Monday, December 22, 2014

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

Saturday, December 20, 2014

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

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

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


I-395 Center Leg Capital Crossing right of way pinch
from 4 to only 2 lanes per direction

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

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2014/12/erased-comments-from-wp-article-dc.html
DDOT's behavior here reeks of behind the scenes deals and bribes.

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

New email message to info@3rdstunnel.com   --  December 12, 2014
I received no reply to my email of November 21, 2014.

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

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

Facts:

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

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

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



Center Leg trench looking north showing the unused righthand lanes- 
the jersey barrier separates the 3rd lane which is now used as a shoulder from the 4th and rightmost lane which remains in its original concrete with the original right-hand shoulder in asphalt.



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

The North Segment:

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


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



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

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

The South Segment (The Mall Tunnel)

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

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



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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1996 'Ron Linton' New York Avenue Tunnel proposal for 4 lane tunnel 
within right of way sufficient for 6 lane version

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

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

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

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2014/12/unanswered-questions-3rd-street-tunnel.html
http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2014/12/erased-comments-from-wp-article-dc.html
http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2007/03/i-66-north-leg-west-k-street-tunnel.html
http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2009/01/i-395-extension

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2011/02/us-ncpc-perjury-2006.html
If people can get so upset over the recent developer suggestion to entirely shut down the Center Leg segment north of the Labor Department Building, why than should they be so complacent about the permanent giveaway of 50% of its right of way?

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




Saturday, December 13, 2014

Previous Center Leg Air Rights Proposals Respected the Freeway Right of Way


1988





Note the full respect of the 8 lane plus shoulders right of way

From Steve Anderson's D.C. Roads:
In 1988, Barry awarded developer Conrad Monts exclusive air rights over I-395 between D Street and Massachusetts Avenue. Monts planned to build a $35 million office, hotel, and residential complex on a deck above I-395, across the street from Georgetown University Law School. However, when the real estate market collapsed in the early 1990's, Monts removed the residential units from his plan.

Relationships between Monts and the City Council soured through the remainder of the decade, and in 2000 the District sued Monts for back rent on the I-395 air rights amid a dispute over unrelated work on the Wilson Building, which houses the mayor and City Council. The dispute ended in 2001 with the District paying Monts $15.7 million to walk away from the I-395 air rights project; a DC Superior Court grand jury three years later awarded an additional $8.4 million in damages to Monts.


1961





 

Note the full respect for the 8 lane plus shoulders right of way,
plus a 3rd potential carriageway shown at left

These images came from a 1961 Washington, D.C. transportation planning study "Downtown Progress", showing this parking garage to have been built atop the Center Leg..

Friday, December 12, 2014

Unanswered Questions- 3rd Street Tunnel Support Columns and Tunnel Roof





Note that the project website contains NO illustrations of the underground construction, such as the tunnel ceiling, walls or supports.  Why might that be?

So I sent them an email on November 21, 2014:


Do you have any schematics to share showing the tunnel roof and the support columns?

How will the tunnel roof look, and how will the columns and any other structure relating to this project impact the original 48 foot x 2 plus shoulders right of way?

Thanks

Douglas A. Willinger
A Trip Within the Beltway
-----

As of December 12- NO ANSWER.

Might it be the design shown in a 2009 report?
 http://pgp.us.com/pdf/395_air_rights_property.pdf

See image at page 10 showing the I-395 right of way pinch.

 I-395 right of way pinch
Yellow- Parking
Grey-  Service and Loading
Blue- Water Storage
Pink- Concourse



Note the garage structure pinching the southbound roadway.

Note the water tank structure pinching the northbound roadway.

Travel lane capacity is reduced from a potential of 4 lanes with shoulders, 50% to only 2 lanes per direction.

Note the pinched center median WITHOUT a set of left hand shoulders.  Though the freeway has such a set, this design shows pinched center median greatly reducing or eliminating that segment of the left hand shoulder- further reducing design flexibility.

This highway segment had been designed with a 2x4 lane right of way plus shoulders as part of I-95.

When I-95 was canceled following the planning botching generated controversies, the highway was striped for only 2 lanes in each direction, with the extra space in the northern tunnel segment cordoned off with non load bearing walls.  As those walls are non load bearing they can be removed at relatively little expense.   This highway segment, though designed for lanes in each direction was so re-striped to only 2 per direction as it would for a time be truncated at New York Avenue.





Center Leg trench looking north showing unused lanes - photos by Douglas A. Willinger

Prior to the mid 1970s, this area was to include a left hand ramp from the northbound lanes to connect to the planned I-66 K Street Tunnel that had been designed to save neighborhoods.  That explains why the northbound carriageway there is wider then the southbound carriageway.

The Plan- cir 1971 of the northern Center Leg tunnel

Northern Center Leg Tunnel aerial showing expansion joints on K Street




Non load-bearing wall- photo and below caption from Steve Anderson's dcroads

This 2004 photo shows the northbound Center Leg Freeway (I-395) approaching the Massachusetts Avenue tunnel portal. The northern terminus of I-395 at New York Avenue is less than one-half mile ahead past the tunnel. Note how the two additional travel lanes in each direction are separated by concrete "Jersey" barriers. (Photo by Jim K. Georges.)

Since then, an I-395 Tunnel extension has been proposed.




1996 'Ron Linton' Plan for I-395 Tunnel Extension

That plan, would likely involve some modifications to the existing northern tunnel segment that is located between Massachusetts Avenue and K Street.  Given the existing 4 northbound lanes have 50% of their capacity diverted to the offramp just south of Massachusetts Avenue by the Georgetown Law Center, such planning could have likely involved a re-striping to at least 3 lanes per direction, if not 4 owing to merge lane issues.

So, is this I-395 Air Rights Plan, now called the I-395 Tunnel Project adhering to this disastrous 2009 design?

That design PERMANENTLY blocks off the extra existing trench-way lane space for extra parking and water tanks.  It even despicably pinches the center median to greatly reduce or eliminate the median shoulder so the highway can not even be expanded from 2 to 3 lanes in either direction while maintaining shoulders!

If so, have any studies been done on how much it would cost to recover the lost capacity, either by partial demolition or by constructing parallel cut and cover tunnels on either side of the Center Leg?


---

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

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

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

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


Douglas A. Willinger
A Trip Within The Beltway




http://i395ea.com/public/documents/meeting1_boards.pdf

Federal
Air Rights Project Environmental Assessment
Table of Contents
http://www.i395ea.com/ea-and-fonsi


See page 16- shows 'typical' I-395 segment with 2 12' lanes plus a 4' left and 12' right shoulder.
See page 62- states "No room for all 4 lanes on either side of Air Rights Tunnel"
NOTE not entirely true- the northern I-395 tunnel segment is designed for 4 southbound lanes and 4-5 northbound lanes plus shoulders (the existing walls are non load bearing and were a later design addition that being non load bearing could be relatively easily removed) ; the southern I-395 tunnel segment has 4 lanes in each direction with at least a set of right shoulders, but perhaps inadequate width for the necessary merge lanes and hence has its outermost lanes required as merge lanes.

http://www.i395ea.com/public/documents/appendices/Appendix%20J%20-%20Selection%20of%20the%20Preferred%20Alternative.pdf


This report gives little or no consideration to ever constructing an extension of I-395 to the north-north-east, nor any connections for an I-66 K Street Tunnel- a plan created by opponents to the original I-66 plans, and which was 'demapped' during the 1970s to jump-start WMATA rail funding at a time when it was believed that the world was going to run out of petroleum by the 1990s, hence somehow making private automobiles obsolete.



Thursday, December 11, 2014

Erased Comments From WP Article 'DC Dropping Request to Shut Down Part of I-395

A newspaper that has repeatedly lied about the feasibility of completing Washington DC highways as the previously planned I-95 on behalf of the power elites can be expected to erase comments that question the 'wisdom' of an unpopular request to shut down part of a popularly used urban freeway.


TheHillman
6:06 AM EST
DDOT's behavior here reeks of behind the scenes deals and bribes.

Their weird silence, stonewalling of the WP requests for information, and then their idiotic stance that since it's part of 395 that they can't weigh in was absurd.
DouglasWillinger
12/9/2014 11:14 PM EST [Edited]
Why not simply re-route both directions temporarily upon one of the two main carriageways to better facilitate construction? The space exists within the Mass Ave to K Street segment as that was designed to accommodate 4 lanes per direction- remove the non-load bearing walls that were erected to create storage areas. Of course they would have to revise the plans to remove that portion of a planned underground parking garage that blocks a portion of the southbound carriageway- as they should. The project should be designed to be flexible to not impinge upon the 2x4 of way, with future connections to a crosstown K Street Tunnel as proposed by Elizabeth Rowe to preserve neighborhoods, and likewise with an extension curved under the Dunbar recreation field and O Street that avoids the 600+ demolitions of the previous extension plans.

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2007/0...

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2007/1...
secretchimp
12/9/2014 11:24 PM EST
You clearly have no concept of DC traffic. This would be an absolute nightmare for thousands of people.
DouglasWillinger
12/9/2014 11:50 PM EST [Edited]
Canned reply from some one with nothing to say pretending that they do.

The northern portion of I-395 already exists with 2 lanes per direction; allowing the full 2x4 width for half used at a time would mean the same number of open lanes during construction as now.
breal18
12:54 AM EST
Because those are horrible ideas that would never happen cost wise?
DouglasWillinger
10:58 AM EST
Baseless criticism from trolls hiding behind pseudonyms offering nothing.

The whole idea of closing the freeway segment entirely is to provide the space for erecting the center median supports; currently there is much space being used for closed off lanes to the outer portion of the trenchway for the sake of storage space that has been used for the lion statutes from the Taft bridge, and for underground parking that could be made elsewhere.

The K Street Tunnel was the idea promoted by opponents of the original cross town I-66 plans that would have cleared 100s of buildings along Florida Avenue and U Street, with its higher costs per inch offset by the shorter route and the use of existing right of way hence avoiding the gap in property tax revenue.

The alternative plan for the I-395 extension likewise avoids the property tax loss by reducing displacement over 95% from the 1970s plan, while avoiding the construction disturbance to traffic of using NY Avenue itself on the highly used segment from 4th Street NW to North Capitol Street, and avoiding the permanent liability of the sharp turn of the Ron Linton plan of a 25 mph curved tunnel wrapping behind the Bibleway Church complex.
kevin43
12/9/2014 8:24 PM EST
Do DDOT officials have to give the bribe money back?
Fitzcaraldo
12/9/2014 7:02 PM EST
I have yet to meet anyone living here in DC who supported closing the freeway.

The developers knew the timetable when they agreed to build the project.

If they have to wait an extra year to start raking in the millions, that's their problem.
stratman1
12/9/2014 6:49 PM EST
Well, that didn't take long. And sure PGP, we believe you when you say you were looking out for the interests of drivers rather than the bottom line of PGP.

Sunday, December 07, 2014

Richard Layman Proposes Renaming 11th Street Bridges After Marion Barry







http://urbanplacesandspaces.blogspot.com/2014/12/marion-barry-ceremonial-vs-real-name.html
I don't favor a renaming of a major arterial for Marion Barry, although I'd be fine with a ceremonial renaming of a bridge--many states including Maryland names bridges in honor of politicians, soldiers killed in the line of duty, etc.

For such a name change, I'd nominate the 11th Street bridges--which connect the city, east and west of the Anacostia River, and Ward 6 to Ward 8--as suitable for renaming in honor of Marion Barry.

I concur.

I agree. Given his role with ECTC, in stopping I-95 by Catholic University of America, he played a role in disproportionately routing the freeway traffic through DC's least affluent areas.


Thursday, December 04, 2014

Marion Barry Dies and the Obituaries Don't Mention His Anti Freeway Role!


Marion Barry dies.  March 6, 1936-November 23, 2014.

 

Numerous obituaries, such as the following from The Washington Post- and none mention his role in stopping Washington, D.C.'s freeway system!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/obituaries/marion-barry-dies-4-term-dc-mayor-the-most-powerful-local-politician-of-his-generation/2014/11/23/331ad222-c5da-11df-94e1-c5afa35a9e59_story.htm
D.C. debut
In 1965, Mr. Barry arrived in Washington to direct activities for the SNCC. This came at a critical juncture in D.C. race relations.

Nationally, the civil rights movement was heating up. There had been riots in the black enclaves of several urban centers, and more were to come. In Washington, the post-World War II flight of whites to the suburbs had given the city a population that was majority African American. But the local government was dominated by whites and subject to the oversight of white-dominated congressional committees. There was no home rule.

The stage was set for Mr. Barry’s D.C. political debut. Clad in a dashiki shirt and speaking in inflammatory rhetoric, he established himself as a visible presence with a forceful voice that could not easily be ignored.
In January 1966, he led a one-day bus “mancott” to protest a fare increase requested by D.C. Transit. He organized a “Free D.C. Movement” to press for home rule. He called D.C. police “an occupation army.” In 1969, he tore up a parking ticket, struck the officer who had placed it on his windshield and was charged with assault. The case ended with a hung jury.
Rep. John L. McMillan (D-S.C.), the chairman of the House Committee on the District of Columbia and one of the most influential men in Washington, was among the targets of his rhetoric. “The citizens of the District of Columbia,” Mr. Barry declared, “are tired of living on the McMillan plantation.”

In the winter of 1967, Mr. Barry resigned as director of SNCC’s Washington office, declaring, “Now we must concentrate on control — economic and political power.”
With financial support from the U.S. Department of Labor, he organized and directed a group known as Pride Inc., which put more than 1,000 inner-city youths to work clearing alleys of trash and debris, killing rats — and later running gas stations and a landscaping business and managing an apartment building.

In 1971, Mr. Barry won his first election for citywide office, defeating the chairman of the school board, Anita F. Allen, for an at-large seat on the board.

None of the obituaries or even his wikipedia bio mention his involvement with the doctrinaire anti-freeway group ECTC.

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2007/11/ectc-1970.html

ECTC  EMERGENCY COMMITTEE ON THE TRANSPORTATION CRISIS
CHAIRMAN: R.H. Booker  VICE CHAIRMEN Marion Barry, Jr. - Charles I. Cassell  Fed Heutte - Johnie D. Wilson  SECRETARIAL COMMITTEE: Mary Alice Brown, Chairman- Ann Heutte - Angela Rooney - LEGAL COUNSEL Simon L. Cain TREASURER: Mrs. Leon Brooks PLANNING CONSULTANTS: 2MJQ  Black Advocacy Planners  SPEAKERS BUREAU: Louis M. Florenzo, Chairman  PUBLICITY DIRECTOR: Sammie Abdullah Abbott

It is as if that movement is not being seen as part of a legitimate protest, but rather a manipulation.

Indeed.  The anti freeway protests had some legitimate targeting- such as the earlier planning as the I-66 new swath displacing 100s of residences along Florida Avenue and U Streets, and the 1964 recommended route for the North Central Freeway that seriously deviated from the recently assassinated John F. Kennedy's vision for a B&O Route North Central Freeway.

But was we know, the freeway should have been (and can still be built) properly, such as with the I-66 North Leg; and that the doctrinaire anti freeway stance was effectively a protest on behalf of the wealthiest and most political powerful to get over upon the general public.
http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2014/09/getting-over.html