Fascinating article! I know just which curve you're talking about. Incidentally, it's the site of the Clay-Randolph duel, as noted by a historical marker there.

That area is funky in a lot of ways; a finger of Arlington County extends up Route 123. Also, there's a Frank Lloyd Wright house up there somewhere--a few doors down from Prince Bandar's compound.

Although Chain Bridge is often a mess, I'm glad they never built those other bridges. It would've ruined neighborhoods on both sides.

by JB on Nov 4, 2010 2:04 pm • link • report

I had often wondered the same thing.

by Paul C on Nov 4, 2010 2:06 pm • link • report

For the areas where they're there, the property lines on Google Maps can be interesting. For example, the space to extend Glebe Road to the Potomac for this never-built bridge is still cut out, meaning it probably belongs to VDOT or the county. Most of the land for the northern branch from Glebe Road to the GW Parkway is mostly still cut out, though it looks like there are two houses there now.

Also, the 1961 map has a tiny bit of DC, complete with many unbuilt freeways, including the one that would have gone under the Lincoln Memorial.

by Tim on Nov 4, 2010 2:17 pm • link • report

The roads on the '61 plan are nuts. Except for the Yorktown Blvd connection to the Parkway. That's a winner in my book.

It also shows the bridge over Spout Run Parkway, which is a good story in its own right.

by Lou on Nov 4, 2010 2:17 pm • link • report

Most of the land for the northern branch from Glebe Road to the GW Parkway is mostly still cut out, though it looks like there are two houses there now.

From the 1961 map it looks like that may have been private property then as well, and VDOT would have needed to exercise eminent domain.

Fascinating tidbit of historical information, this article is.

by ah on Nov 4, 2010 2:42 pm • link • report

Part of the Arlington compromise is the HOV restriction, which was originally HOV 4 and is currently diluted to HOV 2. Of course, some are trying to repeal that as well. For long time Arlington residents, I can see why that would create ire.

by Andrew on Nov 4, 2010 2:44 pm • link • report

Side note on that part of Glebe, from Walker Chapel to the curve was the prime late-night drag strip for those so-inclined back in the day. The bonus being if the cops showed up you could be in DC in no time.

by Lou on Nov 4, 2010 2:50 pm • link • report

"...gone under the Lincoln Memorial."

WRONG- such would have gone under the Lincoln Memorial Traffic Circle.

They appear to have made another mistaken bridge cancellation, however the DC side should have a partially tunneled approach which IFIAK was never planned.

BTW- I have a partial scan of this Arizona Avenue Bridge from the 1956 NWF report, which I need to get up on A Trip Within The Beltway.

David- You should have a 'historic' list of sites to include those such as mine which you may not agree with my philosphy but I suspect that you do appreciate the historical resources.

by Douglas A. Willinger on Nov 4, 2010 3:00 pm • link • report

It should be noted that the 1969 NoVA Major Thoroughfare Plan had a somewhat different interchange proposal at this location. I'll see if I can find the map photo I took and post it.

by Froggie on Nov 4, 2010 3:04 pm • link • report

That's a nice lookin' railroad you got there on the eastern side of the Potomac river...be a real shame if somethin' were to happen to it.

by Bilsko on Nov 4, 2010 3:09 pm • link • report

That's a nice lookin' railroad you got there on the eastern side of the Potomac river...be a real shame if somethin' were to happen to it.

< /Western voice snarky comment >

by Bilsko on Nov 4, 2010 3:11 pm • link • report

The Columbia Pike overpasses at Glebe Road and Walter Reed Drive along with the express bypass along the Pike between those two streets would have surely done wonders for that section of road. Instead of being one of the more vibrant parts of the Pike it would have likely ended up looking like the intersection of Arlington Blvd and Washington Blvd.

On another Pike related note, I noticed that the proposed Metro line down Columbia Pike is not mentioned on the 71 plan but it was part of the original plan, was it not? I seem to remember seeing a map with a Columbia Pike line to Skyline City at the National Building Museum. In fact, Skyline City was built because a Metro line was intended to terminate there right? There's even a spur tunnel at the Pentagon station where the line was to split from the Blue/Yellow. When did it get canceled?

by Teyo on Nov 4, 2010 3:26 pm • link • report

The original Metrorail system was built almost exactly as it was designed. The Columbia Pike line was on the map as a possible future extension, and I believe the stub tunnel is at Pentagon City (not Pentagon).

All construction beyond the original system has indeed more or less followed the original proposed extensions. (Ie. Dulles and Largo).

Thank God that Arlington got its way, and got an underground line. The fact that the Tyson's line is aboveground will severely hinder the development of that area.

by andrew on Nov 4, 2010 3:42 pm • link • report

@andrew:
The tunnel provision for the proposed Columbia Pike (VA) Metro line is at Pentagon.

by Matt Johnson on Nov 4, 2010 3:44 pm • link • report

@andrew, the above-below ground question in Arlington was a bit more complicated. The original plan was to continue Metro in the 66 median all the way to the river, and it would therefore be above ground. Arlington negotiated it to run through the Wilson Blvd corridor, below ground. I don't think there was ever any thought to running it above ground on its current path.

So it was really the decision to run it through an existing commercial corridor instead of interstate ROW that allowed for the development we have today.

by Lou on Nov 4, 2010 3:59 pm • link • report

Links that go with my preceeding post:

Lincoln Memorial traffic Circle, rather then the monument itself:
http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2007/03/i-695-south-leg_18.html

1957 Northwest Freeway showing Arizona Avenue Bordge interchange:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_BZaPGsbLyHM/SVm9ORbbcXI/AAAAAAAADgI/xODYUHYwoVY/s1600-h/1957_NW_Freeway_Chain_Bridge_Plan_1280.GIF

Above is from within 1957 Plans:
http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2006/12/1950-62-plans.html

Here's a Nebraska Avenue Bridge proposal form the early 1950s:
http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2006/12/early-1950s-plans.html

by Douglas A. Willinger on Nov 4, 2010 5:15 pm • link • report

@Douglas

I find the amount of research that you do fascinating and some of your proposals are interesting. I would support having your site listed in the links section of this site.

I know it might be blasphemous to support new freeways on this site, but I like the idea of continuing I-395 beneath New York Avenue. If the tunnel went as far as the Checkers, where Rt. 50 essentially becomes a highway, it might actually alleviate some of the traffic on NY Ave, and maybe allow it to develop more as a walkwable avenue than the pseudo-highway it is today. Ideally, 395 would be underground its entire length of the city as would the Southeast Freeway. Sadly, I feel like such an undertaking would be akin to Boston's Big Dig. It turned out nice in the end, but getting there was a nightmare for Boston.

I think one of the stumbling blocks is the cut and dig method of constructing the tunnels. It's certainly cheaper than just tunneling, but the disturbances to the surroundings are usually too much. Another problem might be the marshy nature of the area around the Potomac and Tidal Pool. The diagonal tunnel connecting I-66 to I-395 would likely flood pretty quickly if pumps broke down or if the Potomac were to flood. However, if the tunnel were to be built without using cut and cover, I think that might make sense as well as there is currently no direct route between crossing the bridge on 395 and getting on 66. Is that on purpose, by the way?

by Teyo on Nov 4, 2010 6:01 pm • link • report

@Teyo: Any tunneling at all would cost a TON of money, even cut-and-cover.

by Tim on Nov 4, 2010 6:08 pm • link • report

Teyo-

The authorities have crippled the I-395 New York Avenue tunnel concept, with insisting upon only considering the "Rom Linton" alignment with its FHWA deficient sharped curved tunnel wrapping around the rear of Bibleway Church (think of line of sight issues in a curved tunnel).

The 1971 plan for a cut and cover tunnel with its portal just east of North Capitol Street would provide adequate geometry, but displace some 600 late 1800s dwellings which are esentially the vanguard of historic late 1800s residential Washington, D.C.

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2009/01/i-395-extension.html

My 'superior option' would provide even better geometry (again think of curved tunnel), and displace only as few as 33, assuming no displacement along the north side of O Street NW. Yet the authorities absolutely refuse to even consider it, even as far far higher levels of displacement are tolerated for new real estate development elsewhere.

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

Often overlooked is the fact that extending such a tunnel along the New York Avenue corridor is better done along its northern side for the segment east of the B&O MB RR. Note the significent linear parkinglots along the north side of New York Avenue in the vicinity of the long demolished Diplomat Hotel- an ideal area to dig an trench and cover it over with urban deck and new development, all including a new WMATA rail line.

I do not see how this is comparable to the bad things about Boston's Central Artery Tunnel Project, unless it is to have similarly bad contract bidding and concrete mixing. The physical conditions in Boston of building a new wider freeway tunnel beneath an existing and in use elevated freeway, and building another tunneled freeway through soil conditions akin to molasus (the Gillette Point I-90 extension) are far far more difficult then anything along the New York Avenue, nor the B&O red Line corridor alongisde Catholic University of American- that is phyisically.

Yes, the area of the South Leg is far marshier, though hardly imsurmountable (and a bizarre situation conisering that the diagional tunnel had the political support but for the trees that ended up being displaced ANYWAY). IMHO, a realistic reason why this link was not built was to avoid overloading the SW Freeway (at least for the eastbound portion).

Tim- all of this would be a mere pittance for a Federal government with its $1 trillion in stimulus spending.

I do find it most bizarre that the Pentagon has not promoted any of these links, as if national security mattered less then the whils of a certain entity in control of certain real estae points- aka Georgetwon University and CUA, in what is essentually New Rome:

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2010/09/washington-dcs-supreme-bridge-builder.html

by Douglas A. Willinger on Nov 4, 2010 6:31 pm • link • report

Teyo-

As for the SE Freeway:

People are squandering a golden opportunity for constructing a portion of its future underground replacement with regard to the CSX Virginia Avenue RR tunnel expansion. Rather then the current project to dig and later fill a temporary RR tunnel, I say use the entire 90 or 100 right of way for an open box tunnel that can accomodate the future eastbound underground SE Freeway. Alas, what little activism I am aware of continues to focus on stopping the project outright.

http://chartxdc.blogspot.com/2010/04/csx-va-avenue-tunnel-risks-and-benefits.html

The portion to the eats of the 11th Street Bridge could be undergrounded without regrading simply with a terraced lid that should also cover the RR. Alas, the current planning NEEDLESSLY destroys this freeway connection in favor of a surface street that increases pedestrian-vehicular conflict.

Beware the trap of hating "Big Digs" rather then shoddy fraternal order contract featherbedding and the shoddy construction that comes from such political masonry...

by Douglas A. Willinger on Nov 4, 2010 6:41 pm • link • report

For those who are interested, here's a map from the 1969 Northern Virginia Major Thoroughfare Plan, showing the proposed ramps from that study. Note the "extension" of Glebe Rd northward, crossing underneath the GW Pkwy, and tying directly into 123.

by Froggie on Nov 4, 2010 6:41 pm • link • report

Here's the image of the Arizona Avenue Bridge that I scanned from photocopies of the 1957 Northwest Freeway Report.

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2010/11/arizona-avenue-bridge-to-chain-bridge.html

by Douglas A. Willinger on Nov 4, 2010 10:03 pm • link • report

@Teyo
The Columbia Pike Route was never canceled, It was simply designated as future in the same way Largo and Dulles Airport were designated future.

@andrew
The junction bellmouths and stubs for the Columbia Pike route are in the south end of the Pentagon station not the Pentagon City Station. One can see the outbound stub by looking in the tunnel from the south end of the lower level platform.

by Sand Box John on Nov 4, 2010 10:34 pm • link • report

My idea for that Arizona Avenue Bridge would have the connecting D.C. northwest radial via a twinned Canal Road (much in the fashion of Colorado's Glenwood Canyon segment of I-70), rather then the trolly route, and to have the D.C. approach via a depressed widened Arizona Avenue swath to MacArthur Blvd, with connecting roadways, and a path to there start a bored tunnel taking advantage of the rising topography to ultimately continue towards Tenly Circle, and perhaps an extension of such to Military Road.

by Douglas A. Willinger on Nov 4, 2010 10:51 pm • link • report

Sorry. I guess I misremembered where those tunnels were. My bad!

I actually agree with a lot of what Doug says. Although I don't share his regret that the inner/outer beltways never got built, I also don't think that all future freeway development should be off-limits. If it were possible to minimize disruption to existing structures, it'd be great to put freeways under K St NW and NY Ave NE.

The current configuration of NY Ave offers the worst of both worlds. It's too busy for any meaningful development to occur along it, and for the commuters/drivers who use it, it's way too slow and crowded. It's easily one of the worst parts of Washington.

by andrew on Nov 4, 2010 11:03 pm • link • report

My regrets about the 1970s cancellations should not be misinterpreted as having regrets about the cancellations of such things as the earlier cross town I-66 concept (the new swath along Florida Avenue and U Streets, and the abomination of the 1964 NCF study).

Indeed, I can even say that the 1970s cancellation were good strictly with regard to the I-395 tunneled extension as then planned- MY plan is way better yet it remains unconsidered.

Likewise with the South Leg. Not because of the absurdity of not building it over preserbing trees that were felled anyway, but because I belive that such a design should include an underwater connector tunnel to VA 27.

My criticisms regard the foolisnes of making these outright demappings, hence supposeldy relieving the authorities of any responsibility to preserve right of ways and easements, especially regarding the B&O NCF. Also the 1970s plans wre short on cover- the eastern extension of the SE Freeway to RFK should be covered with a waterfront terrace, yet that was AFAIK never even considered.

by Douglas A. Willinger on Nov 4, 2010 11:19 pm • link • report

Bethesda though should have built a depressed version of the Northwest Freeway a few hundred feet parallelling ots eastern side designed to be covered with new development. consodering both the traffic need and the fact that not building the freeway did not avoid the massive domolition and reconstruction of real estate that occurred, spurred by the WMATA station.

It's the segment south of Tenley Circle in DC that truely needed an alternative design to those appearing in the 1957 and 1959 reports- perhaps something akin to a briefly considered cir. 1957 proposal for a presumably deep drilled 'Catherdrial Heights Tunnel' that I recall seeing a brief newspaper mention.

by Douglas A. Willinger on Nov 4, 2010 11:25 pm • link • report

For a particularly egregious example of failing to preserve right of way, just go to the intersection of New Jersey Avenue and K Street, and check out how that apartment house on the west side of New Jersey Avenue just north of K Street, blocks the un-opened tunneled northbound ramp to I-395.

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2009/02/dc-corridor-chock-epidemic.html

by Douglas A. Willinger on Nov 4, 2010 11:33 pm • link • report

Doug, for all your rigorous research, I haven't seen you address the cost and disruption that a sensitive insertion of a huge highway into an urban condition. The Big Dig, the Nordtangente/Dreirosenbrucke in Basel, the Tunel Blanka in Prague, and the third ring road in Moscow have all been hugely expensive and problematic. Plus, they can't be easily expanded like a surface road can.

It seems like the Metro was a more economical solution, and will continue to be so as long as we want to preserve the city that we have.

by Neil Flanagan on Nov 5, 2010 8:03 am • link • report

Great map.

Building an extension from Yorktown to the Parkway would make a lot of sense, and it would have been nice to have the Three Sisters Bridge to get traffic off the Key Bridge. I go running in those park areas now, so I'm happy to have the green space, but both would have made North Arlington much easier to use.

Also, the map answers the mystery of North Scott St and the bridge over 66/Lee Highway - right now it runs as an extension of Key Blvd, but on the map you can see it was supposed to connect with Wilson directly.

by charlie on Nov 5, 2010 8:57 am • link • report

@Douglas: Do you have any idea how much this would cost? Where the money will come from?

You dismiss the cost concerns by saying that the federal government has a huge deficit. If you have a $500,000 mortgage, you're not going to eat $200 dinners, just because it'd be a "pittance" in comparison to your debt.

Then you have to consider the cost of expanding it was traffic grows, and the fact that traffic will grow faster due to induced demand. It's not easy in the least to make a tunnel wider.

by Tim on Nov 5, 2010 9:17 am • link • report

@Neil Flanagan, @Tim:
Half the battle is knowing when to give up. Douglas is not a part of the "movable middle." Nothing you do will convince him that building freeways is not the answer. Nothing you do will convince him that the social cost of freeway building could ever exceed the infrastructural benefit.

by Matt Johnson on Nov 5, 2010 9:23 am • link • report

I've never driven on this road but find the situation and your research fascinating, thank you for doing it. :)

by Andrew L. on Nov 5, 2010 9:38 am • link • report

@Froggie - thanks for that link to the graphic of the Pimmit Run Expwy - really cool looking at all this old stuff.

by Matt Glazewski on Nov 5, 2010 9:42 am • link • report

@Matt G

Thanks. I'll probably (slowly) post more as time and opportunity allow.

by Froggie on Nov 5, 2010 9:58 am • link • report

"Matt Johnson- Nothing you do will convince him that the social cost of freeway building could ever exceed the infrastructural benefit."

More dogma that disregards the benifits and the feasibilities.

It's like everything I have wriiten about design, routing etc, simply does not matter- because the best route of the most important road goes through a masonic property.

by Douglas A. Willinger on Nov 5, 2010 10:24 am • link • report

Tunnels can be supplemented far more easily then widened.

There is no excuse for not extending I-395, especially from those that fail to consider my superior alternative and instead insist upon the geometriclaly defcient Ron Linton plan.

The roads are not being extended because of $$$. Instead it is about a top down dictatorship represented by the entities owning the key properties (think CUA and Masonic Eastern Star), exemplified by the COG Transporation Planning Board Citizen's Advosry Council going from an open memebrship to one that is invitation only.

by Douglas A. Willinger on Nov 5, 2010 10:29 am • link • report

I think one benefit of having freeways in tunnels is that it does become more difficult to widen them, resulting in people choosing to use other modes of transportation once the freeways are to capacity. Widen I-66? No problem, just cut down some trees. Widen I-395 under NY Avenue? Sorry, no can do.

On the other hand, building new freeways would just encourage people to see building new freeways as the solution to traffic congestion. Of course, it's been stated many times that more freeways attract more traffic, so I'm not such a fan of more freeways myself.

Personally, I'd rather see 395 disappear along with the Whitehurst Freeway through Georgetown and tearing it down is certainly cheaper than burying it underground. I see the underground freeway idea as a pipe dream, along the lines of that transit map we had a while back linking Baltimore and DC systems. It's a nice "what if" but I think we should realize it's not going to happen.

As for masonic conspiracies, I find it a little hard to believe. The roads are not being extended because it's not financially feasible. If freeways were free to build, we'd all have our own exit by now.

by Teyo on Nov 5, 2010 10:55 am • link • report

by Matt Johnson-

@Neil Flanagan, @Tim:
Half the battle is knowing when to give up. Douglas is not a part of the "movable middle." Nothing you do will convince him that building freeways is not the answer. Nothing you do will convince him that the social cost of freeway building could ever exceed the infrastructural benefit.

RE: All three of yous have no beefs with VDOT building I-66, I-395, Springfield Interchange, and VA I-495 HOT Lanes but as soon as the thought of more Highways being possibly built in Maryland and DC-Maryland Connectors you people want to pull out all kinds of scare tactics and numerous tricks to Scam people into not supporting Infrastructure in Maryland/DC on the Exact same Level as Virginia.......

by chris on Nov 5, 2010 12:13 pm • link • report

@chris:
Tell you what, you look through all of my comments and find one - just one - where I've ever supported a freeway project and I'll concede your point. But you're not going to find one.

I do not, have not, and will not support the construction of, widening of, or rebuilding of I-66, I-395, the Springfield Interchange, or the I-495 HOT Lanes.

I'm of course, also opposed to freeway building in my home state of Maryland.

Luckily the Masons and the Pope are on my side, and will continue to thwart freeway building in and around the region.

by Matt Johnson on Nov 5, 2010 12:19 pm • link • report

by Teyo-

I think one benefit of having freeways in tunnels is that it does become more difficult to widen them, resulting in people choosing to use other modes of transportation once the freeways are to capacity. Widen I-66? No problem, just cut down some trees. Widen I-395 under NY Avenue? Sorry, no can do.

On the other hand, building new freeways would just encourage people to see building new freeways as the solution to traffic congestion. Of course, it's been stated many times that more freeways attract more traffic, so I'm not such a fan of more freeways myself.

Personally, I'd rather see 395 disappear along with the Whitehurst Freeway through Georgetown and tearing it down is certainly cheaper than burying it underground. I see the underground freeway idea as a pipe dream, along the lines of that transit map we had a while back linking Baltimore and DC systems. It's a nice "what if" but I think we should realize it's not going to happen.

As for masonic conspiracies, I find it a little hard to believe. The roads are not being extended because it's not financially feasible. If freeways were free to build, we'd all have our own exit by now.

RE: Statement above looks like a hidden agenda to sabotage ALL Highway building in Maryland and DC-Maryland Connections in hopes that the Federal Funding for Highways in Maryland-DC will ALL go to Virginia which explains why Virginia is Soo Damn Fortunate to Build and Widen Highways such as the Springfield Interchange, I-66, I-395, and I-495 HOT Lanes....

by chris on Nov 5, 2010 12:22 pm • link • report

@chris

You best be trolling.

by Teyo on Nov 5, 2010 12:24 pm • link • report

by Matt Johnson-

@chris:
Tell you what, you look through all of my comments and find one - just one - where I've ever supported a freeway project and I'll concede your point. But you're not going to find one.

I do not, have not, and will not support the construction of, widening of, or rebuilding of I-66, I-395, the Springfield Interchange, or the I-495 HOT Lanes.

I'm of course, also opposed to freeway building in my home state of Maryland.

Luckily the Masons and the Pope are on my side, and will continue to thwart freeway building in and around the region.

RE: Being vocal against New Highway building and Widening in Maryland and Maryland-DC Connections but are remaining silent(until confrontation) about Freeway Building in Virginia speaks High Volumes........

by chris on Nov 5, 2010 12:26 pm • link • report

@chris:
I have deleted one of your comments. We do not tolerate ad hominem attacks at Greater Greater Washington. If you disagree with someone, argue with their points, don't call them names or insult them.

by Matt Johnson on Nov 5, 2010 12:33 pm • link • report

@Matt

I would've left it on there. It kind of wraps up his argument nicely by demonstrating the utter lack of one. Also, my calling him a troll would probably fall under the same category of attack. Also, I guess troll is a race now? :-D

by Teyo on Nov 5, 2010 12:36 pm • link • report

Teyo-

The North Central Freeway was definitely botched.

JFK said it should hug the RR, yet the study that started in late 1963 and published its report in October 1964 had no such route, but instead 37 routes all over the map with a recommended route that partially followed the RR but with serious deviations in Takoma Park MD and Brookland DC upon far more destructive routes that were longer.

By late 1966, the supplementary report comes out, and according to a 1967 letter by Takoma Park, MD resident Duncan Wall, people felt their concerns were being met, but for the waffeling of occicals favoring the 1964 plan!

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2010/05/significence-of-waffling-on-b-north.html

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2010/05/1960s-washington-dc-freeway-planning.html

And then the officials continue to so waffel through 1968- just long enough to get the USNCPC to do a 180.

Why do none of the anti-freeway in any form ideologues never want to address any of this?

We do know what happened to JFK in late 1963.

by Douglas A. Willinger on Nov 5, 2010 2:06 pm • link • report

"Luckily the Masons and the Pope are on my side, and will continue to thwart freeway building in and around the region."

It may be more correct to say that you are on their side rather then the other way around (hey- I'll say that in general about the fear of anyone but myself to spotlight the Vatican's discraceful abortion of the NCPC Extending the Legacuy South Capitol Mall, and Masonry's discrace for not standing up, and the masons for all behaving like puppets on a string.)

by Douglas A. Willinger on Nov 5, 2010 2:09 pm • link • report

"As for masonic conspiracies, I find it a little hard to believe. The roads are not being extended because it's not financially feasible. If freeways were free to build, we'd all have our own exit by now."

Just look at the best I-95 route (PEPCO-B&O) and the two major properties along it (or in it in the case of the Eastern Star property at 6000 NH Ave), rather then an absurdity that since its is not free, then its too expensive (sounds like the supposed libertarians against rail transit- along with everyone else who fails to question why RR's must pay property taxes when we do not accept such aubsurdities for highways).

Sh*t, if only the authorities had forgiven the property taxes, my home county of Westchester, NY would still have its 'NY, Westchester and Boston' [sic Boston should be White Plains) RR foolishly scrapped during the early 1940s.

Me thinks that both 'left' and right' are politically screwed up.

by Douglas A. Willinger on Nov 5, 2010 2:14 pm • link • report

@Doug

You are clearly very passionate about these topics and you do a substantial amount of research into the history of planning freeways as well as suggesting alternatives to decades-old plans. However, with all due respect, some of the conclusions that you draw are a little hard for me to follow or believe. As much as I am sure the Pope, the masons, and JFK all had opinions about freeways, I have a hard time linking masonic conspiracy theories and JFK's assassination to several highways never getting built.

Also, since railroads are privately owned for the most part, they must pay taxes whereas Interstates, State Highways, and other public roads are not owned by private entities (hence the "public" in their names) and therefore do not pay taxes.

by Teyo on Nov 5, 2010 2:17 pm • link • report

Teyo-

I am amazed that so few if any transit advocates question the property tax rule taht places them at an unfair disadvantage that I would change.

I am also amazed that the idea of highe level manipulation is something so verbotten, never mind the clear botching of the plans, and the entities in control of key spots along or within the route.

Do you really think that masonry has nothing to do with WDC planning, or that the history of New Rome ended in a wisper, and Georgetown University's influence upon the government non-existent?

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2010/09/washington-dcs-supreme-bridge-builder.html

Don't forget what JFK personally dedicated only about 11 days before St Cecillia's Day 1963.

by Douglas A. Willinger on Nov 5, 2010 2:31 pm • link • report

Soooo...........how about that Glebe Road curve, eh? Crazy!
<</attempts to divert conversation away from arguing>>

by Matt Glazewski on Nov 5, 2010 3:36 pm • link • report

by Douglas A. Willinger-

Do you really think that masonry has nothing to do with WDC planning, or that the history of New Rome ended in a wisper, and Georgetown University's influence upon the government non-existent?

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2010/09/washington-dcs-supreme-bridge-builder.html

Don't forget what JFK personally dedicated only about 11 days before St Cecillia's Day 1963.

RE:

Mr. Doug have you ever noticed that right after most of the Freeways in DC/Maryland were canceled; different areas in Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, and Texas started a Major BOOOM with MASSIVE Multi-Lane Freeway Expansions which has really help the Economy for Northern Virginia, Raliegh-Durham, Charlotte, Nashville/Memphis, Atlanta, Miami, Houston, and Dallas-Fort Worth........

As we speak North Carolina is Completing 3 Beltways serving Charlotte, Greensboro, and Raleigh...

The way I see it is that if DC/Maryland continue to Fall Back on Highway Expansions the State of Maryland will continue to lose Business, Middle, and Upper Class Population Growth to the Neighboring States South of the Potomac River.........

by chris on Nov 5, 2010 8:24 pm • link • report

Helpful would be a series of map overlays, to make these various points.

The amount of chicanery in the trashing of JFK's B&O Route North Central Freeway clearly indicates high level colusion.

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2010/05/1960s-washington-dc-freeway-planning.html

BTW- correction, it was November 14, 1963, only 8 days before his assassination:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrSTTXBKhuU

by Douglas A. Willinger on Nov 5, 2010 8:34 pm • link • report

As we speak North Carolina is Completing 3 Beltways serving Charlotte, Greensboro, and Raleigh...

...of which Raleigh's is now being built as a toll road, Charlotte's is being argued (locals would prefer widening the southern segment over building the remaining segment), and Greensboro's is on hold due to no money.

by Froggie on Nov 6, 2010 7:46 am • link • report

Thanks for posting about this -- I've long wondered but been too lazy to research myself. Several commenters had intriguing tidbits to add too.

@JB (first commenter): I understand your point about ruining neighborhoods on either side. I have another observation to share, from my daily commutes down Arizona, across Chain Bridge, and up 123 toward Tyson's: horribly backed up traffic that clogs residential streets. I imagine (but don't know for sure) that residents on both sides of the river hate rush hours as much as the drivers do, because we have too much traffic going over too small of a roadway, increasing idling cars and making crossing the street, or even driving around in your own neighborhood, challenging.

I'm not saying a Glebe-to-Macarthur bridge is the solution, but there is a problem crying out for a solution there. I'd certainly take a Metrorail spur connecting Tyson's to Tenleytown, or a Potomac-to-Georgetown line, or heck even a regularly running bus line across the river, over more roadways.

by Graham S on Nov 6, 2010 9:14 am • link • report

"even a regularly running bus line across the river, over more roadways."

How are buses to run across the river without a roadway?

To be anti road is to be anti transportation.

by Douglas A. Willinger on Nov 6, 2010 1:10 pm • link • report

by Douglas A. Willinger-

To be anti road is to be anti transportation.

RE: The funny thing is that the DC/Maryland is the only area I know of in the United States that allows anti-Growth Freaks DICTATE the control of not Building New Highways and Widening Existing Highways and Major Surface Roadways......

This anti-Highway BS does not fly in any other Large Metropolitan Cities/Suburbs of the US.........

by chris on Nov 6, 2010 4:19 pm • link • report

Road include Railroads- and notably I got more anti road dogma from 'bossi' against a RR tunnel connecting Manhattan with New Jersey.

Yes, these anti road types fit with an elitists' depopulationist agenda that even surfaced during a recent controversy surrounding some remarcks made by some overated new urbainist guru against visitors who were only in their 20s.

NONE of their organizations, particularly the elitist masonic 'Committee of 100 on the Federal City' deserve their image of legitimacy as grass roots organizations.

by Douglas A. Willinger on Nov 6, 2010 4:23 pm • link • report

I guess what I thought folks would understand I meant was, a bus running over Chain Bridge or even out across the Legion Bridge between NW DC and Tyson's would provide a mass transit option that doesn't currently exist and might alleviate some of the traffic problems, without significant construction costs.

But I realize I haven't studied traffic patterns scientifically to know whether one is feasible. Just on my wish list.

by Graham S on Nov 7, 2010 5:02 pm • link • report

Graham-

Without an Arizona or Nebraska Avenue Bridge, such a bus route would best provide express service to Tysons by Canal Road/ Clara Barton Parkway to the Capital Beltway; yet that Canal Road/ Clara Barton Parkway is only partially completed (its's not a continious 2 lanes per direction), and still has to deel with the DC approach to the existing Chain Bridge. At least that is going to have to be built out (expanded), without any all new bridge crossing.

An Arizona or Nebraska Avenue Bridge would not only provide a direct link to Virginia 123, as well as circumferential service to the south, and would be a new bridge in the entire area between the Capital Beltway and the Georgetown Key Bridge now serviced only by Chainbridge.

That's clearly insufficent for such a large area.

by Douglas A. Willinger on Nov 8, 2010 12:23 am • link • report

A fine example of supporting closet racism anti-Population Growth(anti-Maryland Growth) Communism:

@chris
You best be trolling.

by Teyo on Nov 5, 2010 12:24 pm

@chris:
I have deleted one of your comments. We do not tolerate ad hominem attacks at Greater Greater Washington. If you disagree with someone, argue with their points, don't call them names or insult them.

by Matt Johnson on Nov 5, 2010 12:33 pm

@Matt
I would've left it on there. It kind of wraps up his argument nicely by demonstrating the utter lack of one. Also, my calling him a troll would probably fall under the same category of attack. Also, I guess troll is a race now? :-D

by Teyo on Nov 5, 2010

by chris on Nov 9, 2010 4:15 am • link • report

@chris:
I would appreciate it if you would tone down your rhetoric. If your goal is to win people over to your side, the unsupported statements and vitriolic labeling you have been making is not the way to go.

I believe you have called me a racist and a communist for not supporting freeway building. I'm not sure how that follows, but I understand you feel rather strongly on the subject. However, calling me names is not going to convince me I'm wrong, nor will it convince anyone else that you are correct.

Now, as for the statements you quote, it's never easy to moderate comments in threads like this one. As far as I could tell, Teyo was asking if you were trolling. And with the statements you were making, someone not familiar with your postings could easily come to that conclusion. So I did not delete the comment.

Your comments, on the other hand, clearly crossed the line. I warned you to steer away from this behavior.

But it is clear that you have not done so. It also appears that you will not do so.

If you are not willing to be a part of a civil discourse on these threads, I suggest you take your ideas elsewhere. But I am willing to give you another chance.

Be civil, or we will ask you to leave.

Because you have repeatedly crossed the line, we will delete all future comments from you until such time as you meet the following conditions. Should you not come into compliance with these conditions or should you fall out of compliance in the future, your ability to comment here will be revoked.

1. You may not use name-calling in your posts, period. No ad hominems either.
2. You must use a consistent name and email address. You can't change continuously.
3. When quoting people, don't copy and paste whole comments. Refer to the person (@Matt Johnson, for instance) and only copy the applicable section, setting the quote off with quotations or italics.
4. Send an email to info@ggwash.org indicating that you understand these conditions and agree to abide by them. And also that you understand that violation of these terms will result in the permanent suspension of your commenting privileges.

by Matt Johnson on Nov 9, 2010 11:23 am • link • report