Your suggestion makes sense. Making NY Ave a normal street again would likely do wonders for that area.

by NikolasM on Apr 14, 2009 3:44 pm • link • report

I hate cars and traffic but NikolasM I have to be contrary on this.

It's gr8 we got 95 stopped from coming through DC but we never planned how else all the auto traffic from the entire NE US would get to and through DC efficiently.

Cars stalled in traffic, like that stretch of NY Avenue is almost 24/7, produce 10 times as much pollution. Plus it's about the only place I know of in the country where the interstate stops for a short distance and all the traffic is funneled onto city streets for a stretch.

David suggests routing all traffic to enter the city via 295 and the 11th St/Howard St.Bridge, but that's not very feasible. 295 from NY Ave to Howard Street is a horrible stretch of often elevated winding road full of loose cement

that could never handle that amount of traffic without a complete and expensive re-make. Plus it goes next to and even over many residences and the beautiful National Aquatic Gardens. Dumping all that traffic onto South Capitol street until it gets back up to 395 would create another city street bottle jam.

That nightmare stretch of NY Avenue is a mixture of underused commercial and railroad tracks with almost free air rights for directed lanes and 395 is already there under the mall largely unused. There just needs to be a better way to connect 295 with 395 under the mall without disturbing the residences that start around the entrance to 395. A short limited-access road with dedicated ramps for cars going to Virginia, to Capitol Hill and to Downtown/Convention Center/Verizon Center would get these damn cars out of here faster and stop 90% of the pollution the bottle neck causes.

It's MHO but I'ved by necessity traveled that route several times a week for 40 years and can't imagine 295/11th St. ever being feasible as more than an alternative route even after enormous expense, residential relocation and renovation.

Again, MHO.

by Tom on Apr 14, 2009 6:51 pm • link • report

Maybe send the 395 traffic underground starting above Florida, with ground level lanes just for downtown on a restored NY Ave. half it's present size.

Anyway I hope the Smart experts are smarter this time than experience has been.

by Tom on Apr 14, 2009 7:37 pm • link • report

@Tom

1. The stalled cars argument is the classic "more highways are good for the environment" argument. And it's utter baloney. Clearing up the congestion will induce demand and undo all the good that did.

2.Traffic along the NE should not go through DC. It should go around.

3. David never mentions Howard Road or South Capitol Street. No traffic will be dumped onto South Capitol. It will cross on 11th Street.

4. Are you talking about building a Freeway under New York Avenue?

5. I'm not sure I agree that SH-295 can't handle the added flow. And if it can't than that will just keep people on the Wilson Bridge.

by David C on Apr 14, 2009 7:37 pm • link • report

I don't want any more highways. Just tie ones already there and don't dump them on city streets for a stretch.

by Tom on Apr 14, 2009 7:40 pm • link • report

David (A): what's the source of data for your traffic flow diagrams?

by Froggie on Apr 14, 2009 7:49 pm • link • report

The whole discussion is very rush-hour centric. The fact remains that the proposed added connection provides the first-ever fully freeway connection from Baltomore to Richmond (or vice versa) that goes through downtown. I don't see why that's a good thing. This is exactly the same reason NY Ave isn't 95 and Barney Circle isn't freeway-connected to 295. It was wrong in the 60's and it's wrong now.

David, you and DDOT are probably right that this proposal would be better than the 11th St Bridge change DDOT plans, but this doesn't make me supporter of that misguided change.

by Lance B on Apr 14, 2009 8:17 pm • link • report

One thing I cannot help but wonder- how would this affect the Anacostia Community Rowing Center, which is located directly between the two existing bridges? Most of the boats are stored underneath the downstream span of the bridge, and the boathouse is located in an old warehouse between the two spans.

by donoteat on Apr 14, 2009 8:32 pm • link • report

One assumption underlying your plans is that the 11th street bridge by fixing a bottle neck connecting the southwest freeway and 295N (or in the opposite direction 295S and the southwest freeway) will suddenly have increased capacity along the entire route. It will certainly improve some intersections around the area, like the awful left turn off of Pa Ave onto 295N, but both of those roads are already at capacity during rush hour. I have a hard time imagining many more long distance commuters choosing that route.

Also, as a matter of principal, I'm opposed to redirecting traffic from one neighborhood to another in the city. I'd rather see transit options explored as an alternative. Is there any public transit across the WW bridge?

by Nicole on Apr 14, 2009 8:56 pm • link • report

It sounds like this mostly amounts to adding the missing south-bound off-ramp from 295 directly to 395 to augment the crazy loop-de-loop via Anacostia's Howard Road to South Capitol Street.

This may entice some divers headed to Capitol Hill, SE, SW and Arlington. Big question is whether they'll be willing to endure the stretch of 295 from NY Ave to there.

Obviously this is mostly traffic to the inner core- I can't imagine anyone headed south toward Richmond taking this route instead of the Beltway to WW Bridge or even 295 to WW Bridge.

by Tom on Apr 14, 2009 9:10 pm • link • report

For everyone not familiar with all the details of the project, I recommend checking out the earlier series which explained the plan and its effects.

Froggie: The widths of the arrows are based on a combination of what the EIS says and my own intuition. As I said in the piece, I'm looking forward to the COG report to give some actual hard numbers. I'll definitely admit that the details might not be 100% right.

Lance B: Yes, this project will entice cut-through traffic. It does create some benefits, but also at great significant both in money and in added pollution. However, it seems that ship has sailed and DDOT is going to move forward. This seems to be the best way to at least alleviate some of the negative side effects.

donoteat: Yes, the project will impact some of the Anacostia boathouses. That's been an argument against the project for sure.

Nicole: By definition, if you improve a bottleneck, then you are expanding capacity of the system. The total capacity of a system is defined as that of the narrowest bottleneck. DDOT's EIS expects an increase in traffic in this area as a result of this project, and the Smart Mobility traffic analaysis commissioned by CHRS predicts that the project will divert traffic off the WW Bridge, though doesn't say how much.

I also oppose shifting traffic from one neighborhood to another. However, if we are going to add traffic to one neighborhood, we may as well take it away from another to balance it out.

Tom: As above, Smart Mobility's traffic modeling did show some diversion off the bridge. Of course, many people won't divert, but a good number will.

by David Alpert on Apr 14, 2009 9:23 pm • link • report

@donoteat

You should read the Boathouse row plan

by David C on Apr 14, 2009 9:35 pm • link • report

Anyone who comes through DC to endure 395 south at rush hour instead of the Beltway desperately needs a new GPS.

I was hoping this might take NY Avenue down from maybe 500% capacity to maybe 400%, but if even part of the reason is to divert some traffic off the new state-of-the-art, so welled planned, almost billion dollar WW Bridge and send it through DC, hell with it.

by Tom on Apr 14, 2009 9:52 pm • link • report

If we were going to remove the whole SE/SW Freeway through DC I would be with people who oppose this bridge. But that isn't happening for a good 40-50 years if ever. But building this bridge with the transit/bike/ped improvements and removing the SE Freeway from 11th to Barney Circle and downsizing the center leg is a pretty good compromise in my opinion.

I'm also uncomfortable leaving a gap in the road system as some sort of anti-car hole. This is like the gap in Breezewood, PA and probably needs to be fixed. And then we need to focus on transit.

by David C on Apr 14, 2009 10:02 pm • link • report

My question is why won't this happen on its own. By hypothesis, the 11th street bridge will be a better, faster, nicer route from points northeast to Arlington/eastern fairfax county (everyone else is going beltway or 295). So wouldn't NY Ave. simply become less congested and 395-SB become relatively unused? If so, at that point go ahead and make whatever changes are appropriate.

But if you force it with premature redesign it seems like you're asking for a greater, greater mess.

by ah on Apr 14, 2009 10:24 pm • link • report

FWIW

The Congress for the New Urbanism has SE Freeway on it's top ten list of freeways that should be torn down. Smart Mobility disagrees with DDOT and says "improvement" will increase the amount of traffic capacity into DC by 50% in violation of the Comprehensive Plan.

Link:

http://www.cnu.org/highways/freewayswithoutfutures

Quote:

"10. 11th Street Bridges and the Southeast Freeway, Washington D.C.

The Southeast Freeway is a 1.39-mile stretch of freeway running through Washington D.C. built in the late 1960s. It connects Interstate 395 to Interstate 295 at the 11th Street Bridges and was prevented from continuing west due to local opposition at the time. To address congestion and traffic routing problems at the interchange connecting the Southeast/Southwest Freeway and the Anacostia Freeway (I-295) over the Anacostia River, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) began investigating how to reconstruct and reconfigure the interchange at the 11th Street Bridges.

The Concerned Citizens of Eastern Washington, the Capitol Hill Restoration Society, some of whom were involved with the freeway revolt in the 1960s, began investigating the FHWA's preferred alternative in the Final Environmental Impact Assessment. Working with the transportation engineering firm Smart Mobility, Inc., the Capitol Hill Restoration Society discovered that, while the DC Department of Transportation states that there will not be an increase in capacity, the “preferred alternative … will result in a 50% increase of freeway capacity into central DC, even though this is contrary to the DC Comprehensive Plan.” This project has renewed discussions about improving surface-street and pedestrian connections in the near southeastern section of the district by removing the Southeast Freeway -- what the DC Office of Planning refers to as a “formidable psychological barrier.”

by Tom on Apr 14, 2009 11:13 pm • link • report

and 295 from NY Avenue south doesn't need to be torn down as it collapsing quite rapidly on it's on with body-sized pieces falling out of it's elevated parts at regular intervals.

by Tom on Apr 14, 2009 11:23 pm • link • report

It's all about screwing over the general public for a discredited ideology that exists as a feel goodism distraction from what is needed -- e.g. a bailout requirement that all new combustion engines be flex fuel capable -- and for keeping a disproportionate amount of the express traffic in the less politically affluent areas.

95 was canceled to keep it far away from CUA (while keeping CUA isolated from the east as attested by the shilling against decking cover the railtracks today) and from passing through the field of the Masonic Eastern Star Home on NH Ave, with the sensible Kennedy plan deliberately sabotaged with the insane 1963-63 NCF misrouting.

by Douglas Willinger on Apr 14, 2009 11:57 pm • link • report

"That nightmare stretch of NY Avenue is a mixture of underused commercial and railroad tracks with almost free air rights for directed lanes and 395 is already there under the mall largely unused. There just needs to be a better way to connect 295 with 395 under the mall without disturbing the residences that start around the entrance to 395. A short limited-access road with dedicated ramps for cars going to Virginia, to Capitol Hill and to Downtown/Convention Center/Verizon Center would get these damn cars out of here faster and stop 90% of the pollution the bottle neck causes. "

Indeed, this option that I devised reduces displacement 95% from the 1970s plan while providing greater safety then either that or the dangerously tight 1996 plan:

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2007/11/i-395-extension-superior-option.html

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/search/label/I-395%20extension

It should though have a route to the north as a linear park covered multi-model transport corridor that would include added rail capacity:

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2008/02/extending-legacy-with-grand-arc.html

95 was definitely botched to induce opposition:

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2007/05/1964-north-central-freeway-routing_08.html

Why else create routes with far greater displacement that are longer and involve more earth moving?

by Douglas Willinger on Apr 15, 2009 12:14 am • link • report

"The Concerned Citizens of Eastern Washington, the Capitol Hill Restoration Society, some of whom were involved with the freeway revolt in the 1960s, began investigating the FHWA's preferred alternative in the Final Environmental Impact Assessment. Working with the transportation engineering firm Smart Mobility, Inc., the Capitol Hill Restoration Society discovered that, while the DC Department of Transportation states that there will not be an increase in capacity, the “preferred alternative … will result in a 50% increase of freeway capacity into central DC, even though this is contrary to the DC Comprehensive Plan.” This project has renewed discussions about improving surface-street and pedestrian connections in the near southeastern section of the district by removing the Southeast Freeway -- what the DC Office of Planning refers to as a “formidable psychological barrier.”"

Weird how there appears to be no opposition to this reconstruction of an elevated freeway for the sake of crossing a heavy railroad that is planned to be removed (if converted to light rail such could cross beneath a below grade highway replacement given that light rail can take a 5% grade change whereas heavy rail only 1%).

This, and the sole focus upon the numbers of people/vehicles served just further confirms the nature of the establishment highway opposition that is OK with an elevated berm highway that splits the area locally.

by Douglas Willinger on Apr 15, 2009 12:22 am • link • report

and all this to enhance an awful mistake of the '60's which is the portion of 295 south of NY Avenue which destroys the Anacostia waterfront.

With it's beautiful view of Capitol Hill, the marinas and the National Aquatic Gardens there the Anacostia waterfront should be the gem of Washington and a prime residential center. Instead, frankly because of racism, it's covered by a crumbling elevated freeway that no one wants to use anyway.

Most of the "missing link" part of New York Avenue above Florida has multiple parallel railroad tracks, run-down motels, and gas stations on one side and cheap motels and warehouses on the other. There's no shortage of alternatives there which harm no residential areas. The problem is just how to get most of the the cars out of the way, possibly below ground, the few blocks from Florida to the 395 tunnel so we can forget about them.

This isn't all that complicated but DC will keep trying to put the square peg into the round hole and leave a whole quadrant of the city devastated by an unneeded freeway that never should have been built and is collapsing as if it even knows it shouldn't be there.

by Tom on Apr 15, 2009 1:16 am • link • report

I don't understand how the new 11th Street Bridge project is going to add capacity to 295? Taking freeway capacity off of New York Avenue is a good thing. Traffic can be controlled on 295 with congestion pricing if it gets to be that big of a problem.

As unsightly as I-395 is, in Southwest it has relatively good connectivity underneath the freeway, with passage under the freeway every couple of blocks. If 295 in River East could be improved to create passages over or under the freeway, the Anacostia Waterfront could become more of a gem.

In any event, freeway traffic needs to be taken off of New York Avenue and South Capitol Street to increase the vitality of those areas. David A. meets that goal here.

by Dave Murphy on Apr 15, 2009 1:56 am • link • report

Douglas -

While I'm all for a requirement that all new mainstream gasoline engines flawlessly burn any proportion of ethanol, and all new diesel engines flawlessly burn any proportion of biodiesel... that's kind of the low hanging fruit. There's not much sustainability there, only a wee bit of increased versatility that slightly offsets our national dependence on foreign oil. The general magnitude of the 'silver bullet', if you will, is that if world trade were to shut down we would have 70% rather than 80% of our cars priced off the road. Cheap/easy/obvious way of helping us, considering the low price(ethanol - a $100 change in tank liner, biodiesel - free, both - free specification/standards testing changes), but it's far from *enough*.

by Squalish on Apr 15, 2009 4:40 am • link • report

I would put a carbon tax at $100/ton CO2 and an escalating fuel tax starting at $2/gallon (inserting figures that sound reasonable at current prices), economically mitigated by an annual rebate of your share of the revenues, as "enough" to singlehandedly solve most of our fossil fuel dependence problems, with some fixable collateral damage in energy-intensive exports. Such a scenario would still have us fixing our cities, because increased urban quality of life would be demanded by the population.

by Squalish on Apr 15, 2009 4:58 am • link • report

"I don't understand how the new 11th Street Bridge project is going to add capacity to 295?"

Exactly. It isn't. Nor does it touch the rest of the SW/SE Freeway west of about 8th St SE.

So unless CNU defines the "DC core" as extending to 8th St SE, I have to call BS on their claim that this "increases capacity by 50% into the core".

Now it does add 50% capacity, at the river itself. But that additional capacity is in the form of local street access (connecting 11th St to MLK Blvd), not freeway lanes.

As for the study claim and David's assertion that this will induce cut-through traffic, there are several flaws in that:

- While this may fix one bottleneck along any "cut-through" route, there are several that still remain...in particular the rest of 295/Kenilworth, and the 14th St Bridge.

- Also, the ramps between 295/Kenilworth and 50 East are absolutely horrible...so I doubt you'll induce much traffic coming from Bowie/Annapolis/other points east as a result.

- If there's any through traffic using the new connection at the end, it'll be drivers trying it out for the first time, or through travelers not familliar with the area. Most drivers at least somewhat familliar with the area know that the east side of the Beltway averages 65-70 MPH, and only slows down when there's an accident or lane closures in Alexandria. And those lane closures (along with the rest of the Route 1 to Eisenhower stretch) will be done long before the 11th St Bridge project is completed.

- Lastly, most of your traffic increase will come from one of three groups: A) those currently using the Sousa Bridge and the east end of the SE Freeway, B) those wanting to avoid the stoplight and perennial watermain break hell along New York Ave, and C) those with an origin or destination well inside the Beltway (thinking Georgetown/Arlington/Mark Center here) to whom going out to the Beltway to get to/from the Northeast is very out of the way.

by Froggie on Apr 15, 2009 7:01 am • link • report

I'd like to elaborate on one more thing, given my previous post: I'm not against closing part of the 395 tunnel or "dieting down" New York Ave. But I'd HIGHLY SUGGEST we look at what the 11th St Bridge project does to traffic conditions first (that first few weeks after completion) before making the determination and implementing it.

by Froggie on Apr 15, 2009 7:08 am • link • report

Can we look at the problem from the perspective of downtown residents with cars trying to get OUT? When I lived on Capitol Hill and needed to get to NoVA, I'd get on the SE Freeway. Without a SE Freeway, I'd have to crawl along the Mall to get on the 14th Street Bridge. I agree that, since the eastbound SE Freeway doesn't really go anywhere (it just dumps traffic onto Pennsylvania Avenue where you have to wait to get on northbound 295), maybe it should be demolished/buried. But now you've created additional street traffic for residents.

Similarly, when I lived in Shaw, I'd regularly take that 395 tunnel to get to the SE Freeway, again bypassing the wretched hell that is 14th Street. And again, that tunnel doesn't really go anywhere; it just empties out on NY Avenue. With no tunnel, where does the outbound traffic go?

The proposed changes won't just shuffle around inbound suburban traffic. You're talking about major impacts to the alternative exit corridors out of the city for residents and outbound commuters alike.

And as an aside, I've noticed an interesting phenomena. Since there's no exit from southbound 295 onto Pennsylvania Avenue and the SE Freeway, people just exit onto the eastbound Suitland Parkway then loop back onto northbound 295 to get onto the northbound 12th Street bridge. So you've pretty much got a de facto "Barney Circle Bypass" except it's at the Navy Yard instead of East Capitol Hill. I work with some guys who say they've been doing this for decades.

by monkeyrotica on Apr 15, 2009 7:51 am • link • report

Tom

In the late 50s & early 1960's when these freeways were first built, Anacostia was about 60-80 % white. It was not about racism as much as class- these were white blue collar areas that eventually moved out to PG County, thence to the the exurbs where they are now. Your view of DC is far too static and does not take into account the breadth of change that has occured here .

by w on Apr 15, 2009 8:10 am • link • report

@Tom - Ha! 295 is terrible up there. I'm not sure people would choose it over NY Ave, even with a nice, new shiny 11th bridge.

by ah on Apr 15, 2009 8:18 am • link • report

two points:

1. Doesn't anyone use the Pennsylvania Ave bridge/295 when going from VA to MD? Non-rush hour, it is your best option.

2. What I've discovered is whatever the horrors of NY ave when coming back from Maryland, it really is easier than going down to 295, then doing the howard ave thing, and getting on 395. Too many strange turns and lights, and traffic usually isn't much better. OK, I might save 3 minutes but USUALLY Ny ave is just easier.

by charlie on Apr 15, 2009 10:45 am • link • report

It sounds strange coming from my mouth, but crippling through routes without providing adequate alternatives is not good policy, even for vehicles.

DDOT and the city's transportation policy has to adequately balance the use of roads for three different purposes, traveling to and from the city, traveling through the city, and traveling within the city. Relatedly, streets are used not just by residents, but by all types of demographics, and this has to be planned for in a judicious fashion.

The NY Avenue problem needs to be addressed, but I don't see how this does it.

Why not bring back the idea of tunneling for through traffic under NY Avenue, as was proposed in the New York Avenue Corridor Study, but really do it the whole way?

It is a lot of money though.

And note that the railroad tracks on New York Avenue are in fact heavily used, not just by Amtrak's Northeast Corridor and MARC trains, but also by a goodly number of freight train traffic as well.

by Richard Layman on Apr 15, 2009 11:56 am • link • report

Charlie,

I live in Alexandria, and when coming from points North, or most likely East, the Howard Road/395 route is much easier than NY Ave. Its all clutchwork for most of NY Ave, and even though I've done it many times, the lanes in the tunnel are not well-marked, and the various ramps are confusing, and you're more likely to have to deal with people doing scary merges.

by spookiness on Apr 15, 2009 1:22 pm • link • report

WTF? How about mapping the traffic in the opposite direction. Ever try getting from Arl to Bal?

by Mark on Apr 15, 2009 1:46 pm • link • report

w- Not to dwell on race but many people who did not live here in the '50's and '60's come with in a very wrong and static idea of it which irritates Washingtonians immensely. Unfortunately race, political power, and 95/295 are especially intertwined.

First, the decline economically of DC happened not after the '68 riots but after 1954 school integration. In the year 1954 the entire Gold Coast of upper 16th moved within a few months to Montgomery County. The other white ethnic neighborhoods, Columbia Heights for example, with less income fled more slowly in 1955-60. By 1968 the flight was finished. Hillcrest Heights and other white areas further out Pennsylvania Avenue were affluent areas and they immediately got the SE Freeway extension stopped. Kenilworth Gardens and the parts of Anacostia under 295 were AA since freed slaves moved there, were totally politically powerless and the bottom of the economic ladder and couldn't fight the Anacostia Freeway (295 south of NY Avenue). The 95 fight which gained national attention and lasted for many bitter years was, as Douglas pointed out above, much more nuanced than the "white man's highway, black man's 'hood" slogan that was used. 95 was going to cut through Catholic University close to the National Shrine and end in a huge interchange of northern Dupont Circle. 95 was finally killed by the entrance of one woman, Hariett Hubbard of the North Umberland on NH by 16th, who was politically powerful and had just gotten the first historic district in DC (Georgetown). Harriett had a voice like sandpaper and would follow city commissioners and Congressmen home and more importantly to the elite clubs she belonged to and shriek at them about the 95 interchange. Other preservationists where also daily chaining themselves to the rocks and trees of Three Sisters Island in the Potomac to stop construction crews trying to build an I-66 bridge to merge with 95 at the Dupont Circle interchange. While rationality should have mattered, it was ultimately Harriet's shrill voice and school marm attitude that killed the deal. She was Dupont Circle and U Street's nuclear option.

The Anacostia/Kenilworth waterfront area was politically voiceless and got saddled with 295.

I realize this is history but unless we learn from it we repeat it. In the '50's and '60's the proponents of economic revitalization considered it smart growth to build freeways and the "yellow elephant" buildings in Dupont Circle. Washingtonians have a healthy distrust of "experts" coming in and lecturing on the current version of "progress". Sometimes they are very well-meaning people who just don't get it but often they are wolves in sheep clothing sycophants for developers who's interest is understandably the bottom line, and by that I certainly mean no one here.

From my own viewpoint, Washington is unique among major American cities for having preserved a green inner city belt because of the "obstructionists" of the past to preserve the neighborhoods below Florida Avenue of the old l'Enfant Washington. But studies by many respected groups from Casey Trees to DC Sierra Club and many others say that the critical point is when tree canopy decreases below 25% and/or impervious land cover exceeds 75%. Beyond that the ground water level and the air quality shrink dramatically. Air that isn't healthy enough for plants is no better for humans and health related costs soar and the city's expense for waste water collection becomes amazing. Much more than any immediate economic benefits.

For a long time our problem was the city's refusal to replant dead trees but in 2002 we had the DC Re-Forestation Act pushed through by none other than Phil Mendelson (I hesitate to say the name favorably on this site). There is plenty of re-planting of tree box trees now but many of the new ones refuse to grow as the water level below them has shrunk. The culprit seems to be the rapid growth of concrete

coverage, including homeowners who are forced by parking problems to cut down rear yard trees and put in parking pads. I do feel an urgency that something, or several things, must be done now. But that's my own soapbox better suited to other topics.

I apologize if this is a long-winded discourse to some but am happy if it helps anyone understand any part of the context.

by Tom on Apr 15, 2009 1:53 pm • link • report

Tom

you made some great points about the freeway revolts.

However- one very critical and too often overlooked aspect of DC history was the closing of the gigantic Naval Gun Factory in 1962-3. This was, contrary to popular opinion- the largest employer in the city's entire history- and with it's demise went most of the blue collar jobs in DC [ except for the large printing industry and a skeletal ship maintenance capability at the NavyYard].

Most of the history of DC was /has been written by folks who seldom have left NW DC to see the "grittier parts " of the city.

In the book "From Roundshot to Rockets " [ 1949] the US Naval Gun Factory is described as the world's largest - dwarfing anything that Krupp or Vickers ever had.

And to this day- the myth of DC having never had industry" still pervades the minds and media of all of those who come here fro m somewhere else.

by w on Apr 15, 2009 2:42 pm • link • report

Mark, the proposed changes to the 11th street bridge would make the connection from 395 to 295 a piece of cake. No need for you to worry.

by NikolasM on Apr 15, 2009 4:40 pm • link • report

@Richard- Thanks for bringing up the New York Avenue Corridor Study Report. But that was done way back in mid-2007 and surely some DDOT wunderkind has spent an afternoon on a more through study which rationalizes this project.

Some day it might occur to the experts that traffic coming from the Northeast will come from the northeast, not south. This is a lot like trying to figure out how to get the Potomac to flow north instead of south. More than the amount of $ involved, main question is why?

Two major overlooked points:

1) There is a bullet train in our future which will parallel NY Avenue above Florida. That is the perfect time to get a re-do of that stretch with 100% federal funding.

2) Unlike zoning laws, overlays, etc. the Comprehensive Plan is chiseled in stone. 11th Street Bridge/SE Freeway is a corpse.

by Tom on Apr 15, 2009 4:41 pm • link • report

In my experience, Comprehensive Plans are chiseled in silly putty, not stone.

They're not immune to the "not going according to plan" concept either.

Curious why you call the 11th St Bridge a corpse...

by Froggie on Apr 15, 2009 4:52 pm • link • report

I'm with spookiness, not Charlie. The Howard Road exit has always seemed pretty easy, at least compared to the mess of NY Ave. The worse part of that route is the 50-295 interchange, which is a mess of tight loops and merges combined with the aforementioned crumbling pavement.

by ah on Apr 15, 2009 4:58 pm • link • report

I'm with spookiness, not Charlie. The Howard Road exit has always seemed pretty easy, at least compared to the mess of NY Ave. The worse part of that route is the 50-295 interchange, which is a mess of tight loops and merges combined with the aforementioned crumbling pavement.

by ah on Apr 15, 2009 4:59 pm • link • report

I'm with spookiness, not Charlie. The Howard Road exit has always seemed pretty easy, at least compared to the mess of NY Ave. The worse part of that route is the 50-295 interchange, which is a mess of tight loops and merges combined with the aforementioned crumbling pavement.

by ah on Apr 15, 2009 5:00 pm • link • report

@ah, spookiness: I'm usually heading from Arlington, rather than Alexandria, so they might make a difference. also depends on time of day; my trip is usually non-rush hour. I hit 4 lights on NY ave and then I'm back on the highway. Yes, if there is any traffic you have to go down to Howard Rd and do the cut over.

Larger point is I've always felt most of the NY ave traffic was MD drivers heading out, rather than cut through the city folks. IN any case, it is SUCH a painful drive even marginal improvements are not going to create cross-state commuters.

by charlie on Apr 15, 2009 11:29 pm • link • report

Froggie- The Comprehensive Plan by DC's home rule grant has precedence over any other laws or regulations. That why zoning is constantly being revised to conform to it.

That also gives the ability to true smart growth proponents to get this expansion of freeway capacity into DC overturned in court.

It bothers me that people who purport to support smart growth support expansion of a freeway that the Congress for the New Urbanism has on it's list of the top ten freeways that need to be torn down. Especially since it's a freeway that concretes over what should be a vibrant inner core neighborhood.

by Tom on Apr 16, 2009 12:00 am • link • report

Again, HOW is this "an expansion of freeway capacity" into DC?

by Froggie on Apr 16, 2009 6:55 am • link • report

Froggie: According to the EIS, traffic on the Southeast Freeway west of the bridge will increase from 152,500 vehicles per day in 2004 to 164,100 per day in the no-buil3 alternative, but to 178,300 in the preferred alternative. That's 14,000 more cars per day if the no-build numbers are right, or possibly more if they're wrong.

Also, the EIS predicts local traffic on M Street will increase from 15,000 vehicles per day to to 28,000 in the no-build alternative but to 38,000 with the project. 11th Street will increase from 13,000 to 14,000 in no-build and 19,000 with the project.

If all the freeways are already at capacity, how will there be more cars on them? Much of the increase could happen at shoulder periods, perhaps. Either way, the simple fact is that the project engineers believe this project will cause more cars to be coming onto the SE Freeway than do now.

Either they are new trips or they are diverted trips. If they're new trips, the project is increasing overall car use and pollution, and it'd be better to spend the $500 million on transit. If they're diverted trips, then unless we reuse the newly created empty space on other roads for other purposes, those roads will later on start filling up with new trips.

by David Alpert on Apr 16, 2009 10:35 am • link • report

Froggie, I'm with you. I don't see how this is "an expansion of free capacity" either

David: I don't believe diverted trips = more capacity. And there are plenty of highways across the country "over capacity".

by Matthew on Apr 16, 2009 10:53 am • link • report

Matthew: Now we're arguing semantics. If I'd just said "more traffic" instead of "more capacity", would you agree? Freeway capacity is a very elusive quantity that doesn't really exist the way 1960s traffic engineering suggested it does. The fact is that the bridge project will cause there to be more cars coming in. Call that what you will, but it's more traffic and more pollution. If we're going to do that, we should offset it another way.

by David Alpert on Apr 16, 2009 11:00 am • link • report

David -- perhaps I've misunderstood what you've been saying, but it seems that the possible result is not more cars "coming in" but rather more cars "passing through" because the 11th street bridge would make trips from NE to arlington be more likely to go along the SE/SW freeway than currently because NYAve is a mess and the 11th street bridge would not be.

by ah on Apr 16, 2009 11:08 am • link • report

ah: I think the project will cause both more cars coming in and more passing through, but yes, I'm especially concerned with the cut-through traffic because there are clearly preferable alternatives like the newly-widened Woodrow Wilson Bridge.

by David Alpert on Apr 16, 2009 11:17 am • link • report

Froggie- Because it expands the SE freeway. Even DDOT doesn't try and make an excuse that no more people will now use the freeway system, ie: the lame excuse it will all be drivers switching from NY Avenue. DDOT even admits some will be be switching from WW Bridge or other routes to now come through DC.

This eastern freeway system has been planned for demolition so that neighborhoods could return there for many years and re-validating it now is a horrible reversal of planning.

DC has no reason to provide freeways so that Virginians can cut across DC and from what I observed yesterday at the center leg entrance almost all the cars going into it were from Virginia. Half the cars on NY Avenue, 2 of the 4 lanes, go into that tunnel.

The obvious solution to NY Avenue problems is to close the center leg freeway asap. Even a one-month test of this would show NY Avenue traffic falling dramatically. We're under no obligation to provide an alternative for Virginia traffic.( and, again, I should have kept my mouth shut about tunneling under Florida until I checked).

I also Googled the Anacostia freeway (295 south of NY) and found it is not even an interstate highway. It is DC 295, a 100% DC-funded road that extended Kenilworth Avuenue in the late 1950's. That explains why it is so poorly planned and repaired.

Smart growth advocates for years have presented a united front in calling for demolition of these odious left-overs of the freeway system and it's very unwise to cause a split with them after they gained concession on this from city planners.

I suspect some in DC government really believe this will be an economic stimulus in getting more cars to National Park and it's market rate parking and where DC officials have their free luxury sky boxes. Nats have more to worry about than that.

by Tom on Apr 16, 2009 11:20 am • link • report

Tom: You've now referred a few times to smart growth people advocating for this freeway. I don't know if you are talking about me or not, but I never advocated for this project. I wrote the earlier 3-part series criticizing the project. At the time, almost all the comments disagreed with me and defended the project.

At this point, I think this project is a done deal. DDOT plans to use a lot of its stimulus money on it, and they can't go find other projects to replace this one quickly enough even if they wanted to, which they don't. The DC Council had plenty of time to try to stop it and hasn't acted. I see no realistic way to stop it.

But since it's going to happen, I've decided to focus at least on exploring ways to mitigate some negative effects.

Plus, it does have some benefits, like connecting the local street grid. It's definitely arguable whether those benefits justify the costs.

by David Alpert on Apr 16, 2009 11:30 am • link • report

David: Yes, if you said "more traffic" I probably would agree. However, in terms of more pollution, and more traffic, I can't see how this would generate more trips, rather, just change the routing of some trips.

It seems to me that a commuter, traveler, would decide depending on traffic reports which route to travel. Remmeber, the partial interchange is being upgraded to a full interchange. There is no change in the capaicty of the freeway. Yes, the 14th St Bridges are a mess, but in the end, what does it matter if they take the center leg of 395 or take the SE freeway.

by Matthew on Apr 16, 2009 11:32 am • link • report

David- Thanks so much for providing the EIS numbers.

by Tom on Apr 16, 2009 11:34 am • link • report

@Tom: DC has no reason to provide freeways so that Virginians can cut across DC

Isn't that the point of "interstate" freeways? This is a federal money project, your point about the existing 295 notwithstanding, and the rest of 395 is also federally funded.

As for observing Va. plates--not sure that tells us much, since plenty of commuters into (and out of) the city have Va. plates.

by ah on Apr 16, 2009 11:39 am • link • report

@ah: There's no obligation in the stimulus that it go for interstate projects. I think the excuse is that it's the one shovel-ready one that was laying around. Unfortunately it was still laying around because it didn't have necessary support.

I take your point about some local traffic with Virginia plates, just don't find it compelling.

@David: I clearly didn't refer to you. I understand your position in the series on this and appreciate the vast amount of information you've provided in it. If there were a shovel-ready project in my neighborhood (like widening sidewalks on U) I'd be button-holing all my connections for it as an alternative. I also wish implementing performance parking and expanded RPP for the entire old city was ready to go and could be funded as an alternative which would later add a lot of city revenue.

by Tom on Apr 16, 2009 12:43 pm • link • report

It will just make traffic heavier everywhere.......

by Ed on Jun 8, 2009 9:58 am • link • report