A Trip Within the Beltway

Saturday, March 10, 2007

Bob and Jane Levey Refuted

The November 2000 article in The Washington Post Magazine got publicly discussed in the newsgroup misc.transport.road

Newsgroups: misc.transport.road

From: "Scott M. Kozel" ...@mediaone.net>

Date: 2000/11/27

Subject: Re: History of DC Interstates

Scott Kozel

> From the Washington Post Magazine:

The _Washington Post MAGAZINE_ is a Sunday magazine supplement with
opinion pieces, delivered with the _Washington Post_ newspaper.

> Instead, the Washington area got Metro-all $5 billion and 103 miles of
> it. Much of the money had been earmarked for interstate highways It was
> diverted to subways.

The final cost to construct Metrorail has reached $11 billion. It would
be remiss not to mention that 60 miles was placed under contract
1969-1980, including the bulk of the underground mileage, and that the
cost in 2000 adjusted dollars would be $22 billion or more.

The D.C. Interstate highway money transferred from canceled highways to
Metrorail construction was $2 billion, and the transfer took place in
the late 1970s, using the then-estimated costs of the canceled D.C.
Interstate highways and Maryland and Virginia connections.

> Today, Washington has fewer miles of freeways within its borders than any
> other major city on the East Coast. More than 200,000 housing units were
> saved from destruction.

That "fact" doesn't even pass the giggle test. Washington (the District
of Columbia) had about 750 thousand population in the 1960s and 1970s
(less now), so "more than 200,000" would be over two-thirds of all
housing units in the city. Baloney, any way you slice it.

> So were more than 100 square miles of parkland around
> the metropolitan area.

That "fact" doesn't even pass the giggle test. That would be equal to a
10-mile by 10-mile square, or about the entire area of D.C. and
Arlington. There is nowhere near that much parkland in the metropolitan
area.

The cost estimate to complete the full District of Columbia Interstate
system (I-66, I-95, I-266, I-70S, I-295, I-695) was under $2 billion if
it had been built in the 1970s. This cost included the portions of I-95
and I-70S (today's I-270) from the D.C. border to the I-495 Capital
Beltway in Maryland, and the portion of I-266 in Virginia.

This included 3,650 job displacements, and 1,166 occupied dwelling unit
displacements, with extensive construction of (perhaps total)
replacement housing. The 1971 study book shows plan views of many
nearby places with proposed replacement housing, replacement local
shops, new community centers, new commercial centers, new industrial
parks, and replacement recreational parks. It looks like a good plan
was in place to replace the residences, businesses and parkland that
would have been displaced by the new freeways.

Sources: The design study, _District of Columbia Interstate System_, by
DeLeuw, Cather Associates and Harry Wesse & Associates, LTD, 1971,
prepared for the District of Columbia Department of Highways and
Traffic, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Transportation,
Federal Highway Administration. This was the last official preliminary
design for the D.C. Interstate system. Several copies are at the Martin
Luther King, Jr. Library (the D.C. city library), which is near the
Gallery Place Metrorail station.

See --

Washington D.C. Interstates and Freeways
http://www.roadstothefuture.com/DC_Interstate_Fwy.html
--
Scott M. Kozel Highway and Transportation History Websites
Virginia/Maryland/Washington, D.C. http://www.roadstothefuture.com
Philadelphia and Delaware Valley http://www.pennways.com

Newsgroups: misc.transport.road

From: "Scott M. Kozel" ...@mediaone.net>

Date: 2000/11/27

Subject: Re: History of DC Interstates

Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

"Kenneth Dancy" wrote:

I already specifically replied to that quote, and refuted it. Those
figures are absurd by over two orders of magnitude.

> The city was spared from freeways bored under
> the Mall, freeways punched through stable middle-class black neighborhoods,
> freeways tunneled under K Street, freeways that would have obliterated the
> Georgetown waterfront and the Maryland bank of the Potomac.
>

Those quotes are mostly wrong too.

The only planned freeway tunneled under the Mall was built by 1973, the
3rd Street Tunnel (I-95 then, I-395 now).

The final 1971 plan did not "punch" though any neighborhoods, unless in
one case the New York Avenue area would be considered, but that was a
very dilapidated area then, and was designated a redevelopment
district. It is still mostly empty today.

I-66 in the final plan was planned to be tunneled under the 147-foot-wide K Street, a wise plan.

The comment about the Georgetown waterfront really was not true, since
the existing elevated Whitehurst Freeway there would have been widened.

The George Washington Parkway was built on the Maryland bank of the
Potomac by 1970, and no further highways were planned there.

> My interpretation is that the 200,000 is DC only, based on previous sentence
> referring to city borders. 100 sq miles refers to metropolitan area.

I think that both quotes were clearly as you say.

> It would be great if someone from mtr wrote about this to Letters of Washington
> Post magazine, preferably Douglas or Scott.

I think we should. As I pointed out in my first post, I clearly
differentiated the _Washington Post MAGAZINE_ from the _Washington Post_
NEWSPAPER. The magazine is essentially opinion pieces.

Actually a lot of the people, events and stages seemed accurate in the
article. It is a shame that they posted some key "facts" that seem so
obviously wrong in favor of smearing the D.C. Interstate system.

> My take is this: That the issue of racism playing a part of the DC freeway
> building would have been less of an issue if they had built I-70S in the
> original NW DC Bethesda corridor instead of moving it to NE DC. They also
> lost a big opportunity to build when it would have been a lot cheaper to do
> so. Now the 2 billion dollar figure seems tame compared to projects that
> are done now, such as Springfield interchange and Wilson Bridge.

With increases in the heavy construction consumer price index, triple
that to $6 billion in 2000 dollars.

> Douglas make a good point that cancelling I-95 through DC and MD, led to
> overuse of Springfield interchange and Wilson Bridge. Those structures
> would have lasted longer with I-95 through DC.

Still, the $2 billion was available in the 1970s, and even building just
I-95 alone for about half that price, would have perhaps obviated or
greatly reduced the needed improvements at the Springfield Interchange
and Wilson Bridge. The Wilson Bridge improvements needed today might be
limited to adding one lane each way to the WWB to make it 8 lanes, with
little or no needed improvements to the nearby interchanges and approach
highway. IOW, we might be spending $400 million today instead of $2
billion at the WWB.
--
Scott M. Kozel Highway and Transportation History Websites
Virginia/Maryland/Washington, D.C. http://www.roadstothefuture.com
Philadelphia and Delaware Valley http://www.pennways.com

Newsgroups: misc.transport.road

From: "Kenneth Dancy"

Date: 2000/11/27

Subject: Re: History of DC Interstates

Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

"Douglas A. Willinger" ...@idt.net> wrote in message
news:3A229B01.38B354F3@idt.net...

- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

> Ron Newman wrote:

Today, Washington has fewer miles of freeways within its borders than any
other major city on the East Coast. More than 200,000 housing units were
saved from destruction. So were more than 100 square miles of parkland
around the metropolitan area. The city was spared from freeways bored under
the Mall, freeways punched through stable middle-class black neighborhoods,
freeways tunneled under K Street, freeways that would have obliterated the
Georgetown waterfront and the Maryland bank of the Potomac.

My interpretation is that the 200,000 is DC only, based on previous sentence
referring to city borders. 100 sq miles refers to metropolitan area. It would be great if someone from mtr wrote about this to Letters of Washington Post magazine, preferably Douglas or Scott.

My take is this: That the issue of racism playing a part of the DC freeway building would have been less of an issue if they had built I-70S in the original NW DC Bethesda corridor instead of moving it to NE DC. They also lost a big opportunity to build when it would have been a lot cheaper to do so. Now the 2 billion dollar figure seems tame compared to projects that are done now, such as Springfield interchange and Wilson Bridge. Douglas make a good point that cancelling I-95 through DC and MD, led to overuse of Springfield interchange and Wilson Bridge. Those structures would have lasted longer with I-95 through DC.

Newsgroups: misc.transport.road

From: "Scott M. Kozel" ...@mediaone.net>

Date: 2000/11/27

Subject: Re: History of DC Interstates

Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

rnew...@thecia.net (Ron Newman) wrote:

> "Scott M. Kozel" ...@mediaone.net> wrote:

> > > "Today, Washington has fewer miles of freeways within its borders than any
> > > other major city on the East Coast. More than 200,000 housing units were
> > > saved from destruction".

> > That "fact" doesn't even pass the giggle test. Washington (the District
> > of Columbia) had about 750 thousand population in the 1960s and 1970s
> > (less now), so "more than 200,000" would be over two-thirds of all
> > housing units in the city. Baloney, any way you slice it.

> Is it possible that 200,000 is the number of housing units saved throughout
> the metropolitan area, not just within the District?

No (*), and the article specifically referred to the city of Washington
itself (see above). I quoted the official figure in my last post for
the 1,166 dwelling unit displacements for the canceled D.C. Interstate highways, and that included the canceled connecting segments of those
highways in Maryland and Virginia (I-95, I-70S, I-266).

(*) In 1970 the metropolitan area had about 2.5 million people, so "more
than 200,000" would still be about 25% of all dwelling units in the
metropolitan area. I was being nice when I called it "baloney".

--
Scott M. Kozel Highway and Transportation History Websites
Virginia/Maryland/Washington, D.C.http://www.roadstothefuture.com
Philadelphia and Delaware Valley http://www.pennways.com

(Ron Newman) wrote:

> Robert Cote ...@gte.net> wrote:

> > > I didn't know that. Can you provide a pointer to this other
> > > forum?

> > Yes.

> > http://discuss.washingtonpost.com/zforum/00/levey1127.htm

> I don't see a retraction there. I see a statement that the
> 200,000 applies to the entire metro area, not just the District
> (pretty much what I asked in the first place).

1970 metropolitan population - 2.4 million.

That is about 25% of all dwelling units in the metropolitan area.

Impossible

--
Scott M. Kozel Highway and Transportation History Websites
Virginia/Maryland/Washington, D.C. http://www.roadstothefuture.com
Philadelphia and Delaware Valley http://www.pennways.com

Newsgroups: misc.transport.road

From: Robert Cote ...@gte.net>

Date: 2000/11/29

Subject: Re: History of DC Interstates

Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

In article <903jnh$j2...@news1.Radix.Net>, "Kenneth Dancy"

- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Where is the newspapers' fact checking staff on this? Ross is
excused from his leaping to conclusions, his blind hatred of anyone
who dares question his opinions as facts makes his comments
worthless. I'm concerned with this blatant historical revisionism
that neither the authors nor publishers seem interested in
correcting. Is there some sort of Anti-Pulitzer Prize for the worst
examples of published journalism? We could call them Rossies.

I nominate the Washington Post for the first ever Rossy Award.
Their blatant disregard for factual content in the field of
transportation policy and recent historical FAct is a shining
example of agenda masquerading as information.
David Jensen wrote:

- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

This one is worse than baloney. I expect that the Washington Post will
be correcting their error soon.

Let's try a reality check: 100 sq. miles will support more than 2,000
miles of 8-lane freeway. It would take more than 1,000 miles of 8-lane
freeway to destroy 200,000 residences. Most of the miles in the metro
area were built. We know what the impact was.

The authors do not have any evidence to support their assertion. I've
asked for it. They have not provided it yet, because it doesn't exist

Newsgroups: misc.transport.road

From: David Jensen ...@dajensen-family.com>

Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 01:39:26 GMT

Local: Thurs, Nov 30 2000 8:39 pm

Subject: Re: History of DC Interstates

Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

On Fri, 01 Dec 2000 00:33:36 GMT, in misc.transport.road
Hank Shirley ...@my-deja.com> wrote in
<906rl0$21...@nnrp1.deja.com>:

- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Guffaws definitely show that the article failed!

"And before you accuse me of "pretending to be a historian," I invite
you to see my history degrees, course work, thesis, and publications
from the last 15 years.

"I readily concede that we used "worst-case" numbers; does that really
make the entire story bad history?" Jane Levey

http://forums.prospero.com/n/mb/discussionFrameset.asp?webtag=wpmetro...

I am thrilled that this woman is an honest-to-goodness historian. Now, I
don't feel bad at all about treating her like one. Yet, despite my
requests, she has failed to produce any documentation of these
"worst-case" numbers.

I'm sure she must have references because an honest historian would
never make such a "worst case" claim without being able to document it.
Otherwise, her work is worse than "bad history", it's not history at
all. It would only be propaganda and the lies that "True Believers" are
willing to say so they can get at a "Greater Truth". That cannot
possibly be what she wanted to do or what the Washington Post wants in
its pages, could it?

Misrepresenting the history of the D.C. Freeway Impacts

This November 2000 article in The Washington Post Magazine was infamous not only for its map with the altered alignment of the unbuilt I-95 Northeast Freeway, but also for such statements as the un-built freeways allegedly requiring 200,000 residential units in DC and 100 square miles of parkland in the DC metropolitan area.

Today, Washington has fewer miles of freeways within its borders than any other major city on the East Coast. More than 200,000 housing units were saved from destruction. So were more than 100 square miles of parkland around the metropolitan area. The city was spared from freeways bored under the Mall, freeways punched through stable middle-class black neighborhoods, freeways tunneled under K Street, freeways that would have obliterated the Georgetown waterfront and the Maryland bank of the Potomac.

http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/style/postmagazine/A50985-2000Nov22....

The Anti Freeway Dogma's Indifference Towards The Consequences

Elitist highway transport haters
ex-Washington Post columnist Bob Levey and his wife Jane

Bob Levey

Jane Levey

This juxtaposition of attitudes expressed through NCPC – deny/lie D.C. I-95 and other un-built D.C. freeways and turn your backs upon the consequences – was reflected by that infamously erroneous article appearing in The Washington Times Magazine, and its authors Bob Levey and his wide Jane Fruendel Levey.during a follow up on line dialog

The cover page shows two photos: one of anti Three Sisters Bridge protests; the other the Capital Beltway/Route 1 interchange in Alexandria, Virginia. (That’s the very interchange that I designed the Alexandria Orb).

During the following on line dialog, someone asked the Leveys to write something about the Woodrow Wilson Bridge

Alexandria, Va.: A follow-up piece on the Virginia side would be equally fascinating, given the continuing controversies over the Wilson Bridge and I-66, not to mention 95/395/495. Hope that's something you can find time to pursue.

Bob Levey and Jane Freundel Levey: Time? What's that? It's a great idea. Maybe in 2009.

How “cute”. Let’s NOT write about any of this until after the WWB project is completed.

At times I notified them about the Alexandria Orb, and later, the South Capitol Street Frederick Douglass Mall, asking them to write about providing better highway design better harmonized into the surroundings serving more of society.

And they did not seem interested.

The message is lie about D.C. I-95 and turn your backs to the consequences.

And I made one last attempt at burying the Capital Beltway in Old Town Alexandria:

In November 2001, I telephoned an important entity that owns property adjacent to/or in the general area of the Alexandria, Virginia approach to the Wilson Bridge.

Within 24 hours the entity’s lawyer contacted me with favorable regard for my idea of a lengthier urban deck as permanent noise mitigation. He invited me to a meeting, scheduled to be held before that month’s end, at his law offices for the various consultants being hired for a case that this entity was bringing, or considering bringing. (I don’t know if this law suit was ever filed). I attended this late November 2001 meeting, and everything appeared to go quite well.

I naturally brought copies of my Alexandria Orb materials, the AUTOCAD drawings, the brochures, perhaps some buttons, and copies of the December 18, 2000 Fairfax Journal. I had ample time to make my case for both concepts of a lengthier urban deck and for the underground helical interchange.

The entity’s lawyer enthusiastically endorses the idea of a lengthier deck.

The others – about 15 people – are additionally intrigued by the “orb” interchange design, elsewhere referred to as an “urban helical”. Their sentiments ranged from about 50% “that the way it’s got to be”; 25% skeptical; and 25% simply silent.

It was a 4 hour long meeting. The entity’s lawyer and I parted on excellent terms.

But then within about 8 weeks I never heard back from anyone regarding this potential law suit, which to my knowledge was never media reported.

Perhaps it was settled out of court?

Or simply dropped?

Who knows?

Whatever happened, did not include any lengthening of the Washington Street Urban Deck, not even just a portion of that deleted in 1999 or 2000.

The only planning changes that I am aware involved the sound barrier walls for the new spans through Jones Point Park, changing them to a see through design with translucent panels. This would reconcile the interests of the National Park Service, which had opposed sound walls for blocking the view, and perhaps the entity. However this would be less likely for those further away from the highway, due to the proximity of Hunting Towers, which would bounce noise northwards from a highway that was not covered.

Saturday, March 03, 2007

Scott Kozel Launches www.Capital-Beltway.com

From Scott Kozel:

I have decided to move all of my website photo articles for the Springfield Interchange Project and the Woodrow Wilson Bridge project, to a separate new website. These articles and their photos already have a grand total of over 270 megabytes in size, and that size will increase considerably before these projects are complete.
Capital Beltway dot com
http://www.capital-beltway.com/
Website for Capital Beltway Highway Projects
"Capital Beltway dot com" is the I-495 Capital Beltway projects annex to "Roads to the Future".
"Capital Beltway dot com" will also be a repository for future Capital Beltway highway project photo articles.
The website is still under construction, including the need for a higher-quality banner photo on the main page, and so far, I have only copied one small photo article to that website.
"Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Photos - February 2006" -
http://www.capital-beltway.com/WWB-Construction-Feb06.html
I will announce when all the photo articles have been moved.
Until then these main page links will be grayed out --
Springfield Interchange Project Photos
Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Photos
--
Scott M. Kozel Highway and Transportation History Websites
Virginia/Maryland/Washington, D.C. http://www.roadstothefuture.com
Capital Beltway Projects http://www.capital-beltway.com
Philadelphia and Delaware Valley http://www.pennways.com

http://groups.google.com/group/misc.transport.road/browse_frm/thread/638ebb2d85e9a044/91b1db7a504f253b?hl=en#91b1db7a504f253b

What this was an outcome of: A Highly Suspiciously Illogical Generalized Anti-Highway Mentality to Push the Traffic Away and Ignore the Consequences

These year 2001 U.S. National Capital Planning Commission’s rubber stamp approval meetings on the chopping of the Washington Street Urban Deck were not the only N.C.P.C. events that I have attended, to provide an insight into N.C.P.C.

These other events have provided opportunities to hear the various members. The attitude of N.C.P.C. member Richard L. Friedman in favor of the government rescinding environmental mitigation after the end of the EIS process, juxtaposed with what I heard him say at another N.C.P.C. meeting about a proposed vehicular traffic tunnel near the White House (the U.S. Presidential residence), raised my eyebrows.

The question was over the selection of one of two main options for such a tunnel, brought about by the closing of the segment of Pennsylvania Avenue that passes along the White House’s north side. One option would place the tunnel there; the other option would place it to the White House’s south side, connecting with E Street, and the E Street Expressway which connects to the west with D.C. I-66.

Since the given reason for the tunnel is security, and that the south option was a bit further away from the White House then the north option, I figured that he would favor the south option.

However, his answer sidestepped that altogether; instead, if a tunnel were constructed it should be the north option, because that would serve fewer people coming in from outside Washington D.C.; Richard L. Freidman would oppose the south option for making it easier for those outside Washington D.C. to drive into Washington D.C. since this would serve as an easterly continuation of the route of the existing underground E Street Expressway.

Wow! Security and cost effectiveness less important than the Washington, D.C.-elitist (serving fewer people) attitude to push matters away and then to turn one’s back upon the consequences.

That’s the basic attitude that I have heard favoring highway truncations.

This is an interesting juxtaposition of attitudes. After all if it as really about protecting neighborhoods along highways, what about N.C.P.C. turning its back on Ed Ford and his neighborhood? And, since 1968-76, diverting I-95 around Washington, D.C on that Capital Beltway segment alongside Ed Ford’s neighborhood?

Talk about turning their backs to those they have pushed on a disproportionate burden! It was so typical of the elitism that passes for environmentalism, as typified by the doctrine of pushing the highways away from the cities - without regard to matters of environmental footprint - in situations that simply push traffic burdens disproportionately on less affluent areas.

What Could Have Been Said: Backroom Political Deal in Alexandria to Deny Long Promised Environmental Mitigation

Advocates of more walkable and livable communities more or less free of the roar of interstate highway traffic noise suffered a major set back last December 16, when the Alexandria City Council voted in favor of a VDOT proposal to delete most of the Washington Street Urban Deck – a park covering of a portion of the I-495 Capital Beltway approach with a “lid,”

Long promised as an integral part of the Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project since the mid 1990s, the Urban Deck was to effectively encasing the highway and containing its noise, shielding neighboring communities from the traffic noise of an upwards of 16-17 lanes of traffic, including ramps immediately adjacent to such historic sites as that of Freedman’s Cemetery.

For about half a decade, the design on display was consistently an 1,100 foot long deck, extended from a canted western edge, extending easterly to a point immediately east of the nearest wing of what would be the nearest surviving Hunting Apartment Tower. (An earlier consideration took it about 100 feet further east, fully past that nearest tower.

It leaves almost all of the two surviving feet away from 12-14 lanes of interstate highway, at that very portion where the grade rises/descends, hence creating greater traffic noise. Consideration is being given to a lawsuit for loss of property values; it is well established that property values go up as infrastructure goes down, Manhattan's 96th Street, where its Metro North trains transition from tunnel to bermway, is but one example.

A Trip Within the Beltway

Saturday, March 10, 2007

Bob and Jane Levey Refuted

Misrepresenting the history of the D.C. Freeway Impacts

The Anti Freeway Dogma's Indifference Towards The Consequences

And I made one last attempt at burying the Capital Beltway in Old Town Alexandria:

Saturday, March 03, 2007

Scott Kozel Launches www.Capital-Beltway.com

What this was an outcome of: A Highly Suspiciously Illogical Generalized Anti-Highway Mentality to Push the Traffic Away and Ignore the Consequences

What Could Have Been Said: Backroom Political Deal in Alexandria to Deny Long Promised Environmental Mitigation

DC Center Leg Capacity Giveaway

Developer Threats To Our Public Right of Ways

Introduction

Technorati

Traffic Camera Views

Blog Archive

Labels

Links

Government Links

About Me

Facebook Badge

Sitemeter

Followers

Feedjit

Feedjit

Feedjit