Capitol Hill Restoration Society • Washington, DC

Website hosted by DC Access.

Eleventh Street Bridges Project

Update, April 2008
Hearing on Transportation Budget Raises Issues

by Thomas Grahame

Councilmember Jim Graham presided over a marathon Public Works and Transportation Committee hearing April 18 on the allocation of 2008 budget funds for the Department of Transportation (DDOT). One major issue was whether the Council should authorize DDOT to start spending money on the proposed Eleventh Street Bridges expansion, or halt construction spending to explore a less expensive, less damaging alternative? Ward 6 Councilmember Tommy Wells also attended for much of the testimony on the project. His views will be key to whatever decision is made.

Readers of the CHRS News will remember that the issue isn’t whether the current bridge needs replacement or whether there should be a new connection northbound to the Anacostia Freeway. Most observers agree with both. Rather, the issue is whether the current 8 lanes should be expanded to 12, a 50 percent increase in freeway lanes between the Eleventh Street Bridges and I-395. As a result of these additions, DDOT projects almost 50,000 more vehicles will cross the Anacostia River at Eleventh Street. Some would access Eleventh Street northbound directly, others would spill off I-395 between Second and Tenth Streets, SE, near Barracks Row and the Ellen Wilson development, and others would continue past Capitol Hill.

While the current projected cost is a minimum of $475 million, that figure is based on last year’s estimates. New cost estimates will rise considerably due to large recent increases in costs of raw materials and energy, almost all to be paid for by DC taxpayers.

The choice for the Council is whether it is wise to spend more than $475 million dollars for the proposed bridge expansions. These expansions would affect our community in various negative ways, including:

increasing the need for parking in the District;
taking people off mass transit; and
increasing health problems related to pollution

DDOT’s own data is inconclusive, showing a traffic decrease by small percentages on some Capitol Hill Streets and an increase in traffic by small percentages on other Capitol Hill streets. Their analysis actually shows increased traffic jams on Pennsylvania Avenue in Ward 7. Traffic on other, heavily traveled Hill streets was not even analyzed. The Council needs to decide whether it would it be smarter and cheaper to redesign the proposed capacity expansion to cause less harm and cost less money.

Norm Marshall, Principal of Smart Mobility, the transportationconsulting firm that analyzed the Environmental Impact Statement for CHRS, was the leadoff witness, and emphasized points raised in the Smart Mobility study (available at www.CHRS.org). Mr. Marshall was asked to be available at this hearing by Chairman Graham.

Marshall was limited in his ability to provide Chairman Graham with answers to questions raised at the previous DDOT oversight hearing because DDOT had failed to provide the necessary data requested by Chairman Graham. Graham expressed disappointment in DDOT but he did ask Mr. Marshall questions that led Marshall to state that in his experience in assisting other large cities with transportation planning, the trend is to reduce rather than to expand freeway capacity into a city, partly because it increases demands for scarce services such as parking. Marshall also said that he knows of no instances where such a large-scale bridge project is being done primarily with local funds.

Testimony in favor of a smaller, cheaper alternative was also provided by CHRS Board members Barbara Eck and Tom Grahame as well as local activists Chris Herman and Pat Taylor.

A key question is whether the proposed expansion violates the Comprehensive Plan. Speaking for the Committee of 100 on the Federal City, an advocacy group of long standing emphasizing appropriate land use and planning, Ward 7’s Laura Richards also advocated for a smaller alternative. She noted that the proposal to increase the Eleventh Street Bridges capacity ‘by 50 percent from 8 lanes to 12 — runs counter to the Comprehensive Plan...,’ which de-emphasizes reliance on cars. The Plan states: ‘...the city does not foresee making significant investments in road widening to accommodate more autos. Instead, the District will continue to manage roadway resources and provide for viable transportation choices throughout the city.’

Opponents of a smaller, cheaper alternative testified that the current proposal should go forward immediately, either because of the poor condition of the bridges (implying that a delay of 12 to 18 months to identify a smaller, cheaper alternative would be too dangerous, or couldn’t be addressed with shortterm repairs), or because the capacity expansion will reduce traffic numbers on several streets in Hill East and such reductions should occur as soon as possible.

Pat Taylor, however, who lives on Seventeenth Street, SE, one of the streets currently used by commuters traveling at dangerously high speeds, provided written testimony that the reduction in rush hour traffic on Seventeenth Street (from 2,200 to 2,000 vehicles per hour) would be barely noticeable to residents. Taylor suggested that a better and cheaper alternative for traffic-calming in Hill East would be to reduce traffic speeds by converting Seventeenth and Nineteenth Streets to two-way streets with lower speed limits. Taylor noted that DDOT says it will not make such a change until the Eleventh Street Bridges capacity expansion is completed, and she questioned why the most workable and cheapest alternative was not a priority.

Update, Feb. 22, 2008
Report Raises Critical Questions on Bridge Project—
CHRS Asks Tommy Wells to Raise Concerns with DDOT

by Thomas Grahame

Dick Wolf, Barbara Eck, and Tom Grahame of the CHRS Board met with Ward 6 Councilmember Tommy Wells on Friday, February 22, to discuss the findings of the Smart Mobility, Inc., study of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the Eleventh Street Bridges proposal. Smart Mobility, Inc. is a consulting firm providing services in computer modeling and analysis of land use and transportation systems. The study was commissioned by CHRS and is available at www.CHRS.org. In light of the unknown effect on Capitol Hill of the new traffic patterns and because our concerns have gone unanswered for months, CHRS asked Councilmember Wells to submit questions to the DC Department of Transportation (DDOT).

Here are the main points of the Smart Mobility, Inc., study findings:

Almost 50,000 more vehicles per day would cross into DC at the Eleventh Street Bridges, if the capacity expansion proposal goes forward.
There would be a net increase of 44,000 vehicles over the Anacostia on the expanded Eleventh Street and Sousa Bridges combined, after subtracting the slight reduction in traffic estimated for the Sousa Bridge.
A large increase in bridge capacity for vehicles takes people off mass transit.
Increased pollution near busier roadways results in more asthma, respiratory problems, even cardiovascular death.
The project will increase global warming emissions, at a time when the Mayor has pledged to reduce them to 1990 levels in five years.
All proposed alternatives are very similar, all have 12 lanes instead of today’s eight, and all increase capacity to use freeways.
The EIS is misleading because it states several times that “The project does not include adding capacity to the freeway system.” Yet it does add such capacity — two added lanes on the connection between the Eleventh Street Bridges and the Southeast Expressway.
Adding this large amount of vehicular capacity is inconsistent with the planning goals of the District, and of the National Capitol Planning Commission.
The main beneficiaries are Maryland commuters.

Issues Raised by Unexplained Estimated Drop in Future Sousa Bridge Traffic

The EIS shows a projected decrease in Sousa traffic from 93,000 average daily trips (from DDOT website) in 2002 to 77,000 in 2030, under a proposal that provides no changes to Eleventh Street Bridges. Yet estimated traffic on the Eleventh Street Bridges increases in the same time period by almost 40,000 vehicles per day under the same proposal.
Why this big reduction in Sousa traffic over next 22 years? Traffic doesn’t spontaneously decrease over time.
What unspecified new projects cause this reduction? How much will they cost?
Smart Mobility, Inc. suggests that a new boulevard may have something to do with the decrease, but it is probably responsible only for a small portion.
Without the decrease caused by unidentified projects, Smart Mobility, Inc. finds that traffic would be higher than the EIS projects, especially over the Sousa Bridge. We need on-the-record answers from DDOT, to know how they came up with the reduction, the costs involved to account for it, how much extra traffic will occur, and where it will go if the unidentified projects don’t go forward.

Questions for DC Department of Transportation (DDOT)

At the end of this positive meeting, CHRS asked Wells if he would submit the following questions to DDOT for on-the-record answers:

What will be the 2030 impact on traffic in parts of Capitol Hill not previously studied, e.g., Fourth, Sixth, Eighth, and Eleventh Streets north of Pennsylvania Avenue, under the proposal to build the new bridge vs. the proposal to not build the new bridge?
What specific projects are included in the EIS which cause traffic volumes over the Sousa bridge to decline from 93,000 per day in 2002, to 77,000 per day in 2030, in the proposal which anticipates no changes to the Eleventh Street Bridges? How much would such projects cost?
What would be the additional traffic volumes in 2030, in both the build and no-build alternatives, if these unspecified projects were not included in the base forecast?
Ask DDOT to provide street level, three dimensional renderings of the Eleventh Street Bridges as they would look when completed, including the context of buildings on either side of the river.
How is the Mayor going to meet his goal of reducing DC greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels in five years, if we have an added 44,000 cars crossing the Anacostia on the expanded Eleventh Street and Sousa Bridges?

Smart Mobility, Inc.
Review of 11th Street Bridges Final EIS

Summary

We have conducted a review of the 11th Street Bridges Final Environmental Impact Statement. In summary, we have the following concerns about this project, and have concluded that it falls short of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements in several key respects. These are briefly summarized below:

1) The Purpose and Need Statement does not suggest that additional capacity is needed, and the FEIS states numerous times that the project will not increase freeway capacity. However, all of the build alternatives not only include four additional lanes crossing the river, but also increase freeway capacity by 50% at the system’s primary bottleneck, the connection between the 11th Street Bridges and the Southeast Freeway. Adding freeway capacity is inconsistent with planning goals of the District of Columbia and the National Capital Planning Commission. Alternatives should be developed, evaluated, and refined that do not increase the freeway capacity in the project area.

2) The increased roadway capacity proposed results in much larger traffic volumes in the study area, including 44,000 additional Anacostia River crossings per day. The increases on the 11th Street Bridges (49,000 vehicles per day) are 9 times the reduction shown for the Pennsylvania Avenue Sousa Bridge Avenue Bridge. If the 11th Street Bridges were done without the Southeast Freeway boulevard conversion assumed in all 2030 traffic analyses in the FEIS, traffic volumes in the study area would be higher, especially on the Pennsylvania Avenue Sousa Bridge.

3) The impacts of the project are not fully disclosed or considered in the analysis. Peak hour freeway traffic will increase by up to 85% on the Anacostia Freeway (also called Kenilworth Avenue or DC 295), and by over 12% on the Southeast Freeway heading into central DC during the afternoon peak hour. Freeway analysis was done only for the afternoon peak hour but should also be done for the morning peak hour which could be the worst case. The limits of the analysis should be extended to the downtown and along the Anacostia Freeway.

4) The increased traffic that will result from the project will result in increased air pollutant concentrations relative to the no build alternative. However, the FEIS only compares the air pollutant concentrations to the standards, and not to the no build conditions. Further, the effects of increased air pollution are not adequately considered for disadvantaged populations near the project, especially those living near Kenilworth Avenue. A large number of studies have documented health problems for those living near to heavily traveled roadways.

5) The alternatives are far too similar, and provide an inadequate range of options. All of the alternatives will significantly increase traffic on the Southeast and Anacostia freeways, which will restrict future options from consideration for downsizing or avoiding increased capacity on these facilities.

6) The Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG) transportation model relied on is inaccurate even for the base year. The hundreds of precise numbers presented in the FEIS for future traffic volumes, speeds and delays are misleading as they are highly uncertain. The model overestimates traffic volumes and underestimates transit use. The model deficiencies bias the results towards exaggerating any traffic benefits that may result from the preferred alternative.

Click here to download PDF of the report