CSX begins Virginia Avenue Tunnel evaluation process

Transit

CSX begins Virginia Avenue Tunnel evaluation process

by Erik Weber and Moira Gillick • September 15, 2011 2:17 pm

Replacing and expanding CSX's Virginia Avenue tunnel in southeast Capitol Hill will be no easy task and is likely to cause more than a few headaches for local residents. Last night, CSX and DDOT kicked off the formal public involvement process, asking attendees for comments, concerns and potential alternatives.

Photo by HerrVebah on Flickr.

The project scope is virtually unchanged since CSX first unveiled its plans to widen and deepen the tunnel that runs under the eastbound lanes of Virginia Avenue, SE.

The biggest difference since initial talks began in late 2009 is that CSX has chosen not to wait for any additional public funding and will cover much of the additional cost with $160 million of its own capital.

Tonight's event officially started the NEPA environmental evaluation process. The federal review process is being led by the Federal Highway Administration because of the project's potential to impact traffic flow on and off of I-295.

Construction may require temporary closure of the 295 Eastbound on-ramp at 8th Street and Virginia Avenue. This would force drivers heading across the 11th Street Bridge to use the on-ramp at 11th and N Streets.

As part of the NEPA process, CSX and DDOT will hold several public meetings, and this first one was billed as a "scoping meeting." Here's the presentation.

Left: NEPA process overview. Right: NEPA schedule.

While CSX provided plenty of nametagged people to talk to members of the public and address questions, the open format left more that a few people scratching their heads. A number of attendees expressed their disappointment that CSX didn't begin the meeting with some kind of general presentation about project basics, like tentative designs and schedule, need and potential impacts.

"I don't even really know what's happening," said one nearby resident. "Is this tunnel only one option? I'm not a shy person, so I have no problem asking questions of these people, but I could see how a lot of people can get intimidated."

That may indeed have happened. The organizers boasted about 100 attendees signing in, but it appeared that only half of those were in any way engaged in asking questions of submitting comments, with many others quickly scanning past the placards before heading off into the night.

What's more, the meeting had a decidedly superficial feel to it. The placards scattered about the room contained very little information beyond introductory NEPA facts, a very basic project scope, and a lot of pro-freight rail propaganda, including some nifty computer animations about the National Gateway project.

As David Garber, ANC Commissioner for the affected neighborhood, pointed out, the meeting was lacking in answers to residents' most important questions: what happens during construction and what does the community get out at the end? "Virginia Avenue is not a great public space currently," Garber said, "so there's an opportunity here to change that."

So while many residents were left wondering why they should be made to endure huge, several year long disruptions to their daily lives, there was no sign anywhere of CSX's proposed community amenities.

CSX is clearly making significant efforts to reach out to the community. They're going to need it to overcome an earlier snafu in which the railroad and its consultants used old satellite images for preliminary planning. The old photos left planners unaware that Virginia Avenue was no longer a strip of vacant parcels, but instead a burgeoning neighborhood of new row houses and a senior apartment building.

Still, this event did little to answer residents' questions or quell their fears that the project would be a major disruption to their daily lives. While asking for comments, questions and alternatives is a laudable effort, it is difficult for the public to make reasonable suggestions if they no so little about the actual impacts they can expect.

If you live or work near Virginia Avenue or frequent the SE-SW freeway, DDOT and CSX want to hear your concerns. The NEPA process requires a 30-day comment period, leaving interested members of the public until October 14th to submit their comments. Comments can be submitted via email to contact@virginiaavenuetunnel.com or via the project website.

Update: The boards from the meeting are now posted online.

25 comments

Tags: CSX, DC, DDOT, Near Southeast, public involvement, Virginia Avenue Tunnel

CSX plans for Virginia Avenue Tunnel replacement (Apr 13, 2010)
"Dave Thomas Circle" opens June 4th (May 25, 2010)
DDOT gets closer to an Anacostia streetcar alignment (Jun 30, 2011)
Ward 7 residents define "livability" for their streets (Dec 7, 2010)
DDOT will reexamine Fort Totten no-people zone (Dec 14, 2009)

Erik Weber has been living car-free in the District since 2009. Hailing from the home of the nation's first Urban Growth Boundary, Erik has been interested in transit since spending summers in Germany as a kid where he rode as many buses, trains and streetcars as he could find. Views expressed here are Erik's alone.

Born in DC, Moira grew up in Arlington and became an avid urbanist after studying and living in London. She is currently a fellow with Smart Growth America, working on the Governors' Institute on Community Design program.

Comments
Add a comment »

Glad to see this is being done with private money.

by charlie on Sep 15, 2011 3:21 pm • link • report

Thanks for attending and reporting back! I read the write-up on DCmud this morning, but it was a bit lacking, y'all provided a much better write-up of what happened.

Hopefully they'll get it together on community outreach.

by Nolan on Sep 15, 2011 3:50 pm • link • report

Out of curiosity, will there be a switch installed here to give Amtrak trains another way out of the city to reach the northern portions of the NEC via New Carrolton?

Although you wouldn't want to use it for revenue service, it'd be an awfully nice bit of redundancy that we could get virtually for free.

Also, are there plans to replace the rail bridge over the Anacostia, or can we strongarm CSX into adding a pedestrian path to the existing bridge as part of the project?

by andrew on Sep 15, 2011 4:01 pm • link • report

@andrew

Not sure what you mean for NEC trains - you'd propose that they leave Union Station and head south, then turn around and traverse this tunnel? I don't see why you'd want to do that.

The Anacostia Rail Bridge has already been replaced, more or less. It's been incrementally upgraded and widened. There isn't room for a bike/ped trail, but that general location would be the perfect location for a bike/ped bridge (and one was mentioned there in the AWI planning - crossing at Mass Ave SE).

by Alex B. on Sep 15, 2011 4:04 pm • link • report

This is great, but even greater would be a rail bypass of the entire capital region, crossing the potomac well south of here and meeting back up with the line in the Fort Meade/Annapolis junction area. Then all the tracks in the metro area could be used for majorly expanded commuter rail service and really reduce a major terrorist potential target.

by NikolasM on Sep 15, 2011 4:16 pm • link • report

@NikolasM

I'd agree - but the cost of that bypass is probably an order of magnitude higher than re-doing this tunnel. And even if not for the double-stack expansion, the tunnel is old enough that it would need to be reconstructed anyway.

by Alex B. on Sep 15, 2011 4:26 pm • link • report

You'd want that switch to be there so you have an alternate route that can be used if the other route somehow gets blocked, and severs the most heavily-used passenger corridor in the country. I mean...the tracks are already there, and although there would indeed be capacity issues, you'd be able to maintain *some* level of service.

by andrew on Sep 15, 2011 4:36 pm • link • report

@andrew:
Can't be done. The whole of the Virginia Avenue Tunnel and Landover Sub would also need to be electrified.

Besides, it would provide an alternate route only in the case that whatever blockage there was happened to be between Landover and New York Avenue.

by Matt Johnson on Sep 15, 2011 5:06 pm • link • report

@NikolasM

NCPC did a rail relocation study a couple of years ago that looked at getting the freight rail traffic out of DC. You can download a copy of it here: http://www.ncpc.gov/ncpc/Main(T2)/Publications(Tr2)/iframpages/monumental_core_framework_plan_a.aspx#RailRealignPub

by Christine on Sep 15, 2011 5:41 pm • link • report

Based on the study (which I downloaded a couple years ago...it's been out that long), a realistic figure for a freight rail bypass is in the neighborhood of $3 billion...several orders of magnitude higher than this tunnel project.

by Froggie on Sep 15, 2011 6:02 pm • link • report

Was anything said about having this project work to accommodate the eventual under-grounding of the SE Freeway?

If they instead made a wider tunnel under Virginia Avenue, that could later be used for the eastbound SE Freeway tunnel.

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

by Douglas Willinger on Sep 15, 2011 6:27 pm • link • report

Is CSX still planning to rip up the land, dig a bigger trench, and then put a lid on it and re-plant a few of the trees? Or has it decided to drill instead, so as not to cause a surface disturbance?

by Turnip on Sep 15, 2011 7:10 pm • link • report

I doubt they could drill it as its elevation is insufficiently deep.

by Douglas Willinger on Sep 15, 2011 7:23 pm • link • report

What they could do is a shallow excavation (minimizing surface disruption time), and then place a prefabricated lid atop, with the new streetscape, while the tunnel excavation and construction continues beneath.

That was an idea I wrote in 2005 concerning NYC's "West Street Tunnel", though I don;t know if anyone asked it at the recent meeting regarding the Virginia Avenue Tunnel. THAT, along with making it wider, would greatly reduce the surface disruptions of both this RR project and a future SE Freeway tunnel project.

by Douglas Willinger on Sep 15, 2011 11:22 pm • link • report

Was this the CSX-sponsored open house or the official NEPA public scoping meeting. Open houses are typically loose format like this that are sponsored by the applicant. The meetings sponsored by the agency are the offical NEPA scoping meetings. I've run a ton of them and they are the formal meetings run by the govt. agency and would typically (varies a bit by agency) have 1 or more people talk about the NEPA and agency process, the project and then solicit comments from the public for recordation by a stenographer.

by Eric on Sep 16, 2011 9:36 am • link • report

I don't think you can blame CSX too much for the lack of information. It is the nature of the beast. Any time you do one of these formal NEPA environmental studies, you *have* to do one of these scoping meetings which are simply to present the conditions of what's out there now and give a broad overview of the purpose of the project. They're essentially not allowed to begin analyzing or presenting alternatives until after they've solicited citizen input at these meeting.

Presumably what they'll do next is develop a long list of alternatives, eliminate those that don't meet the goals of the project or are ridiculously expensive/ridiculously impactive, and then present the detailed alternatives to the public.

It's always a delicate balancing. Present too little information and people wonder about the purpose of the meeting. Present too much information and people think that the public involvement is a farce and the decision has already been made in some smoke-filled back room.

In general, and unfortunately, this may be a project where local residents have to "take one for the team". The project will be highly disruptive during construction, but you can't not do the project because the existing tunnel is so out of date and because this project has, not just regional, but national implications.

by Marc on Sep 16, 2011 10:28 am • link • report

They paid off Congress - they can (and will) do whatever they damn well please.

by FJ on Sep 16, 2011 12:12 pm • link • report

@NikolasM & Froggie
We spend billions for Homeland Security and trillions on National Defense. How come 3 billion is too much to remove a genuine possible threat to the Nations Capital , Congress, numerous Federal agencies , the Navy Yard not to mention the hundreds of thousands who live here or the tens of thousands who work here and additional tens of thousands who visit here on any given day?

by Dan Maceda on Sep 16, 2011 5:32 pm • link • report

@Dan. That alternate route puts that traffic in my backyard, trashes a wildlife study area, destroys a very nice 100 year old town, builds a massive bridge over the Potomac river and disrupts dozens of communities. The enviro studies alone would take dozens of years. Please spend that $3b to make the tunnel safe and even bury the freeway. There is no free lunch here; someone gets stepped on. Heighten that tunnel, and you reduce... at least for the coming years, the number of trains going through the tunnel.

by From the burbs on Sep 16, 2011 9:45 pm • link • report

Actually, modern decking technology can significantly reduce the impact of a project like this. You can build a decking system that allows street traffic and work can continue beneath it. Might not be appropriate for the whole length of the project, but I assume that this is how cross street traffic will be handled.

As anyone listening to TV and radio in the region knows from that rail industry "propaganda", trains carry freight much more efficiently, usuing less energy than trucks.

by Steve Strauss on Sep 19, 2011 10:35 am • link • report

It seems DC DOT is avoiding the idea to study possibility of having SE Freeway be underground (as a starter). In later years, we can put rest of SW Freeway underground (e.g. Boston Big Dig). Once we tear down the Freeway, we can build another tunnel for both MARC and Metro when they're ready to expand lines to other part of DC or Southern Maryland. And build park on the top of all tunnels and underground freeway.

by Dave on Sep 20, 2011 2:23 pm • link • report

It wasn't too many years ago when then Director of the DC Office of Planning, Andrew Altman, put out plans to eliminate the elevated portions of the freeway in SE Washington so as to better connect city residents with the flanking Anacostia River.

Does anyone have one of those diagrams and, if so, can they post it somewhere so others may see it and consider in the process of this review?

As to the public process, to date, an email blast went out today that said the "boards" from last week's open house were available online within VirginiaAvenueTunnel.com at http://www.virginiaavenuetunnel.com/project-resources/. Comment period runs to or through October 14.

by Lindsley Williams on Sep 22, 2011 3:03 pm • link • report

Just read in today Washington Post -- there's a follow up hearing on Wednesday, November 30, 2011 at 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.. It will be held at Nationals Park, 1500 South Capitol Street, SE, Washington, DC 20003-1507.

Too bad I didn't know about this sooner. Also, no one seems to know where the plan to put freeways underground (see my email I mentioned above).

I think this is a final public hearing and CSX plan is finalized. I think it's too late to change the plan.

by Dave on Nov 28, 2011 2:20 pm • link • report

Did anyone attended this hearing? I didn't see anything in the newspaper.

by Dave on Dec 5, 2011 2:21 pm • link • report

@Dave: JDland does a much better job of covering this. see http://www.jdland.com/dc/index.cfm/3586/Virginia-Avenue-Tunnel-Project-Concept-Designs-Unveiled/

by goldfish on Dec 5, 2011 2:27 pm • link • report