Greater, Greater Washington:

http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/24152/a-traffic-engineer-and-a-planner-both-study-a-closed-freeway-segment-their-conclusions-are-wildly-/

http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/24154/when-temporary-becomes-permanent-why-reopening-the-se-freeway-is-risky/


Very interesting comments section in both.  Likewise with the following 2010 and 2013 GGW articles on the adjacent area to the south:

http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/5732/ncpc-worries-about-viewsheds-in-waterfront-development/

http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/17788/do-we-need-a-southeast-boulevard-at-all/

Last spring, I was in a studio at school that looked at the development potential of removing or capping parts of the Southeast/Southwest Freeway. I did the urban design plan, and in the area you're talking about, we extended the existing street grid to the river and got a pretty substantial amount of housing and a lovely waterfront park to boot.

My beef with Southeast Boulevard is that they didn't really consider how the street would fit into a larger scheme for that area. It could be the spine of a new waterfront neighborhood, but instead it'll just be a street as divorced from its context as the freeway is.

by dan reed! on Feb 28, 2013 11:12 am • link •

Dan Reed- I would love to see that studio's work.

A Landmark Example of 'Hill East' Gated Community Mentality
http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2013/08/washington-dc-war-on-people-shuns-east.html

http://www.treehugger.com/urban-design/german-autobahn-covered-giant-public-park.html

Wasting the Eastern SE/East Leg Freeway

http://www.anacostiawaterfront.org/awi-transportation-projects/barney-circle-southeast-boulevard/

Eastern end of Washington, D.C.'s SE Freeway beneath Pennsylvania Avenue-Barney Circle

note Congressional Cemetery at upper left, and the Anacostia River at upper right.

Extension to East Capitol Street canceled during the mid or latter 1970s, vis a design first officially adopted about 1963, replacing the earlier proposals for a depressed freeway on a new swath alongside 11sth Street SE/NE.

A proper design could build this with an enclosure atop in the fashion of the existing Barney Circle Overpass - Above Ground Tunnel, with the added fashion of extending Washington, D.C.s Monumental Core eastward- rather than having such merely to the west.  This would be easy to do, with the freeway extension to East Capitol Street, owing to it being somewhat cut into an existing hillside, both to the west and to the east of Barney Circle.

A recent report included illustrations of various cross sections essentially making the segment to the west as an above-ground tunnel, yielding maximum benefit for the broadest segment of society.  Strangely that idea is only conveyed by the illustration, with ZERO recognition in the text, which merely focused upon the restored street grid atop.

The existing plan to destroy the approaches to and beneath Barney Circle should be immediately abandoned, and replaced with a reconstruction with a minimum of 4 lanes per direction of undercover freeway, taking advantage of it being largely cut int the side of an existing hill, and with a look towards a design to permit some air rights development, with southern extensions of the existing north-south surface streets.

Ideally, this should be accompanied via reconstruction of ramps to and from the 11th Street Bridge, to more equitably handle the traffic burden, rather than the current plans for this to serve PRIMARILY as a dip down into SE east of the Anacostia, as yet another text book example of a more affluent area getting over on a less affluent area.

I-295 East Leg to East Capitol Street and the SE Freeway at Barney Circle 
http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2007/03/i-295-east-leg-to-east-capitol-street_17.html


Eastern SE Freeway Bastardization
http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2008/11/eastern-se-freeway-bastardization.html

NCPC Eco District to Lock in Existing I-395

A retreat from their 1998 plan to lower I-395 into a new tunnel beneath Washington Channel which essentially followed the extended Louisiana Avenue axis to a new 14th Street Bridge Potomac crossing.  This new plan instead covers the existing freeway, with buildings to the west of 9th Street SW, and solar panels to the east alongside the 28 notoriously close Capital Square townhouses between 9th and 7th Streets SW.  It would do nothing to add I-395 capacity nor eliminate its dangerous merges.

http://ncpc.gov/sites/default/files/SWEcodistrict%20Plan%20Summary.pdf

It would also cover portions of Maryland Avenue occupied by railroad tracks, and extend Virginia Avenue to the west of 9th Street SW.


See the 1998 proposal

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

Preserving Elevated I-395

New SW Development to preserve existing SW Freeway
blocking implementation of U.S. NCPC 2008 proposal for an I-395 Washington Channel Tunnel,

more of the 'trendiness' of real estate development so close to existing transportation corridors so as to lock in in adequate and divisive 1950s freeway design, and of the Federal government's abdication of its Constitution prerogative of eminent domain

Building too close to the SW Freeway thus thwarting mitigation efforts as U.S. National Capital Planning Commission's I-395 Washington Chanel Tunnel

http://www.swdcwaterfront.com/about/Presentation_Community_Forum.pdf

Includes new building on the Banneker Knoll covering the SW Freeway, locking in its inadequate width and its elevated Washington Channel Bridge crossing, effectively blocking the US National Capital Planning Commission's 2008 I-395 Washington Channel Tunnel

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

U.S. National Capital Planning Commission's I-395 Washington Channel Tunnel, mitigates noose of roadways near the Jefferson Memorial; accommodates real estate development built of course afterwards

NOW is the time for employing that Constitutionally mandated power of eminent domain for public use, notably roads, for securing the space for constructing the Washington Channel Tunnel. Likewise for the needed improvement of the existing land portion of the SW Freeway establishing the space for beginning construction of the new submerged underground replacement, including removing the row of 28 'Capital Square' townhouses built a mere 16 1/2 feet from the Freeway's retaining walls, rather than let new real estate development prematurely as the reason or excuse to do preserve the existing Freeway's form.

The Federal government incapable of intervening to promote its own NCPC's recommendations, thus locking in the existing obsolete SW Freeway design, within site of the U.S. Departments of Housing & Urban Development and the Department of Transportation is something to make people further ponder and question the political dynamics that govern the government.

CSX Virginia Avenue Tunnel- Cross Sections Published

Concept 5 preserves the most space alongside the SE Freeway, thus best facilitating the freeway's lowering/tunnelization, ESPECIALLY if it shifted the new northern tunnel closer to the new southern tunnel, rather then using the existing tunnel's centerline. Concept 5 avoids the waste of filling in a new excavation via making the new cut into a new tunnel, and furthermore preserves part of the existing tunnel's excavation for the outboard portion of the future underground SE Freeway.




The report also includes options of a temporary cut to the north of the existing tunnel, even though that provides less space for lowering-covering the freeway, but may run into issues with the existing elevated freeway's underground piling supports. Concept 2 is essentially CSX's traditional preferred plan, with Concept 5 a recent addition.


Virginia Avenue Tunnel Study
http://www.virginiaavenuetunnel.com/media/uploads/downloads/VAT_Public_Alternatives_Meeting_Presentation_Combined_FINAL_1.pdf

More from JD
http://www.jdland.com/dc/index.cfm/3586/Virginia-Avenue-Tunnel-Project-Concept-Designs-Unveiled/

US NCPC to CHOCK its 2008 I-395 Tunnel Proposal?!

http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/11444/southwest-ecodistrict-looks-to-fix-60s-planning-failure/

New planning proposals by the United States National Capital Planning Commission to build too closely to the I-395 Southwest Freeway, potentially hampering their 2008 Washington Channel Tunnel proposal

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

It continues the ill advised idea seen in planning irresponsibly pushed by such organizations connected with the 'Committee of 100' on the Federal City, of a west extension of essentially the building line of the cir. 1999 'Capital Square' townhouses, a mere 16 1/5 feet away, clearly complicating constructing the I-395 Washington Channel Tunnel, leaving no room to maintain traffic, while blocking adding even a single lane

Planning in a Vacuum- CSX-SE Freeway Tunnelization

With Virginia Avenue to be torn up anyway, what about something more comprehensive?

http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post.cgi?id=5539

How will the CSX tunnel expansion project affect a future tunnel project to replace the existing elevated SW-SE Freeway?

Proximity Demand Coordination- yet were where the Feds?

Why was this corridor’s planning languishing as EYA and others rushed in to develop up against the right of way?

Note the close proximity of the SE Freeway’s transition from elevated berm to open viaduct in order to cross the mouth of the Virginia Avenue Tunnel, with the connections at left with the interchange with the Center Leg and the SW Freeway.

Note how the viaduct portion over South Capitol and New Jersey Streets is entirely south of the CSX railroad, before swinging to the railroad’s north side at 1st Street SE

That was how the original 1955 Inner Loop design had it, shown here with the original East Leg along 11th Street.

This 1961 rendering below at its top shows an un-adopted routing of the SE Freeway, along the Virginia Avenue railroad tunnel’s southern side. I have not yet seen a rendering of this option for the segment further east (with this rendering failing to show even the connections to the 11th Street Bridges[s]).

Given their proximity and grade requirements – freeways can tolerate 5-7 % while heavy rail can only take 1% -- and the short distances to the 11th Street Bridges – the under-grounding of the SE Freeway is surely a project to coordinate with that for reconstructing the railway, such as that now announced to start construction by 2011.

Here’s a close of the 1955 design.

Here’s what was built.

And here’s a close up where the freeway crosses the RR at the start of the latter’s tunnel


Note the proximity of the support columns for the SE Freeway viaduct.

Photos by Matt Johnson

The CSX Project:

Reconstruct the Virginia Avenue railroad tunnel with greater height and width; digging it lower and widening it with a temporary trench to the south that is later filled in.

How:

- Dig a trench about 25 feet wide along the existing tunnel’s southern side for diverting the trains throughout the reconstruction
- Remove the roof and at least one of the lateral walls, excavate the floor 3 or 4 feet lower and widen to 40 feet.
- Route trains into reconstructed tunnel and fill the trench

Not yet known to me is:

- whether or not both of the existing tunnel walls are replaced/relocated
- whether the center-line shall remain the same, or is shifted
- the method of construction, particularly the method of securing the ‘temporary’ trench- perhaps a less expensive yet noisier to construct pile driving instead of a more expensive yet quieter to build and more permanent slurry wall?

Idea:

Facilitate the reconstruction-restoration of Virginia Avenue with a well thought overall plan encompassing the CSX project and a future underground SE Freeway

According to this communiqué from Capitol Hill:

- The District comprehensive plan stipulates that the railroad tunnel expansion should only occur in conjunction with the tunnelization of the existing parallel SE Freeway

Since this segment of the SE Freeway is an elevated berm-way, framed by vertical concrete retaining walls, its burial will require some space, particularly while maintaining traffic to and from the reconstructed 11th Street Bridges and the SW Freeway.

Apparently CSX shall pursue this tunnel augmentation project as inexpensively as possible, meaning:

- open trench construction (without a street deck), except for the cross streets
- replacing only one of the existing tunnel’s lateral walls, which given that era’s generous ‘over-engineering’ could be incorporated into the reconstructed tunnel, hence shifting the mainline fully to one side or the other.

With the ‘temporary’ trench to the south and the option of replacing one or both of the existing tunnel walls, the likeliest option is that of shifting the center-line to the north, closer to the elevated SE Freeway, using the existing southern RR tunnel wall to segregate the trench from the RR tunnel construction.

But given the cost premium of underground construction particularly with excavation, is simply configuring this project via filling in this space really its most cost effective and productive potential use?

What consideration has been given to any sort of coordination between the future stated goal of an under grounded SE Freeway tunnel from South Capitol Street to 8th Street with the CSX project?

Likewise, what about that concerning the just started 11th Street Bridges Project?

Let alone the accompanying mandatory project to so bury the SW Freeway, given that its meeting with the SE Freeway is an elevated viaduct, meaning that any CSX-SE Freeway Tunnel project would otherwise require its SE Freeway Tunnel be built while retaining the existing elevated berm-way SE Freeway until the realization of the full SW-SE Freeway Tunnelization Project. Clearly thus they must be planned all together, yet where’s any indication of that?

Photo by Matt Johnson
SE Freeway berm-way at left

Instead we have a situation with questionable decisions to extend new real estate development – aka buildings full of peoples’ dwellings – in extra close proximity to such major transportation corridors. The plethora of simply bad decisions as:

- Failing to reserve a strip of the Cappersburg properties along the along the area closest to the Virginia Avenue RR tunnel

- Failing to reserve a strip of the properties along the entire southern side of the SW Freeway, especially between 9th and 7th Streets with the 1999 construction of the ‘Capital Square’ townhouse project.

- Approving the ‘Capital Square’ project with its northernmost row of 28 townhouses- complication the future under-grounding of the SW Freeway via creating a right of way band pinch.

- Selling the interchange land for the northbound I-395 Tunnel on ramp between Massachusetts Avenue and K Street for the demolition special "Golden Rule" apartment house, blocking the on-rap and potentially creating a dangerous migratory pattern of elderly citizens carrying home their groceries from the nearest food market - also named 'Golden Rule' for the association with the Bibleway Church at the northern end of I-395.

- Allowing the transportation corridor reconstruction to lag behind decisions by entities as EYA to construct new dwellings

It is hardly a flattering indication of those within the government.

Given this track record, anyone is going to have to ask if the CSX project, in its current form, present the most optimal ‘defragging’ of this right of way- or might its cost savings as so configured, be more than offset by it increasing the costs of the SE Freeway Tunnel project?

SE Freeway Physical Realities:

Burying the SE Freeway is going to require some space, particularly with the need to maintain traffic throughout the construction to and from the reconstructed 11th Street Bridges.

Along its southern side is Virginia Avenue, with the RR tunnel beneath.

It has underpasses for cross streets.

It connects to its west to the SW Freeway, with the configuration being an elevated viaduct before a slightly depressed segment between 7th and 9th Streets Sw

It connects to its east with the 11th Street Bridges with a brief continuation to a set of tunnels beneath Barney Circle where it is truncated since 1974.

Situate the CSX Project to facilitate SE Freeway under-grounding, while preserving the easements for its connections to an under grounded SW Freeway, the already underground Center Leg and a future South Capitol Street Tunnel.

This is essentially ‘defragging’ the existing corridor right of way by assembling the needed contiguous space for constructing the future eastbound cut and cover SE Freeway tunnel before demolishing the existing elevated freeway to construct the westbound twin.

Such a stage ability is required to reduce construction impacts, and is subverted by the government’s apparent inability to just say no to developer projects located closer and closer to a right of way (such as the infamously placed row of EYA Capitol Square townhouses alongside the SW Freeway).

Basic options include:

- Cut and cover CSX tunnel shifted south, re-using existing northern tunnel wall, creating space for future eastbound cut and cover SE Freeway tunnel

- Cut and cover CSX tunnel shifted north, re-using existing southern tunnel wall, and thereby in the median space for future cut and cover SE Freeway tunnel

- Drilled railroad tunnel directly beneath eastbound lanes of SE Freeway berm, allowing full Virginia Avenue right of way for the future eastbound SE Freeway Tunnel

- Full Virginia Avenue right of way cut and cover tunnel accommodating the expanded railway and future eastbound SE Freeway tunnel

These decisions can’t be avoided.

Capitol Hill communities will need to be vigilant, including being fully willing to sue the government for failing to plan.

SW Freeway to Center Leg/Capitol Hill Signage

I wrote in my last article that the placement of EYA 'Capitol Square' townhouse development project, particularly its northernmost row of some 28 houses with their rear walls some 16 or so feet from the SW Freeway retaining wall stood as mute testimony to the non-planning of the very federal agencies headquartered only a few hundred feet to the north- the U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development and the U.S. Department of Transportation visible in the above picture.

The following photos from a piece about this area of the SW Freeway from the JDLand site, and the response of 'Froggie' (see further below) serves as yet another example of this non-planning, though with something far easiest to remedy.

JD photo and caption: The first sign, instructing drivers who wish to get off at C Street SW for the US Capitol and House office buildings to get in the second lane from the left (though it's hard to tell which of the left lanes the sign is pointing to). Before the bridge was reconstructed, this sign was placed over the second-right lane, with the 395 sign nudged further to the right, which wasn't absolutely correct either but was closer to being accurate.

JD photo and caption: The second sign, about a quarter-mile later, properly telling drivers to be in what has become the second-right lane but was the right-most lane back at the first sign. If drivers follow these signs, they'll have veered left and then veered right within a quarter-mile.

In a follow up piece, JD writes:

Technically off-topic, but: I've been grumbling for more than seven years now about the poorly placed sign on the SW Freeway for the C Street SW exit, which points drivers to a left-side lane but then requires them to move two lanes to the right within a quarter-mile to get to their ramp, So I finally took some photos to explain the issue and tweeted them to blow off some steam. Soon after, @ajfroggie posted two great images of how to replace the signage along that stretch to fix not only my complaint but some general problems with all of the signs.

I prefer the 2nd option shown here as exit 6 to the northbound Center Leg (3rd Street Tunnel) actually splits, with one lane as the off ramp, and one lane into the northbound Center Leg (yes, the planned D.C. I-95 northbound route necked down to a single through lane).

In the long term, this freeway needs to be entirely reconstructed underground by the most practical way of being dug lower starting in a band along its southern side, allowing the maintaining of traffic during the construction, and allowing the highway to be offset about 20 to 30 feet to the south, mitigating the mistakes of the original design, including its capacity pinch - obstensibly decided simply upon aethestics without regard to the cut and cover tunnel concept nor the fact that all of the buildings allong its southern side where being torn down anyway - while improving its geometry, particularly the connections with the Center Leg/3rd Street Tunnel and the likewise undergrounded SE Freeway. One would supect the existence of a government design process for this project, tethered with a statutory authorization for the protection of the needed adjacent lands for something as important as this; yet in fact there apparantly is not- as with the EYA 'Capitol Square' project, and the South Capitol Street corridor re-development.

But even as the government non-planning of the Washington, D.C. freeways, oh so fashionable amongst its political ruling class, despite extending the life of this highway in its existing form, extends beyond a disregard to the long term, with even the infinitely simpler things to fix as this signage.

If you think the signs are bad deliberately to punish or discourage outsider traffic, just look at the philosophy embodied by such things as the U.S. National Capital Planning Commission's reletively recent 'Charrette' [PDF link] on the New York Avenue corridor attitude towards extending the I-395 tunnel.

That's some planning for the freeways of our nation's Capital.