You are on page 1of 164

Anacostia Waterfront Initiative

Transportation
Master Plan
2014 UPDATE

This page intentionally left blank

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

15

Ta b l e o f C o n t e n t s

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section 1 Executive Summary Section 2 Purpose
2.1 2.2 History & Vision of the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative (AWI) DDOTs AWI Study Area

3 9
9 11

Section 3 Project Development Process


3.1 3.2 Project Phases Project Prioritization

13
13 17

Section 4 Project Implementation


4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 Project Financing Program Management Contract Packaging Construction Management Maintenance of Trafc (MOT)

21
21 25 25 26 26

Section 5 Project Descriptions South Capitol Street Corridor


5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge Rehabilitation Ballpark Roadways (2008 Near-Term Improvements) South Capitol Street Phase 1 - Segments 1 and 2 South Capitol Street Phase 2 - Segments 4 and 5 (2008 Long-Term Improvements) I-295/Malcolm X Bridge Rehabilitation I-295/Malcolm X Interchange

29 30
31 32 33 35 36 37

Middle Anacostia Crossings Corridor


5.7 5.8 5.9 5.10 5.11 5.12 5.13 5.14

Pennsylvania Avenue & Potomac Avenue Intersection Pennsylvania Avenue & DC 295 Entrance Ramp Improvements Pennsylvania Avenue & Minnesota Ave Intersection Pedestrian Bridge: Anacostia High School to Anacostia Park 11th Street Bridge: Phase 1 11th Street Bridge: Phase 2 Barney Circle/Southeast Boulevard Virginia Avenue SE / CSX National Gateway 12 Street SE

38

39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46

Kenilworth Avenue Corridor


5.15 5.16 5.17 5.18 5.19 5.20 5.21 5.22

Kenilworth Avenue Corridor (2008 Near-Term Improvements) Nannie Helen Burroughs Interchange East Capitol Street Interchange Benning Road Interchange Eastern Avenue Interchange Kenilworth Avenue Mainline Improvements Parkside Pedestrian Bridge DC 295/Kenilworth Pedestrian Bridges

47

48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

Ta b l e o f C o n t e n t s

M Street/Southeast-Southwest Corridor
5.23 5.24 5.25 5.26 5.27

M Street Southeast/Southwest Transportation Study DC United Soccer Stadium 4th Street SW Reconstruction Maine Ave SW Improvements The Wharf Infrastructure Maryland Avenue SW / CSX National Gateway

56

57 58 59 60 61 62

Anacostia Riverwalk Trail Corridor


5.28 Segments of ART

63 66

63

Suitland Parkway Corridor


5.29 5.30 5.31 5.32

Suitland Parkway Pedestrian/Bike Trail South Capitol Street Phase 2 - Segment 3 MLK Jr. Two-Way Reconstruction MLK Jr. Two-Way Widening

67 68 69 70

AWI-Wide
5.33 5.34 5.35

DC Streetcar St. Elizabeths East Campus Infrastructure Water Coach/Taxi 14th Street Bridge Improvements Long Bridge Study AWI Master Drainage Plan Clean Rivers/CSO Project Private Development Review National Park Service Anacostia Park Master Plan

71

72 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81

Non-Active Projects

Pennsylvania Avenue/DC 295 Interchange Reconguration I-295/I-395 Tunnel New York Avenue Improvements Reservation 13 Roadway Network

82

82 82 83 83

Section 6 Key Development Projects


6.1 6.2 6.3 Relationships between Infrastructure and Development Projects in the Anacostia Waterfront AWI Development Hot Spots Conclusion About the Development Environment

83
84 85 102

Appendices
Appendix A: List of AWI Planning & Environmental Studies Appendix B: Required Environmental Documentation for AWI Projects Appendix C: 2014 Update to the 2005 AWI Mobility Study A-1 B-1 C-1

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Executive Summary

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The District Department of Transportation (DDOT) is helping to transform the Anacostia Waterfront into a better place for citizens to live, work, learn, shop and play. As part of the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative (AWI), DDOT is pursuing a plan to reshape the areas transportation network into one that provides easy access for residents, commuters and visitors, improves the areas environmental quality, and supports economic vitality in long-neglected neighborhoods and communities. The goals of the AWI are:
zz zz zz zz zz

1. Restore Restoring the environment and have a clean and active river 2. Transportation Breaking down barriers and gaining access 3. Play Create a great riverfront park system 4. Celebrate Supporting cultural destinations of District character 5. Neighborhoods Building strong waterfront neighborhoods

For years, the transportation system along the Anacostia Waterfront has been dominated by highways that favored regional mobility over neighborhood accessibility. These highways are ill-suited to serve local neighborhoods and have the effect of cutting off communities from one another and from the waterfront. DDOTs objective is to reconnect communities through the replacement of outdated and deteriorating facilities with context-sensitive infrastructure solutions. To accomplish these aims in the AWI area, DDOT has developed the AWI Transportation Master Plan (Master Plan). AWI Transportation Goals:
zz zz

Provide continuous pedestrian and bicycle access along and across the entire waterfront; Aggressively promote modal shifts to public transit, cycling, walking and other shared transportation modes (e.g., carpools, car-sharing, taxicabs, etc.); Create urban boulevards with mixed uses, landscaping and great civic spaces; Redesign bridges across the Anacostia River in the tradition of great civic architecture; Redesign highways and freeways to reduce barriers between neighborhoods and waterfront parks; Reconnect the city street grid to waterfront parks; and Support and foster economic development in the AWI neighborhoods.

zz zz zz zz zz

DDOTs transportation plan for the AWI area is comprised of six key transportation corridors as well as several areawide or independent projects. The Master Plan is an umbrella document that organizes these studies and projects into a comprehensive program. Its primary focus is to establish a logical and efcient implementation plan for the ongoing efforts in the AWI area based on such factors as cost, duration of construction, environmental impacts, funding and benets to the community. DDOT is actively engaged with its partner agencies and the development community to deliver these sweeping infrastructure changes as efciently and effectively as possible. In all cases, minimizing disruptions to citizens daily lives and to the economic life of the District has been a guiding principle. Projects have been sequenced in such a way as to provide residents with the highest possible levels of accessibility and personal mobility throughout the duration of the plan. The Master Plan is a dynamic plan, and the project sequence outlined here will continue to evolve, subject to constructability, funding, and changes to priorities. This document, therefore, merely represents a snapshot of DDOTs current and future plan for the Anacostia Waterfront. The timeliest information on the Master Plan is available at www. anacostiawaterfront.org/ . This Master Plan aligns with all ve of the AWI goals noted above by rethinking the design of transportation networks and infrastructure to gain multimodal access to waterfront lands and better serve adjacent neighborhoods. This approach to new and renovated transportation infrastructure is embodied in the AWI transportation goals enumerated above.

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

Executive Summary

History of the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative The AWI was ofcially launched on March 22, 2000, through a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) signed by 20 federal and District agencies that all committed to the goal of transforming the Anacostia River from a forgotten and blighted river to a source of pride for the entire city and region. In 2003, the AWI Framework Plan was released. In this plan, the District and federal governments dened the elements that would redene Washington as one of the worlds great waterfront cities. The elements of the Plan are Environment, Transportation, Parks, Destinations and Neighborhoods. Based on the Framework Plan, DDOT developed an AWI Transportation Master Plan in 2005. Its primary purpose was to rethink the design of transportation infrastructure to gain multimodal access to waterfront land, support economic development and to better serve neighborhoods. It also served to describe and develop the transportation system within the AWI impact area as an integrated whole, taking into account all available modes of transportation. The Districts pattern of growth is moving steadily eastward, as evidenced by new public and private investments along the Southwest Waterfront, the M St SE/SW Corridor, the South Capitol Street Corridor and streetcar projects east of the Anacostia. The citys economic future is inextricably linked to the Anacostia Waterfront, and it is a vital component of the Districts One-City vision and action plan. The vision of the AWI is centered on revitalizing its parks, environment, economy and infrastructure and re-establishing connections throughout the AWI area and between the Anacostia Waterfront and other parts of the city and the region. In the years since the AWI MOU was signed, considerable accomplishments have been achieved. Previously, large tracts within the AWI impact area were characterized by boarded-up buildings, vacant lots, obsolete industrial facilities, garages, parking lots, and auto repair shops. The streets were full of commuter trafc during rush hours but devoid of pedestrians or auto trafc during the remainder of the day. Today, some of these areas have been transformed by new public and private sector ofces, residential buildings, entertainment complexes and recreational facilities. As people come and go from these new activities, they are enlivening the streets. Pedestrians and cyclists can be seen in increasing numbers along the Anacostia River, within its parks and along nearby streets. Accomplishments achieved pursuant to the AWI MOU have been documented in a report, Anacostia Waterfront Initiative 10 Years of Progress, published in September 2010. DDOT plays a key role in this effort through the planning, design and construction of an improved transportation infrastructure that will support a transformed Anacostia Waterfront. Project Development Process DDOTs project development process includes planning, environmental documentation, design, and construction, followed by regular maintenance. Public involvement is a continuous part of the process of developing context-sensitive solutions, with multiple opportunities for community stakeholders to provide input. DDOT engages the community through various methods, including neighborhood meetings, publications, web sites, and outreach to key neighborhood groups such as the Advisory Neighborhood Commissions (ANCs).
zz

Planning is the initial stage of a project, when a particular project is first conceived based on a purpose and need. Planning studies provide recommendations for near-, middle- and long-term transportation improvements. In the environmental documentation phase, projects are analyzed to consider how they will affect the human and natural environments. Environmental documentation varies in complexity based on the nature of the project. Regardless of a projects scope and complexity, the level of environmental documentation required by law must be completed before a project can be built. In the design phase, projects draw heavily upon the public information gathered during planning and environmental documentation. DDOT puts an emphasis on designing projects in partnership with the communities they serve so that the improvements are environmentally sensitive and appropriate to their context. During construction, projects take physical shape and become visible to the public. DDOT ensures that all projects are built in a safe and efficient manner and puts a priority on maintaining quality of life for neighbors and affected commuters.

zz

zz

zz

Project Implementation Transportation projects within the Master Plan area are in various stages of project development and range from localized, low-impact improvements to projects with broader scope and potentially more substantial impacts. All of

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Executive Summary

these projects were assessed for their effect on each other in terms of construction duration, maintenance of trafc, and trafc volume impacts. Many transportation projects are very expensive and take many years to plan, design and construct. The availability of funding is a critical factor in project scheduling, and DDOT is pursuing a variety of both local and federal funding sources. Given that funding availability over a number of years is uncertain, DDOT formulates the implementation plan to make the best use of committed funds. Additionally, DDOT makes a concerted effort to coordinate its projects with major development efforts within the AWI area, seeking to support the success of development through transportation improvements. Transportation achievements since the inception of the AWI MOU include the following:
zz

Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge Rehabilitation and Ballpark Streets. Although scheduled for three years of construction, DDOT was able to remove the South Capitol Street viaduct, rehabilitate the Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge while lowering its north end to create a new at-grade intersection with Potomac Avenue SE/SW, and improve surrounding streetscapes in nine months to coincide with the opening of the new Nationals Park in the Spring of 2008. Anacostia Riverwalk Trail. Of the 20 miles planned, approximately 12 miles are complete; the remaining segments of the trail are in design or under construction. 11th Street Bridge. In 2009, DDOT awarded its largest construction project -- the $340 million 11th Street Bridge project, Phase 1. The new bridges are open to traffic, and Phase 1 is complete. Phase 2, which improves street and highway connections on the west bank of the Anacostia, is underway and approximately 20% complete. Total cost for both phases is approximately $460 million. Design Standards. DDOT published the Anacostia Waterfront Transportation Architecture Design Guidelines, which guide low-impact development standards in the public streetscape to reduce and mitigate the negative impacts of urban stormwater runoff. This has become an important component of the Sustainable DC Initiative that Mayor Gray kicked-off in 2011. Middle-Anacostia Crossing (MAC) Improvements. Many of these improvements have been completed, including enhancements to the intersection of Pennsylvania Avenue SE, with I-295. Several key projects including the repurposing of portions of the former Southeast Freeway are underway now. Kenilworth Corridor Improvements. These projects have improved safety through better lighting, signage and lane markings. This corridor was the initial focus of the AWI effort and many of its projects have been accomplished. Interchange at Kenilworth Avenue and Nannie Helen Burroughs Avenue NE. A new bridge carries Kenilworth Avenue over Nannie Helen Burroughs Avenue NE. Wider sidewalks provide safer and easier pedestrian and cycling movements between areas east and west of Kenilworth Avenue. Reconfiguring Kenilworth Avenue on and off ramps enhanced auto safety, as well. Interchange at Kenilworth Avenue and Eastern Avenue NE. New sidewalks provide safer passage for pedestrians and cyclists. The clearance of the Eastern Avenue bridge over Kenilworth Avenue has been increased to reduce truck collisions with the bridge. Fourth Street SW. Waterside Mall, constructed in the 1960s as part of the Southwest Urban Renewal Project, was built in the Fourth Street right-of-way. This prevented north-south vehicular travel along Fourth Street SW, between I Street SW, and M Street SW. Demolition of Waterside Mall began in 2007. The missing segment of Fourth Street, SW, was thenreconstructed. This makes pedestrian, bicycle and vehicle movements much easier while reducing spillover traffic on other nearby streets. Maine Avenue SW. Improvements to the sidewalk enhance pedestrian and bicycle movements between the Tidal Basin and the Southwest Waterfront along Washington Channel. By improving the safety and convenience of cycling and walking, progress is being made toward achieving the transportation goals of Mayor Grays Sustainable DC Initiative.

zz

zz

zz

zz

zz

zz

zz

zz

zz

In addition to these accomplishments, many transportation projects are underway. The following chart, Figure 1-1, provides the construction implementation schedule, as it is now understood. This schedule, however, is subject to the availability of funding, determinations about constructability and changes to priorities. Figure 1-2, the foldout map on the following page, shows the location of the discrete projects that have been completed or that are in other phases of development pursuant to the AWI effort. Since the last update of the AWI Transportation Master Plan, DDOT has developed an AWI-specic web page: anacostiawaterfront.org. This website includes project-specic information.

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

Executive Summary

Figure 1-1: AWI Project Implementation Schedule Transportation Infrastructure Improvements


2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

South Capitol Street Corridor


Douglass Memorial Rehab Ballpark Roadways (2008) South Capitol St. Phase 1 South Capitol St. Phase 2 I-295/Malcolm X Bridge Rehab I-295/Malcolm X Interchange

Middle Anacostia Crossings Corridor


Penn Ave/Potomac Ave Intersection Penn Ave/DC 295 Improvements Penn Ave/Minn Ave Intersection Ped Bridge: Anacostia HS to Park 11th Street Bridge - Phase 1 11th Street Bridge - Phase 2 Barney Circle/Southeast Boulvard Virginia Ave SE/CSX National Gateway

Kenilworth Avenue Corridor


Kenilworth Near-Term Imp. Nannie Helen Burroughs East Capitol Street Benning Road Eastern Avenue Kenilworth Ave. Mainline Imp. Parkside Pedestrian Bridge DC 295/Kenilworth Ped Bridge

M Street SE/SW Corridor


M Street SE/SW Transport Study DC United Soccer Stadium 4th Street, SW Reconstruction Maine Avenue SW Improvements The Wharf - Infrastructure MD Ave CSX National Gateway

Anacostia Riverwalk Trail


11th Street Bridges FRP Bridges Kenilworth Gardens National Mall Connections Arboretum South Capitol Street Trail Buzzard Point Southwest Waterfront Florida Rock Properties Poplar Point

Suitland Parkway Corridor


Suitland Parkway Ped/Bike Trail S. Capitol St Phase 2 (Segment 3) MLK Jr Two-Way Reconstruction MLK Jr Two-Way Widening

AWI-Wide Projects
St. Elizabeths East Infrastructure 14th Street Bridge Improvements Long Bridge Study DC Streetcar Clean Rivers/CSO Project

Planning

Env. Doc. Completed

Design TBD

Construction

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Executive Summary

Figure 1-2: AWI Transportation Projects

28

19

22

16 21 18 15

Project Management
17 27 07 12 28 13 20
Project# 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Project Name Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge Rehabilitation Ballpark Roadways (2008 Near Term Improvements) South Capitol Street Phase 1 (Segments 1 and 2) South Capitol Street Phase 2 (Segments 4 and 5) I-295/Malcolm X Bridge Rehabilitation I-295/Malcolm X Interchange Pennsylvania Ave & Potomac Ave Intersection (2008 Near Term Improvements) Penn Ave & DC 295 Entrance Ramp Improvements (2008 Near Term Improvements) Pennsylvania Ave & Minnesota Ave Intersection (2008 Near Term Improvements) Pedestrian Bridge: Anacostia HS to Anacostia Park (2008 Near Term Improvements) 11th Street Bridge - Phase 1 11th Street Bridge - Phase 2 Barney Circle/Southeast Boulevard Virginia Avenue/CSX National Gateway - 12th St SE Kenilworth Corridor (2008 Near Term Improvements) Nannie Helen Burroughs Interchange East Capitol St Interchange Benning Rd Interchange Eastern Avenue Interchange Kenilworth Avenue Mainline Improvements Parkside Pedestrian Bridge DC 295/Kenilworth Pedestrian Bridges DC United Soccer Stadium 4th Street, SW Reconstruction Maine Avenue, SW Improvements (2008 Near Term Improvements) The Wharf - Infrastructure Maryland Avenue SW, CSX National Gateway Anacostia Riverwalk Trail Suitland Parkway Pedestrian/Bike Trail South Capitol Street Phase 2 (Segment 3) MLK Jr. Two-Way Reconstruction MLK Jr. Widening

## ##

Managed by DDOTs AWI Team Managed by Others

25 26 24

04

14

02 11

10 01

08

09

23

03 31

30

29 32

06

05

7/8

This page intentionally left blank

Purpose

2. PURPOSE
As part of the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative (AWI), the District Department of Transportation (DDOT) is pursuing a plan to reshape the areas transportation infrastructure into a network that improves access for residents, commuters, and visitors while also improving the areas environmental quality. DDOTs objective is to reconnect communities through the replacement of outdated and deteriorating facilities with context-sensitive infrastructure solutions. To accomplish these aims in the AWI area, DDOT has developed the AWI Transportation Master Plan (Master Plan). The Master Plan was initiated by DDOT to organize the studies and projects underway in the AWI study area into a comprehensive program. It describes DDOTs project development process for implementing the AWI vision. It also provides details of each projects current progress, as well as a snapshot of the status of DDOTs AWI transportation program as a whole. This document presents the current implementation schedule. Given the realities of the project development process as well as political and funding cycles, this program will change over time. However, the Master Plan is intended to provide more than a set of projects. It is also intended to provide goals and a set of criteria that will remain applicable as circumstances affecting the set of projects change.

2.1 History and Vision of the AWI


The Anacostia Waterfront Initiative is a comprehensive plan to restore the long-neglected Anacostia Waterfront, remove physical barriers in the surrounding infrastructure, and leverage the communitys economic growth while preserving its rich historic and cultural heritage. The AWI was formally launched in March 2000, through the AWI Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), which created an unprecedented partnership of 20 federal, regional and District of Columbia government agencies, including DDOT. The AWI Framework Plan, released in 2003, concluded that the AWI area suffered from a transportation system that favored regional mobility over neighborhood accessibility. The highways that dominated the area were ill-suited to serve local neighborhoods and had the effect of cutting off communities from one another and from the waterfront. The Framework Plan put forth the following strategies to redress the negative effects of the existing transportation system and to create a future system characterized by connectivity:
zz zz

All activities along the waterfront are to consider being linked by the Anacostia RiverwalkTrail. Public transportation must be enhanced and increased to provide more residents direct access to the Anacostia River and its neighborhoods. The bridges across the Anacostia River must be designed in the tradition of great civic architecture and must allow for transit, bicycle and pedestrian access that is safe, easy, attractive and enjoyable. The highways and freeways that frame the Anacostia River must be transformed to become less of a physical and visual barrier to the waterfront and adjacent neighborhoods. All streets and boulevards that lead to the Anacostia River must be multimodal and designed to meet neighborhood needs.

zz

zz

zz

In order to implement the transportation element of the AWI Framework Plan, DDOT and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) initiated the AWI Transportation Master Plan. The Master Plan was intended to organize the transportation studies and projects underway in the AWI study area into a comprehensive program made up of a distinct set of projects and develop an efcient and practical way for these projects to be constructed. The Master Plan provides a description of each project and an overview of the project development and environmental documentation processes as governed by various laws including the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Through the Master Plan, DDOT and FHWA embarked on an ambitious task to develop a set of context-sensitive infrastructure improvements for historically neglected and segmented neighborhoods. DDOT is striving to reconnect communities, improve the performance and design of facilities, sequence these improvements so that they serve the economic development goals of the city and air quality goals of the region, and achieve measurable environmental benets. To that end, the Master Plan examines the programmatic impacts of the AWI transportation projects taken as a whole, highlighting potential impacts of proposed projects and potential points of conict to be addressed in subsequent stages of project development. In the course of project development, DDOT will thoroughly investigate the

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

Purpose

environmental impacts associated with each proposed project. However, one of the objectives of the Master Plan is to have a clearer picture, from the outset, of anticipated impacts, potentially making subsequent efforts more focused and efcient. The Master Plan was created in 2005 and updated in 2007 and 2008. Now that this program has become more mature, the Master Plan is also tracking project status through environmental documentation, design, construction and completion. In this regard, it is important to note that some projects that were called near-term improvements in 2005 might now be completed. And some projects characterized as long-term improvements in 2005 might now be underway or characterized as near-term. Of course, some long-term projects from 2005 might still be characterized as long-term in this 2014 update. People familiar with earlier versions of the Master Plan should keep this in mind. To avoid this type of confusion going forward, near-term and long-term are being dropped from project names. Also, a few long-term improvements from 2005 (such as the tunnel connecting I-395 with I-295, the extension of Massachusetts Avenue over the Anacostia River, and the reconguration of the Pennsylvania Avenue / I-295 interchange) are no longer under active consideration. This 2014 update of the Master Plan represents the status of the AWI transportation projects at this moment in time. But the AWI study area does not exist in isolation from the District of Columbia or the rest of the Washington Metropolitan Region. For example, DDOT is now conducting a collaborative public planning effort to create a multimodal long-range transportation vision plan. This effort, called moveDC will include recommendations to coordinate bus, rail, vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian and freight for the current and future generations of residents, workers and visitors. You can learn about and participate in this effort at www.wemoveDC.org. DDOT expects to nalize this vision plan in the spring of 2014. The Master Plan and its component projects must also respond to outside inuences. In 2012 Mayor Gray announced an action plan to help implement his Sustainable DC initiative. Transportation goals to be achieved by 2032 are embedded in this plan and will be included in all project planning phases of the projects. They include:
zz

Changing the mode split of commuting trips within the District so that 75 % of commuting trips are made by transit, cycling or walking and only 25% by car; and Zero unhealthy air quality days.

zz

Sustainable DC includes many goals in addition to those related to transportation and air quality. These other goals include improvements to water quality and energy conservation. For example, the Clean Rivers / Combined Sewer Overow project and the Anacostia Waterfront Transportation Architecture Design Guidelines will reduce and mitigate stormwater runoff. Transportation goals to promote walking, cycling and transit use will also help save energy and improve air quality. A signicant coordination effort with the District Department of the Environment (DDOE) on drainage standards for future projects has been underway over the past year. The Master Plan and its projects will also serve as inputs for the 2014 update to the Districts Comprehensive Plan. Once the Comprehensive Plan is updated and legally adopted, DDOT plans will have to reect any changes in it. DDOT must also pay attention to the National Capital Planning Commissions recent plans for a Southwest Ecodistrict and the Ofce of Plannings Maryland Avenue Small Area Plan. This vision plan, centered around the LEnfant Plaza area, calls for new and recongured federal facilities. It also recommends changes in streets, streetscapes and transit facilities within this portion of the AWI study area. If the federal government provides funding to implement these plans, then DDOT must not only pay attention but engage in planning, design and coordination, as well. DDOT is currently studying the transportation components of this vision. Given the realities of the project development process, as well as political and funding cycles, the projects in this program are changing and evolving over time. However, the Master Plan also establishes broad transportation goals and project development processes that will remain applicable well into the future guiding DDOTs responses to those changing circumstances. DDOT is fullling its commitment to the AWI by planning, designing and constructing an improved transportation system that will support a transformed Anacostia Waterfront. Transportation facilities within the AWI area must be upgraded to support economic development and better serve neighborhoods and the region. Several federal agencies have already relocated along the river, and a mix of private ofces, residential and retail development are moving in, as well. In 2008, the Washington Nationals new ballpark on the riverfront was completed. More recently, Canal Park and The

10

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Purpose

Yards Waterfront Park have opened. The Department of Homeland Security is developing a new headquarters on the west campus of the historic St. Elizabeths Hospital. In short, the area has become one of the fastest-growing centers of employment, entertainment, and residential growth. Improvements to the transportation network will improve access and connect new developments to adjacent communities and the Washington region as a whole. DDOT actively coordinates with neighborhoods, other stakeholders and agencies to ensure that all projects will improve the health of the river and restore the landscape. This environmental stewardship is an integral part of DDOTs mission to build transportation facilities that provide better access to local destinations and improve mobility for everyone throughout the AWI area. Figure 2-1: Rendering of Anacostia Waterfront Open and ongoing communication with the public is instrumental to the success of the AWI program. Public involvement is vital at every stage: planning, environmental documentation, design and construction. Listening to and collaborating with community stakeholders is an essential component of all DDOT projects. DDOT and other sponsoring AWI agencies continually seek citizen input through meetings, workshops, phone calls and emails or letters as work moves forward. It is important to note, however, that the topics for public meetings will change as projects progress through the development process. For example, once the purpose and need for a facility has been established as part of the planning and environmental documentation process, the purpose and need for a facility is no longer subject to debate at subsequent public meetings held to discuss design issues or construction phasing.

Source: DC Appleseed

More information about the Master Plan and individual projects is available online at: www.anacostiawaterfront.org/.

2.2 DDOTS AWI Study Area


The study area for the AWI Transportation Master Plan roughly corresponds to the boundaries of the AWI study area from the AWI Framework Plan. The 2003 Framework Plan described its study area as including over (2,800 acres 4.4 square miles) of land along the Anacostia River corridor in the east half of Washington, DC. The AWI study area is a mix of urban and natural land. Although the Master Plan examines transportation improvements throughout this area, most of the transportation improvements are located in long-developed, urban and publicly owned land. The Anacostia Riverwalk Trail is the major exception. It is being built in areas that include parkland. The AWI corridor is roughly 7 miles long and runs northeastward from the Potomac River to the Districts northeast border with Maryland. Development activity often has transportation impacts well beyond its immediate vicinity. While the AWI MOU is focused on areas in fairly close proximity to the Anacostia and Potomac waterfronts, DDOT must consider a signicantly broader area in order to effectively meet the challenges that redevelopment of the waterfronts will bring. Figure 2-2 shows the extent of the study area for DDOTs AWI Transportation Master Plan.

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

11

Purpose

Figure 2-2 - DDOTs AWI Study Area for Transportation Master Plan

ist

M ar yla nd
ol um bi a fC to

ric

fC to ist ric
Virginia
12

ol
M
a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

ar

yla

nd

um

bi

Project Development Process

3. PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS


DDOT moves projects forward following an established Project Development Process. This process, organized by project phase, is described in Section 3.1. Project Prioritization, a separate process that occurs concurrently with the phases detailed below, is covered in Section 3.2.

3.1 Project Phases


The Master Plan organizes projects already underway or planned in the AWI area. DDOT is developing these projects through public outreach, planning, environmental documentation, design, and construction. As shown in Figure 3-2, the projects are in various stages of the project development process; while some projects are still in the planning phase, several others are under construction or even complete. Because DDOT involves the public through all project stages, community stakeholders have multiple opportunities to provide input and feedback. Public involvement is a central part of Context-Sensitive Solutions (CSS) - See Figure 3-1. As dened by FHWA, CSS considers the total context within which a transportation improvement project will exist. In order to formalize a contextsensitive approach to projects, DDOT has developed the Context-Sensitive Design Guidelines. Because CSS is an overarching theme in DDOTs work, these guidelines apply to all phases of project development. Figure 3-1: DDOTs Project Development Process Showing Public Participation During Each Phase

3.1.1 Planning Planning is the initial stage of a project, when a particular project is rst conceived based on a particular purpose and need. During this rst phase, DDOT begins its comprehensive public collaboration efforts, working with community members, as well as District and federal agencies, to align the priorities and policies of a proposed project. Planning studies include conceptual recommendations for improvements, typically documented in reader-friendly reports and graphics. Another critical component of planning is identifying utility companies impacted by projects so reasonable construction budgets can be conceptually estimated. From the broad goals of the AWI, DDOT has identied six critical corridors on which to focus planning efforts:
zz zz zz zz zz zz

South Capitol Street Corridor Middle Anacostia Crossings Corridor Kenilworth Corridor M Street SE/SW Corridor Anacostia Riverwalk Trail Corridor Suitland Parkway Corridor

For projects that do not t within an identied corridor or that apply more broadly than a single corridor, DDOT has added a seventh category: AWI-Wide

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

13

Project Development Process

DDOT studied each of these corridors and developed recommendations for near-, mid-, and long-term improvements within each study area. These studies are listed and described in Appendix A. From among these recommended improvements, a set of individual projects was developed for each corridor. Based on funding availability and priorities, various projects identied in the major planning studies have moved forward to other stages in the project development process. In addition, several other independent projects that do not conform to any one of the corridors, yet which bear directly on the success of the overall AWI area transportation system, have been included in the overall program. For all of the projects in the AWI program, DDOT practices CSS during the planning stage by engaging the public, ensuring that the resulting recommendations directly reect the needs and concerns of affected neighborhoods and stakeholders. DDOT informs the public of planning activities and solicits feedback through a variety of methods, such as iers, newsletters, websites, community meetings, and door-to-door outreach visits at local businesses and community organizations. Of particular importance are the outreach efforts made to and through the Advisory Neighborhood Commissions (ANCs), which are the established forums for neighborhood issues and participation. DDOT encourages local stakeholders to be a driving force in planning efforts. Public workshops allow members of the community to put pen to paper as active participants in the planning process. The Kenilworth Avenue Study team went a step further, hiring local residents to collect pedestrian and bicycle data for the study. The end result of such a community involvement program is a better planning product and a sense of ownership by the neighborhood for the proposed improvements. 3.1.2 Federal Environmental Studies The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires FHWA and DDOT to follow a regulated process to complete the environmental evaluation of projects using federal funds. Environmental documentation varies in complexity depending upon the nature of the project and its context. Several components of the AWI transportation improvements program are of such complexity that they warrant the most in-depth level of documentation required under NEPA, the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). If a project is expected to have no signicant impacts, an Environmental Assessment (EA) or a Categorical Exclusion (CE) is completed instead of an EIS. A complete list of the anticipated level of environmental documentation required for AWI projects is included as Appendix B of this report. Figure 3-3: Public Involvement Meeting

Source: DDOT

For all levels of NEPA documentation, the preparing agency must demonstrate that the project has independent utility or be usable and be a reasonable expenditure even if no additional transportation improvements in the area are made (FHWA, The Development of Logical Project Termini, 1993). Furthermore, the project must connect logical termini, be of a sufcient length to provide a comprehensive evaluation, and not preclude other alternatives for foreseeable transportation improvements. Typically, NEPA documents include an analysis of several possible combinations of improvements (build alternatives) to consider how they will affect the human and natural environment. The merits of each alternative are weighed against one another and against the resulting conditions if no action is taken (the no-build alternative). Typical environmental issues that are analyzed include:
zz zz zz zz zz zz zz zz

Land use Traffic and safety Parklands and recreational areas Historic and archaeological resources Impact to communities Noise/air quality Water quality and wetlands Economic development

14

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Project Development Process

Figure 3-2: Projects By Phase


Project Management
## ## DDOTs AWI Team Non AWI Projects

Project Status U.S. U.S. Capitol Capitol Building Building


Planning Environmental Documentation Design Under Construction Completed

RFK RFK Stadium Stadium

Potomac Potomac River River

Anacostia Anacostia River River

Potomac Potomac River River 15/16

This page intentionally left blank

Project Development Process

3.1.3 Design The specic design of a project draws heavily upon the public information gathered during the planning and environmental analysis processes. DDOT puts an emphasis on designing projects with the communities that they serve. This helps to create improvements that preserve scenic, aesthetic, historic, and environmental resources, while maintaining safety and addressing the particular mobility needs of surrounding communities. DDOTs infrastructure projects include the design of roadways, bridges, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Final design documents include plans for stormwater systems, erosion control, lighting, signalization and utility connections or relocations. Certain aspects of construction management, such as interim trafc patterns and the coordination with utility companies to relocate their infrastructure, are addressed during the design phase. 3.1.4 Construction A project takes physical shape during the nal phase construction becoming visible to the neighborhood and traveling public. Access to and through surrounding neighborhoods is a critical consideration during construction, as are the prevention of excess runoff, minimizing noise impacts to neighborhoods, and maintaining a safe construction site. Maintenance of trafc, a major concern during construction, is addressed in more detail in Section 4. DDOT continues its CSS approach during the construction phase by helping to maintain the quality of life for neighbors and affected commuters. For example, during the development of the 11th Street Bridge Project plans for Phase 1, DDOT completed construction period travel demand studies and stakeholder outreach to determine if a temporary closure of the Southeast Freeway would be possible after some new ramps were completed. Results of the trafc analysis indicated that during this phase of the construction, travel times on an alternate route would be comparable to travel times before the closure of the Southeast Freeway segment. Therefore, a temporary closure of the Southeast Freeway would be possible to accommodate a safe construction site without disrupting existing local and commuter trafc patterns. DDOT continues to move forward with implementing all AWI projects based on community priorities, public input, project benets and available funding. Figure 3-4: 11th Street Bridge Project

3.2 Project Prioritization


After planning and environmental documentation, DDOT decides which projects to develop further with design and, ultimately, which projects to construct. Prioritizing projects takes various scal, social, and physical factors into account. DDOT has prioritized, or sequenced, the AWI transportation projects. This section describes the factors that inuenced the project construction sequence. The construction sequence is always evolving based on funding, constructability, and changes in priorities. The current schedule, reected in Figure 3-5, represents a snapshot as of December 2013.
Source: DDOT

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

17

Project Development Process

Figure 3-5: Project Implementation Schedule Anacostia Waterfront Transportation Infrastructure


2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

South Capitol Street Corridor


Douglass Memorial Rehab Ballpark Roadways (2008) South Capitol St. Phase 1 South Capitol St. Phase 2 I-295/Malcolm X Bridge Rehab I-295/Malcolm X Interchange

Middle Anacostia Crossings Corridor


Penn Ave/Potomac Ave Intersection Penn Ave/DC 295 Improvements Penn Ave/Minn Ave Intersection Ped Bridge: Anacostia HS to Park 11th Street Bridge - Phase 1 11th Street Bridge - Phase 2 Barney Circle/Southeast Boulvard Virginia Ave SE/CSX National Gateway

Kenilworth Avenue Corridor


Kenilworth Near-Term Imp. Nannie Helen Burroughs East Capitol Street Benning Road Eastern Avenue Kenilworth Ave. Mainline Imp. Parkside Pedestrian Bridge DC 295/Kenilworth Ped Bridge

M Street SE/SW Corridor


M Street SE/SW Transport Study DC United Soccer Stadium 4th Street, SW Reconstruction Maine Avenue SW Improvements The Wharf - Infrastructure MD Ave CSX National Gateway

Anacostia Riverwalk Trail


11th Street Bridges FRP Bridges Kenilworth Gardens National Mall Connections Arboretum South Capitol Street Trail Buzzard Point Southwest Waterfront Florida Rock Properties Poplar Point

Suitland Parkway Corridor


Suitland Parkway Ped/Bike Trail S. Capitol St Phase 2 (Segment 3) MLK Jr Two-Way Reconstruction MLK Jr Two-Way Widening

AWI-Wide Projects
St. Elizabeths East Infrastructure 14th Street Bridge Improvements Long Bridge Study DC Streetcar Clean Rivers/CSO Project

Planning

Env. Doc. Completed

Design TBD

Construction

18

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Project Development Process

The following bullets explain the approach that was used to distill the projects into a schedule for implementation. This process is summarized in Figure 3-6.
zz

Projects that are in later phases of development typically have already developed construction schedules. Where available, these schedules were used. For other projects, assumptions for construction durations were made based on historical data on similar projects. Funding availability was included in the project phasing evaluation. Projects with known funding sources are generally scheduled to be constructed earlier. Individual construction projects that include work on a bridge structure crossing the Anacostia River were phased to allow for only one Anacostia River bridge to be worked on at a time. This provides alternative access points from both sides of the Anacostia River and limits the impacts to truck and evacuation routes. Project construction phasing was evaluated according to the impact the work would have both within the individual project area and the Master Plan area. The proposed phasing was established based on two conditions: A. The immediate impacts to other facilities caused by an interchange, roadway or bridge being under construction; and B. The potential benet for a future project if another project is already in place. An example of this benet would be the reconstruction of an interchange to add movements that are currently missing, thus providing access options that may lessen the trafc impact when constructing an adjacent interchange.

zz

zz

zz

zz

The projects were phased so that major regional connections would be improved prior to beginning work on key local routes. This sequence would prepare the regional roadways, most of which are also truck and evacuation routes, for the traffic impacts of key local road construction. In addition, improving the regional connections would facilitate the separation of local and commuter traffic and reduce congestion on local streets. Environmental justice is a specific concern in the Master Plan study area given the high percentage of low-income and minority neighborhoods and DDOTs stated goal of improving the accessibility of community resources and mobility of community residents through its transportation infrastructure improvements.

zz

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

19

Project Development Process

Figure 3-6: Flow Chart for the Project Prioritization Decision-Making Process

20

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

4. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION
Once a project reaches the later stages of the development process design and construction a wide array of considerations begin to affect its implementation. Among these are project nancing, program management, contract packaging, construction management, and maintenance of trafc, each of which are detailed in this section. The degree to which each of these factors affects the timing and costs of a particular project will vary on a case-by-case basis; therefore, they are presented independently.

4.1 Project Financing


The availability of funding is often the rst lter in determining the timing of a projects implementation. For the AWI program, DDOT utilizes funds from a variety of sources and continuously updates its cost estimates to take into account scope changes driven by community input and Context-Sensitive Solutions (CSS), construction market conditions, and the time value of money. However, it is the timing of the availability of funding that is perhaps the most critical lter for scheduling the implementation of a project. Over the course of the past decade, DDOT has improved its nancial management capabilities and is using tools that provide exibility to meet the funding needs of the AWI program. Tools such as GARVEE bonds, Advanced Construction, and private contributions have maximized DDOTs capacity to deliver the AWI program. Public-private partnerships are also under consideration for project development by DDOT. The information presented below on both funding sources and uses represents the best information available at the time of this reports release. 4.1.1 Funding Sources: AWI Transportation Improvements The AWI Transportation Master Plan projects represent a large investment in the infrastructure within the Anacostia Waterfront neighborhoods, and project funding has been committed from a number of different sources - the federal and District of Columbia governments, non-governmental agencies, as well as private parties. The District has stood rm on its commitments to the AWI, having already invested over $500 million in transportation improvements since 2000. DDOT has made plans for the advancement of over nearly $2.5 billion in transportation investments (by DDOT and its numerous partners) beginning in 2013. These projects are proposed in DDOTs six-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP). For projects scheduled to begin after 2018, as with all capital improvement programs, there is some level of uncertainty about the availability of out-year funding. The projects are included in the agencys long-range transportation plan, and each year, project-specic commitments are rened to reect the current priorities and funding availability. From the start, the participation of the federal government has been essential to the progress of AWI. Even with the passage of the new federal transportation authorizing law, MAP-21 (Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century), which brings signicant changes to the structure of the national transportation program, the federal commitment to AWI remains intact. During the rst decade of implementing AWI, DDOT has forged an excellent working partnership with its partners at the U.S. Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) District ofce. This partnership has been reinforced through numerous funding notications, project authorizations and ribbon-cutting ceremonies. The overall Anacostia Waterfront Initiative is a 30-year, $10 billion program, with transportation being a major component of the Initiative. The funding sources for AWI Transportation Improvements are shown in Figure 4-1. These percentages are based upon DDOTs assumptions as to the availability of funds as of September 2013. Figure 4-1: Funding Sources: AWI Transportation Improvements

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

21

Project Implementation

Below is a brief description of identied sources of funding: District of Columbia Funds Local Match/Contribution East Washington Trafc Relief General Obligation (GO) Bonds The District of Columbia issued a total of $225 million in GO bonds to nance trafc relief in the eastern half of the city. These funds were primarily used as the local match funding, to complement federal funding, for the 11th Street Bridge Project. The availability of these funds was critical to DDOTs use of the federal GARVEE (Grant Anticipation Revenue Vehicle) Bond program to accelerate the 11th Street Bridge Project. District of Columbia Highway Trust Fund FHWA administers the federal-aid Highway Program and reimburses DDOT for eligible expenditures related to approved highway projects. In most cases the federal share of the costs for approved projects is about 83 percent. The Districts share of eligible project costs is funded with the DC Highway Trust Fund (DCHTF). Grant Anticipation Revenue Vehicle (GARVEE) Proceeds GARVEEs are special obligations of the District, payable from and secured Source: DDOT by certain pledged revenues from FHWA and other federal transportation funds made available to nance federal highway projects. In 2011, the District issued GARVEE Bonds to help nance the replacement of the twin 11th Street Bridges over the Anacostia River. Federal Formula Grants The District of Columbia receives annual reimbursable grants in excess of $150 million from FHWA. These grants are distributed to the 50 states and the District of Columbia by formula, which is based on transportation system variables (i.e., roadway miles, motor fuel tax sales, etc.). DDOT is granted discretion as to the proposed use of these funds but is subject to FHWA oversight and concurrence. National Highway Performance Program (NHPP) One of the formula grant programs is the National Highway Performance Program (NHPP). The NHPP provides support for the condition and performance of the National Highway System (NHS), for the construction of new facilities on the NHS and to ensure that investments of federal-aid funds in highway construction are directed to support progress toward the achievement of performance targets established in a States asset management plan for the NHS. Figure 4-3:New Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge Concept Rendering Figure 4-2: 11th Street Bridge Existing Conditions

Source: DDOT, www.anacostiawaterfront.org

Surface Transportation Program (STP) The STP provides exible funding that may be used by states and localities for projects to preserve and improve the conditions and performance on any federal-aid highway, bridge and tunnel project on any public road. The funding may also be used for pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure and transit capital projects, including intercity bus terminals. Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality (CMAQ) The CMAQ program, jointly administered by FHWA and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), provides funding for areas that do not meet the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (non-attainment areas), as well as former nonattainment areas that are now in compliance (maintenance areas). The formula for distribution of funds considers an areas population and the severity of its ozone and carbon monoxide problems, with greater weight given to areas that are both carbon monoxide and ozone non-attainment/maintenance areas. CMAQ is used for projects that will reduce the generation of air quality pollutants (i.e., transit, bicycle and pedestrian projects).

22

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Project Implementation

Federal Discretionary Grants Earmarked Funds Earmarked grants are discretionary grants that are appropriated by Congress to a specic recipient. The term earmark is a reference to the Congressional Record where the awards are written into the legislation specically with the grant applicants name, activity and dollar amounts. National Corridor Infrastructure Improvement Projects Funds The National Corridor Infrastructure Improvement Projects is a U.S. DOT discretionary program that provides funding for construction of highway projects in corridors of national signicance. The Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efcient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) allocated $75.0 million to the Frederick Douglass Memorial (FDMB) Bridge through this program. Federal High Priority Projects (HPP) Funds The HPP program is a U.S. DOT discretionary program. SAFETEA-LU authorized $48.0 million for replacement of the FDMB and $17.6 million for replacement of the 11th Street Bridges. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) ARRA was the Economic Stimulus legislation passed and signed into law in 2009. ARRA was developed, primarily, to save and create jobs in the United States. Its secondary aims were to provide relief to programs impacted by the recession and invest in infrastructure. Nearly $50 billion was set aside for national transportation programs; DDOT received $11.1 million in ARRA funding for the Eastern Avenue Bridge over Kenilworth Avenue.
Source: DDOT, www.anacostiawaterfront.org Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) TIGER was a supplemental, competitive, discretionary program that was included in the ARRA legislation. The goal of TIGER was to provide incentives for transportation programs to achieve better environmental outcomes and reduce the United States dependence on petroleum-based energy sources, while encouraging job creation. DDOT received $10 million in TIGER IV funding to construct the Anacostia Riverwalk Trail through Kenilworth Gardens, connecting the existing multi-use trails in DC and Maryland.

Figure 4-4: Anacostia Riverwalk Trail FRP West Bridge Grand Opening

Other Federal Appropriations Since the authorization of the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative, the federal government has appropriated funds for a number of projects:
zz zz zz

Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge Rehabilitation Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge Replacement Anacostia Riverwalk Trail

Private/Non-Governmental Contributions Since the start of AWI in 2000, the District has seen an inux of investment and residents, with numerous private development projects being constructed. In some occasions, developers have offered capital to accelerate an AWI project or have built transportation infrastructure (to the design and specications of DDOT) that has been incorporated into the Districts system (for future maintenance and operation). Private corporations such as CSXT RR contribute signicant project dollars to transportation projects within the AWI area. With the growing appetite for development and transportation services in the AWI area, it is anticipated that this funding approach will only continue to grow. 4.1.2 Financing Tools Availability of funding is a major factor in DDOTs ongoing reevaluation of the Master Plan timetable. While it is essential to have funding sources in place to pay for the projects in the Master Plan, it is also critical to have access to the

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

23

Project Implementation

appropriate nancing tools that can help initiate or accelerate project implementation. DDOT has already used existing exibility in the federal transportation program, as well as advocated for the use of District of Columbia nancing tools to implement the 11th Street Bridge, South Capitol Street and DC Streetcar projects.
zz

Advance Construction Advance Construction (AC) allows states to begin a project even in the absence of sufficient federal-aid obligation authority to cover the federal share of project costs. It eliminates the need to set aside full obligational authority before starting projects. As a result, a state can undertake a greater number of concurrent projects than would otherwise be possible. Advance Construction allows a state to conserve obligation authority and maintain flexibility in its transportation funding program. Flexible Local Matching Strategies Flexible match allows a wide variety of public and private contributions to be counted toward the non-federal match for federal-aid projects. Flexibility in matching federal-aid highway funding with the typical 17 percent local share exists primarily through two means: 1) Using other federal funds as a match, and 2) Third party contributions. Although funds from other federal agencies generally cannot be used to pay for the local portion of a federal-aid project, some flexibility exists in several instances (i.e., Federal Lands programs, Transportation Infrastructure Financing and Innovation Act (TIFIA) and Recreational Trails). Third party contributions allow states to apply the value of third party contribution funds, land, material, or services toward their non-federal share of project costs. Third parties include private companies, organizations, individuals, and (since SAFETEA-LU) local governments. Federal and state government agencies are not considered third parties in this definition. General Obligation Bonds General Obligation (GO) bonds are municipal bonds backed by the credit and taxing power of the issuing jurisdiction rather than the revenue from a given project. GO bonds are issued with the belief that a municipality will be able to repay its debt obligation through taxation or revenue from projects. No assets are used as collateral. The District of Columbia currently holds a AA/AA- rating with the three major credit rating agencies. Revenue Bonds Revenue Bonds are another type of municipal bond that is supported by the revenue from a specific project, such as a toll bridge, highway or local stadium. Revenue bonds are used to finance income-producing projects and are secured by a specified revenue source. For example, if a revenue bond is issued to build a new toll road, the tolls that are collected from motorists who drive on the road would be used to pay off the bond (after the building expenses had been paid). A primary reason for using revenue bonds is that they allow the municipality to avoid reaching legislated debt limits. Value Capture Arrangements Value capture mechanisms are a type of public financing where increases in the private land values generated by public infrastructure investments are captured to repay the cost of the public investment. Examples of value capture mechanisms include: Tax Increment Financing (TIF), Special Assessments, and Joint Development. The District is quite experienced in the use of these tools The Wharf project (Project 5-26) is an example of a project in the AWI project area being financed with a TIF. GARVEE Bonds GARVEE is a term for a debt financing instrument - such as a bond, note, certificate, mortgage, lease, or other debt financing technique - that has a pledge of future Title 23 federal-aid funding. DDOT has only recently issued its first GARVEE bonds, which have significantly increased the capacity of its CIP.

zz

zz

zz

zz

zz

DDOT (in partnership with the District of Columbia Ofce of the Chief Financial Ofcer) continues to investigate other nancial tools and delivery structures that may be available to advance transportation infrastructure projects, such as: TIFIA Loans/Loan Guarantees, a State Infrastructure Bank, and Design, Build, Finance, Operate, and Maintain (DBFOM) project delivery. While these approaches are no longer really innovative, with an increasing number of examples across the United States, the application of these approaches to DDOT projects could make the agency even more effective. Furthermore, in recognition of the Districts need for continued infrastructure investment, the full spectrum of funding and nancing strategies is being explored. As part of the Districts Long-Range Transportation Plan (moveDC), transportation management and funding approaches such as roadway tolling and cordon pricing are being given consideration. As the District looks to capitalize on the reinvestment of the past decade, the next generation of nancing tools will involve more complex structures that will allow for the leveraging of a mix of local, federal, and private funding sources to accelerate availability of funds to implement projects.

24

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Project Implementation

4.2

Program Management

DDOT will follow a Program Management approach for developing and implementing projects in the AWI corridors. This provides the comprehensive general and technical management support that is required to develop and implement a program of work that includes a number of closely related projects. The AWI Program Manager and AWI Program Management support staff will supply, supervise, and support the scope and services required for DDOTs AWI program. The Program Manager will be retained throughout the planning, design, procurement, construction and operations stages. The improvements in these corridors will be advanced through the award of multiple contracts for construction and procurement, each typically constituting a project. Program Management includes an extensive contractor outreach effort as a consideration in timing the advertisement of major contracts. Outreach efforts are focused on projecting the AWI program as well-managed, well-funded, highly important, and worthy of contractors investing time up-front, with the prospect of winning multiple contracts over time. Having a Program Manager coordinate multiple concurrent contracts can reduce DDOTs risk exposure for managing interfaces. The contractor outreach program provides the additional benet of increasing the potential bidders understanding of the overall master plan and its desired outcomes. The designated Program Manager ensures that there are specic provisions for each contract that place constraints on the contractor during construction and that commitments made in the project planning and environmental documentation stage are included in each construction package.

4.3 Contract Packaging


DDOT, with the assistance of the Program Manager, will take the lead in conducting the initial constructability reviews, which will inform the process of developing appropriate contract packages prior to the procurement phase. The contract packaging process will adhere to the following general policy guidance:
zz

Begin Early to Minimize Risk - The objective of the constructability review process is to create an environment in which contractors can optimize production. The avoidance of contractor delays and interruptions to production is a powerful means of controlling risk. DDOT will facilitate this process by anticipating and accommodating in the bid documents likely contractor logistics, operations and employee needs. When contractors are productive, they tend to be profitable, produce better quality work and are much more likely to meet a schedule; all of which benefits the owner, the community affected by the project, and the traveling public. Target Adequate Market Capacity - Part of the constructability review effort will involve forecasting market capacity and contractor backlog to help target advantageous windows of time to advertise contracts during owner favorable bidding periods. Use Current Information - Initial constructability reviews are performed with the best available information at the time. These reviews are the basis for developing proposed construction contracts. Strategically Build Advantageous Contract Packages - Proposed contract packages, possibly combining more than one of the specific projects, will be developed during the Implementation Phase. In addition, alternate delivery systems for projects will be considered such as design-build, design-build-own-operate, and design-build-finance. Re-evaluate Prior to Initiating Procurement - Each proposed package will be evaluated during the procurement phase in a greater level of detail. Since more detailed information on the scope of individual major projects, as well as the availability of funding, will be available during the procurement phase, this may lead to the discovery of interdependencies and other factors that would be significant in determining constructability and the type of delivery package that will be used. It will also assist in the identification of potential benefits that could be obtained by completing a portion of one particular project early in the construction period, in order to assist in maintenance of traffic with adjacent projects.

zz

zz

zz

zz

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

25

Project Implementation

4.4 Construction Management


Construction Management is the overall planning, coordination and control of a project from beginning to completion. Because the construction impacts of transportation projects can affect a large number of people (especially in urban environments), the mitigation of these impacts is often a major concern of the public and business communities. For major projects, these temporary impacts can stretch over many months and sometimes years. It is important to assess these impacts effectively and to work with those affected to develop mitigation strategies as early as possible. In the Anacostia Waterfront area, the list of potential projects requires acknowledgment that the construction period for several projects will overlap, possibly for an extended, multi-year period. For example, different contractors working on two separate projects may be able to work together to coordinate the delivery of like materials and use of certain roadways for access. There can be benets to establishing unied construction staging zones and material storage areas to minimize the total effects on local streets, businesses and neighborhoods, either in geographic scope or length of time. DDOT continues to develop and implement programs and tools to standardize its processes to ensure safety throughout the organization and the efcient use of resources. The DDOT Construction Management (CM) Manual presents DDOTs procedures and standards for managing and administering construction projects. The primary purpose of the manual is to establish standard operating procedures for DDOTs engineers, construction managers, consultants, and contractors in order to promote uniformity and efciency. The CM Manual works in concert with DDOTs Design and Engineering Manual, which describes the Departments procedures and standards for preparing project construction documents. DDOT is providing ongoing training to its staff on both manuals and is also making this training available to its consultants and contractors. 4.4.1 Construction Durations Project durations need to be matched to reasonable targets for the construction employee placement rate. For individual contractors working in the District, there are material delivery challenges, trafc congestion, and work space constraints, all of which may impact construction schedules. The AWI Master Schedule assists DDOT and the AWI program team to predict and track construction durations for AWI projects. 4.4.2 Contractor Staging and Storage Areas DDOT will allocate areas to be used by particular contractors, and those allocations will be specied in each contract. This will make the best use of the available space and avoid potential conicts and sub-optimized utilization that might occur if contractors are left to identify their own staging and storage areas. The allocation of specic staging areas will include known constraints on the use of the properties, including must vacate by dates and contact information. For a corridor program, it is valuable for DDOT to dedicate space and to include, if applicable, a plan to recongure, share or release the area to follow-on contractors on specic dates.

4.5 Maintenance of Trafc (MOT)


A primary consideration during the design phase of a project is the maintenance of trafc (MOT) during construction. Part of DDOTs emphasis on context-sensitive solutions (CSS) is to minimize the disruption that construction creates in neighboring areas. DDOT attempts to maintain the same number of open lanes in the peak rush-hour direction as were available prior to construction, where possible. In some cases, shifting lanes between morning and evening rush-hours is effective at maintaining trafc ows, although this conguration can lengthen the overall period of construction. DDOT seeks to strike a balance between a greater disruption for a shorter period, and a lesser disruption for a greater span of time. The viability of alternate routes represents an additional factor to be weighed when formulating an MOT plan. When a project is part of a greater overall program, such as the projects in the AWI Transportation Master Plan, the desire to minimize disruption must also be weighed against the overall program schedule, as other efforts may be delayed by lengthened construction timeframes, as well as the construction of nearby developments in the project area. Consideration of trafc inherently involves not only specic localized impacts unique to a given project, but also how those changes in trafc t into the overall trafc network. Because several projects will be under construction at the same time in, and adjacent to, the AWI area, DDOT will examine the cumulative effects of all projects, including those that

26

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Project Implementation

are not part of the AWI program. This requires coordination of all lane shutdowns for various projects, which requires addressing trafc management with a holistic approach. DDOT conducts daily and weekly inspections and issues summaries of major MOT aspects in the AWI program area. DDOT has requirements to ensure that MOT is a key element in the contractors construction sequencing approach. In addition to identifying contract specic restrictions, DDOT creates Special Provisions to address guidelines for multiple contractors who work concurrently on adjoining and/or overlapping projects. These may include Special Provisions for cooperation among contractors, milestone and access release dates for corridor dependencies, lane closure requests, haul routes, and staging. 4.5.1 MOT Example: 11th Street Bridge Project The 11th Street Bridge Project is an example of how DDOT applies CSS to construction projects. The construction phasing (see Figure 4-5) was developed using the results of a thorough trafc analysis which indicated that the eastbound and westbound Southeast Freeway could be temporarily closed during part of the construction period. This decision was balanced against attempting to maintain trafc in an active work zone requiring overhead bridge work as well as large cuts/lls in the adjacent areas. Step #1: Trafc Analysis - The rst step was to determine the trafc patterns of the majority of vehicles using the existing westbound Southeast Freeway by completing an origination/destination study. This study determined that the majority of trafc using this section of the Southeast Freeway was through-trafc - trafc that was either coming to/from DC 295 north of Pennsylvania Avenue or to/from Pennsylvania Avenue east of DC 295. Based on these travel patterns, it was determined that the best alternative route was to have trafc use DC 295 between Pennsylvania Avenue and the new inbound bridge and then continue across the bridge to I-695 westbound. With a viable temporary detour route determined, trafc simulation software was then utilized to determine the capacity constraints and travel time impacts of the proposed detour. Step #2: Sequencing Proposal - Based on the simulation analysis, several critical components of the new project were identied that had to be functional prior to implementing the detour - Ramp B-1 connecting SB DC 295 to inbound bridge. A similar process was undertaken for eastbound Southeast Freeway. A critical component, prior to the closing of the freeway, was the opening of the new northbound ramp (Ramp B-2) connecting I-695 to NB DC 295. With these new ramps in place, and with some minor improvements to the DC 295/Pennsylvania Avenue Interchange, the travel times for the temporary routes would not be signicantly different from existing conditions during the construction period. Step #3: Community Input - DDOT presented its ndings and proposals, and then worked closely with the community to balance the relative benets and impacts of the proposed detour. During the design process each scenario took into account three main concernstrafc mobility, construction access, and safety (both vehicular and worker). From a trafc standpoint, the construction would be completed adjacent to existing roadways without ever impacting the existing roadway until the new facility was ready to open. Alternatively, from a construction standpoint, the existing facility would be completely closed allowing for the shortest schedule and safest work conditions. This is where the stakeholder outreach and CSS played an important role in the process. By using a transparent process, there was broad-based stakeholder support for the best scenario to complete the work safely and efciently. Step #4: MOT Design - With the detour identied, designers could then identify critical ramps that had to be completed prior to implementing the detour. The new ramps would connect 11th Street Bridges to and from DC 295 to the north and allow trafc to ow smoothly and efciently without encountering trafc signals. DDOT decided that rather than disrupting trafc patterns for an extended period and risk trafc and construction workers to more exposure, it was preferable to implement a detour with construction partially complete. The scheduling of the project was adjusted to correspond with the detour in place. Step #5: Implementation and Monitoring - Finally, the westbound direction of the Southeast Freeway was temporarily closed in late 2012. After trafc acclimated to the new travel patterns, travel times were recorded on the detour routes. As the trafc simulation analysis predicted, existing travel times were not signicantly impacted. Prior to the opening of this ramp, a portion of the trafc had been using the Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge from I-295 to travel to the north; but once the new ramp was in place, drivers determined that travel was quicker to use the new 11th Street Bridge even though the route was slightly longer. The eastbound direction of the Southeast Freeway recently closed, and trafc is beginning to adjust to the new travel pattern. Until the completion of the project, DDOT will continue to monitor trafc throughout the detour and make adjustments as needed.

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

27

Project Implementation

Figure 4-5: 11th Street Bridges Project Sequencing

Source: DDOT

28

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

5. PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS
The projects that make up the AWI are described in detail in the following section. Each projects existing conditions and proposed improvements are described, along with considerations for implementation. All information presented in these descriptions represents the current status of each project as of 4th Quarter 2013. Due to high-level commitments by federal and District agencies to the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative, it was decided that, for FHWA-funded projects, there should be a separate AWI Team within DDOT to oversee the planning, design and construction of key projects in the AWI Transportation Master Plan. This separate team would help ensure that these projects received an appropriate level of attention, integration and coordination. These projects are designated on maps and in Section 5 with white project numbers on black circular backgrounds. Master Plan projects that are managed by others (either inside of DDOT or by other parties) will be designated by having white project numbers on blue circular backgrounds. For information on the location of each project, refer to the fold-out master map in Section 3 (See Figure 3-2). The majority of the projects presented in the AWI Transportation Master Plan are planned to be implemented in the future, and for consistency these project costs are presented in constant 2013 dollars (2013 $). Alternatively, several projects that are discussed have already been completed. For those already completed, the project costs are presented in year-of-completion dollars (i.e., 2008 $). The sources for project information are listed in Appendix A unless otherwise noted.

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

29

Project Description & Status

South Capitol Street Corridor


Project Cost: $983.5M South Capitol Street was a primary corridor in Major Pierre LEnfants 1791 Plan of the City of Washington and was envisioned as one of the symbolic gateways to the city and its Monumental Core. Today, the South Capitol Street Corridor continues to connect downtown Washington to neighborhoods in the southeast and southwest quadrants of the District of Columbia and Prince Georges County, Maryland. However, South Capitol Street, particularly within the section between the U.S. Capitol and the Anacostia Waterfront, lacks any characteristics of its historic function as a gateway. The streets present characteristics and conditions are not appropriate to its central place and important function. Figure 51: South Capitol Street Corridor Area Map South Capitol Street is an urban freeway that has become a conduit for through trafc at the expense of serving the immediate needs of the residents and businesses in the corridor. The transportation infrastructure is deteriorating and fails to provide necessary connections to community destinations for pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, or motorists. Despite the inadequacies of the transportation infrastructure in the corridor, new development is rapidly transforming former industrial and military uses into thriving mixed-use communities and employment centers. The economic development of the South Capitol Street Corridor and along the Anacostia River is part of a District and regional effort to revitalize the waterfront. The vision for the Anacostia Waterfront is an area that will unite the city economically, physically, and socially as the center of 21st century Washington, DC, and a cornerstone of the National Capital Region. South Capitol Streets transportation infrastructure must support and enhance this new vision of the Anacostia Waterfront.

Source: DDOT

P r o jCapitol ect T ime line South Street Corridor

Project Timeline
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

Sub-Project Name Douglass Memorial Rehab Ballpark Roadways (2008) South Capitol St. Phase 1 South Capitol St. Phase 2 I-295/Malcolm X Bridge Rehab I-295/Malcolm X Interchange

Completed

Design

Construction

30

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Project Description & Status

Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge Rehabilitation P r o j e c t

Reference 5.1

01
Corridor: South Capitol Street Project Cost: $32.0M Figure 52: Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge Before Rehabilitation

Pre-Existing Conditions Beginning in 2007, the Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge underwent substantial rehabilitation to ensure the safety of the bridge until more comprehensive plans could be implemented. Besides rehabilitation, one approach trestle on the west side of the Anacostia River was removed and the entire bridge approach lowered to facilitate access and visual connectivity to the planned Nationals Park. The rehabilitation and access improvements provided sufcient transportation network capacity and connectivity to support the increased adjacent ofce and residential development, as well as meet the requirements of Nationals Park, later built adjacent to the bridge. Improvements
zz

Source: www.JDLand.com

Cleaning, painting, and repairing of the bridge structure; replacement of deteriorated structural steel members, deck joints, and bearings; milling and replacement of the deck; repair of the deck drainage system; replacement of existing streetlights and addition of decorative streetlights; addition of decorative floodlighting for piers; and replacement of pedestrian railing. The western approach from O Street SE, to south of Potomac Avenue SE, was demolished, and the remaining span of the bridge was lowered such that the new bridge approach touches down at the grade of Potomac Avenue SE. A new intersection at South Capitol Street and Potomac Avenue SE, was constructed, and between Potomac Avenue SE, and N Street SE, South Capitol Street was reconstructed with boulevard streetscape features.

zz

Implementation The bridge was closed during July and August 2007 to perform the demolition of the approach, lowering of the superstructure, construction of the abutment and approach structures, and construction of the at-grade roadway. Preparatory work, such as structural repair, was done prior to the bridge closure. Final paving and streetscape improvements, both on South Capitol Street and many nearby streets, were completed in early 2008, prior to the opening of the new Nationals Park. Figure 53: Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge After Rehabilitation

Project Timeline Completed in 2008

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

31

Project Description & Status Project Reference 5.2

Ballpark Roadways (2008 Near-Term Improvements)

02
Corridor: South Capitol Street Project Cost: $34.9M

Pre-Existing Conditions The roadways surrounding the under-construction Nationals Park and South Capitol Street had inadequate streetscape facilities and insufcient utility capacity to support planned and ongoing economic development. Additionally, other roadways and intersections in Wards 6 and 8 had insufcient pedestrian facilities and poor access for the disabled. Figure 54: 1st Street SE Before Construction Improvements This project included:
zz

The reconstruction of Potomac Avenue SE, 1st Street SE, N Street SE, and I Street SE, to widen and enhance streetscaping, The provision of on-street parking, and The installation of ADA-compliant wheelchair ramps.

zz zz

Source: www.JDLand.com

Other improvements included bike lanes on 1st Street SE, and Potomac Avenue SE, a new trafc signal at Half and M Streets SE, and a new trafc signal and the removal of the median barrier at South Capitol and N Streets SE. Finally, roadways adjacent to South Capitol Street and Suitland Parkway in Wards 6 and 8 were repaved and improved with geometric modications, wheelchair ramps, and crosswalks.

Implementation Figure 55: 1st Street SE After The near-term improvements began in early 2007 and were completed in February/March 2008. DDOT coordinated with utility providers to ensure that Construction needed upgrades, particularly for water and sewer, were being installed as the roadways were being reconstructed. As with the Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge Rehabilitation project, this work was completed prior to the opening of the new Nationals Park.

Source: DDOT

Project Timeline Completed in 2008

32

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Project Description & Status

South Capitol Street Phase 1 - Segments 1 and 2

Project Reference 5.3

03
Corridor: South Capitol Street Project Cost: $663.3M

Existing Conditions Planning efforts have been underway for more than a decade to transform South Capitol Street into a grand urban boulevard that improves safety, accessibility, multimodal transportation and supports economic development. It is intended to improve accessibility by eliminating grade separations, providing for missing trafc movements and calming trafc. In 2007, DDOT was granted the requisite approvals to begin property acquisition for more comprehensive improvements. DDOT has initiated a supplemental environmental review process to nalize some elements of the Preferred Alternative from the 2011 EIS. Planned Improvements Phase 1 includes two major segments: 1) a new Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge/Approaches and 2) modications to the Suitland Parkway/I-295 interchange. More details are provided below. Segment 1:

Figure 56: South Capitol Street Phase 1 Western Approach Trafc Oval Rendering

Source: DDOT

Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge improving the character, connectivity, safety and multimodal nature of the bridge and the corridor is a vital piece of the planned improvement of this area. The bridge will be fixed or movable with the final decision to be made by the U.S. Coast Guard in early 2014. There will be traffic ovals on both the western and eastern landings of the bridge. Segment 2:
zz zz

Suitland Parkway/I-295 Interchange the existing cloverleaf ramps will be removed and replaced with a diamond interchange. The new interchange will be signalized and allow for Figure 57: South Capitol Street Phase 1 Rendering multimodal mobility across I-295.

Implementation It is anticipated that Phase 1 will be complete by the end of 2018. DDOT is currently advancing the preliminary design, with a goal of tendering a solicitation for design-build contractors by early 2014. It is anticipated that construction will begin in 2015. More details on the schedule are presented below. Project Timeline
Phase Protective Buying Preliminary Design FDMB and Approaches Suitland/I-295 Interchange
2013 2014 2015 2016

Source: DDOT

2017

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

Design

Construction

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

33

Project Description & Status

South Capitol Street Phases 1 and 2 - Segments 1 thru 5


Corridor: South Capitol Street

Figure 58: South Capitol Street Project Area

Source: South Capitol Street Corridor Initial Financial Plan (2013)

34

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Project Description & Status

South Capitol Street Phase 2 - Segments 4 and 5 (2008 Long-Term Improvements)

Project Reference 5.4

04
Corridor: South Capitol Street Project Cost: $121.8M

Existing Conditions Planning efforts have been underway for more than a decade to transform South Capitol Street into a grand urban boulevard that improves safety, accessibility, multimodal transportation and supports economic development. It is intended to improve accessibility by eliminating grade separations, providing for missing trafc movements and calming trafc. Proposed Improvements Phase 2 includes three major segments, two of which are included in the South Capitol Street Corridor: 1) the reconstruction of South Capitol Street, north of O Street and 2) streetscape improvements on New Jersey Avenue SE. More details on each project are provided below. Segment 4:
zz

Figure 59: AWI Transportation Architecture Design Guidelines Rendering

South Capitol Street (North of O Street) the segment of South Capitol Street, west of the Anacostia River and north of O Street, will be rebuilt as a six-lane boulevard divided by a landscaped median. The roadway will have wider sidewalks and wider curbside lanes to accommodate both cyclists and vehicles. The intersections at I, K, L, N, O and P Streets will be reconstructed. The existing ramps at M Street and South Capitol Street will be removed and reconfigured as an at-grade intersection with turning movements allowing access for both north and southbound South Capitol Street.

Source: AWI Transportation Architecture Design Guidelines (2008)

Segment 5:
zz

New Jersey Avenue Streetscape the concept of this project is to restore consistency to the streetscape, both in design and right-of-way between the Southeast/Southwest Freeway and M Street, SE. The design will be in accordance with the Anacostia Waterfront Transportation Architecture Design Guidelines, DDOT (2008) and will be similar to those on South Capitol Street.

Implementation Per the existing nancial plan, Phase 2 will begin as late as 2022. However, DDOT anticipates commencing Phase 2 nal design and construction as funding is budgeted and as the requisite staff resources to manage the procurement, design and construction of the phase become available, which is expected to begin sooner than 2022. The costs for all segments and elements of the project were estimated and validated during FHWAs Major Project Review in July 2009. Analysis conrms that each of these phases is operationally independent. Additionally, each of the segments included in Phase 2, if undertaken separately, would also be operationally independent, and subsequent updates to the nancial plan may propose dividing Phase 2 into two or more additional phases. This offers signicant opportunities for exible project implementation. Project Timeline
Sub-Project Name South Capitol St and M St New Jersey Ave Streetscape SCSC 5-4 (South Capitol Street - Phase 2)
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

Design

Construction

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

35

Project Description & Status Project Reference 5.5

05
Corridor: South Capitol Street Project Cost: $4.0M

I-295/Malcolm X Bridge Rehabilitation

Existing Conditions The Malcolm X Avenue and South Capitol Street Interchange on I-295 is located within the vicinity of St. Elizabeths West Campus. In anticipation of General Services Administration (GSAs) planned transportation infrastructure improvements in the area in support of the redevelopment of St. Elizabeths West Campus into the consolidated headquarters for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), DDOT rehabilitated the existing bridge carrying I-295 over Malcolm X Avenue. This improved the safety of the bridge until nal decisions are made, approvals secured and construction commences on the new transportation facilities for the West Campus (DHS) access. These future improvements have been identied in the Malcom X/I-295 Interchange Justication Report (2012). Improvements The rehabilitation project included the following improvements to the bridge structure:
zz zz

Figure 510: I-295/Malcolm X Bridge Rehab Existing Conditions

Construction of new reinforced concrete deck slabs Major structural and roadway repair work on the northbound and southbound I-295 bridges that run over Malcolm X Avenue SE Reconstruction of the entrance ramp over South Capitol Street, including pavement milling and overlay Modification of the traffic signal system at Malcolm X Avenue at South Capitol Street

Source: DDOT

zz

zz

Implementation Construction began in 2006 and was completed in 2007.

Project Timeline Completed in 2007

36

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Project Description & Status

I-295/Malcolm X Bridge Interchange

Project Reference 5.6

06
Corridor: South Capitol Street Project Cost: $120M

Existing Conditions The Malcolm X Avenue SE, and South Capitol Street Interchange on I-295 is located within the vicinity of St. Elizabeths West Campus. General Services Administration (GSA) has initiated construction that will redevelop St. Elizabeths West Campus a former mental health facility into the consolidated headquarters for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). GSA issued a Record of Decision (ROD) in May 2012 selecting a preferred alternative that includes the modication of the I-295/Malcolm X Bridge, as one element in the package of transportation improvements necessary to provide access to the consolidated DHS Headquarters at St. Elizabeths. The Preferred Alternative also includes a new access roadway and direct ramp connections to I-295 from the West Campus. Figure 511: I-295/Malcolm X Interchange Planned Improvements Proposed Improvements The Preferred Build Alternative includes the following improvements to Interstate 295:
zz Restripe

southbound I-295 south of the existing slip ramp to southbound South Capitol Street to add an exclusive lane to the modified I-295 / Malcolm X Avenue interchange. new southbound and northbound I-295 off-ramps that will allow for access to St. Elizabeths Campus and proposed West Campus Access Road and connections from new interchange. 1) loop off-ramp from northbound I-295 to Malcolm X Avenue, 2) left turn connection from westbound Malcolm X Avenue to north bound I-295 loop on-ramp, and 3) on-ramp connection to northbound I-295. I-295 loop on-ramp. signal at newly created intersection with Malcolm X Avenue and West Campus Access Road.

zz Construct

zz Remove

zz Realign zz Install

Source: District of Columbia Interstate Justification Report, I-295 at Malcolm X Avenue (2012)

Implementation In August 2012, DDOT received conrmation from the GSA of its commitment to fund the project, subject to the receipt of federal appropriations. In December 2012, DDOT received approval of an Interchange Justication Report (IJR) for this project from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Design of the interchange improvements have been initiated by the GSA.

Project Timeline
Sub-Project Name I-295/Malcolm X Interchange
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

Design

Construction

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

37

Project Description & Status

Middle Anacostia Crossings Corridor

Project Cost: $797.6M In 2005, DDOT conducted the Middle Anacostia River Crossings Transportation Study to evaluate the current and future needs regarding vehicular, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle mobility and safety, as well as redress access problems either caused by or ignored by past transportation investments. The study targeted missing interchange movements on the Anacostia Freeway at Pennsylvania Avenue and the Southeast Freeway at Barney Circle. The study also investigated alternative uses of existing lane capacity on the Southeast Freeway between 11th Street and Barney Circle, as well as the potential for increased pedestrian and bicycle access within the study area and along the Anacostia River. Specic goals included enhancing mobility and connectivity, enhancing safety, providing an urban design, and providing solutions for all transportation modes. DDOT developed a series of near-term and midterm improvement projects that would address immediate safety, accessibility and mobility challenges for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motor vehicles alike. These proposed near-term and mid-term improvements include:
zz

Figure 512: Middle Anacostia Crossings Corridor Aerial

Better signing along commuter routes to ease local gridlock, Removal of unused ramps, Addition of missing interchange movements, Better crosswalks and bus stop amenities, and Improved access to Anacostia Park.

zz zz zz zz

For the longer term, DDOT developed concepts for the missing interchange movements on the Anacostia Freeway (I-295) at both Pennsylvania Avenue and 11th Street, the Southeast/Southwest Freeway at 11th Street interchange, and Barney Circle. The team also developed concepts showing how the section of the Southeast Freeway between 11th Street and Barney Circle could be transformed into a pedestrian friendly boulevard (Southeast Boulevard) with access to the river and Anacostia Park. Finally, a long-term consideration for improving the transportation system between Barney Circle and Independence Avenue was developed. The projects on the following pages represent the progress towards realization of the longer term vision for the Middle Anacostia Crossings.

Project Timeline
Project Timeline
Middle Anacostia Crossings Corridor Sub-Project Name
Penn Ave/Potomac Ave Intersection Penn Ave/DC 295 Improvements Penn Ave/Minn Ave Intersection Ped Bridge: Anacostia HS to Park 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

11th Street Bridge - Phase 1 11th Street Bridge - Phase 2 Barney Circle/Southeast Boulvard Virginia Ave SE/CSX National Gateway

Env. Doc.

Design

Construction

Completed

38

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Project Description & Status

Pennsylvania Ave & Potomac Ave Intersection

Project Reference 5.7

07
Corridor: Middle Anacostia Crossings Project Cost: $3.6M

Existing Conditions The Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Potomac Avenue SE, and 14th Street SE, intersection has multiple striped crosswalk locations that create pedestrian and driver confusion and conict points. The existing striped crosswalks provide an indirect means to cross Pennsylvania Avenue SE. However, pedestrians have created a more direct path through the grassed median of Pennsylvania Avenue SE. This path is not striped and not included in the pedestrian signal timing. Figure 513: Pennsylvania Ave./Potomac Ave. Existing Conditions Proposed Improvements This project would recongure the intersection at Pennsylvania Avenue and Potomac Avenue to reduce the number of pedestrian and vehicle conict points, and provide safer, more direct routes for pedestrian and transit users. Several design alternatives are under review, including a signalized mid-block crosswalk at Pennsylvania Avenue SE, and reconstructing the intersection to connect T congurations. Implementation This project is currently undergoing environmental documentation and assessment, DDOT has projected the Environmental Assessment to be complete by winter 2014. The projected schedule would allow one year to complete the nal project design and begin construction in mid 2015.

Source: DDOT

Project Timeline
Sub-Project Name
Penn Ave/Potomac Ave Intersection 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Env. Doc.

Design

Construction

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

39

Project Description & Status Project Reference 5.8

08
Corridor: Middle Anacostia Crossings Project Cost: $1.6M

Pennsylvania Ave & DC 295 Entrance Ramp Improvements

Pre-Existing Conditions One of the corridors major congestion points was the on-ramp to northbound DC 295 (Anacostia Freeway) from Pennsylvania Avenue. The ramp was set up to accept a double left-turn from eastbound Pennsylvania Avenue as well as the right-turn trafc from westbound Pennsylvania Avenue. Three lanes of trafc were required to merge into one lane in less than 100 feet and then merge onto northbound DC 295. The lack of adequate storage and merge area on the ramp caused a ripple effect in congestion along Pennsylvania Avenue and DC 295. Queues for this movement were often seen as far back as the Sousa Bridge. In turn, the queues spilt over into the through lanes for eastbound Pennsylvania Avenue. Improvements The scope of work consisted of:
zz

Figure 514: Penn Ave/DC 295 Planned Improvements

Reconstruction and widening of the existing DC 295 (Anacostia Freeway) ramp from Pennsylvania Avenue SE to northbound; Signing and pavement marking improvements along the Sousa Bridge and the ramp to the Southeast Freeway, including an adjustment to the sequence of overhead signing along the westbound approach of the Sousa Bridge to be in accordance with the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD); Pedestrian, bicycle network, and bus stop amenity spot improvements throughout the project area.
Source: DDOT

zz

zz

Project Timeline Completed in 2013

40

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Project Description & Status

Pennsylvania Avenue & Minnesota Avenue Intersection

Project Reference 5.9

9
Corridor: Middle Anacostia Crossings Project Cost: TBD

Existing Conditions LEnfant Square is named for the parkland at the intersection where Minnesota Avenue and Pennsylvania Avenue meet just east of DC 295. LEnfant Square is a key activity node along Pennsylvania Avenue SE, with housing and retail adjacent to the intersection. The existing trafc patterns and signage can be confusing and are contributing factors to the persistent congestion at the square. Proposed Improvements The Modied Square option at the intersection of Minnesota Avenue and Pennsylvania Avenue stresses the importance of safety and awareness and allows vehicles to navigate through the intersection. This design would allow Pennsylvania Avenue to bisect through the center of the square as well as a way that encompasses the perimeter of the design. This perimeter route acts to calm the trafc, similar to how a trafc circle works, by allowing vehicles to enter and exit the square at locations identied by the intersecting streets. Specic actions proposed include:
zz

Figure 515: Penn & Minnesota Ave Intersection Planned Improvements

Source: Revitalization of Pennsylvania Avenue SE for the Great Streets Initiative, DDOT (2005)

Reconfiguration of the intersection at Pennsylvania Avenue and Minnesota Avenue so that Pennsylvania Avenue would consist of three through lanes in each direction and Minnesota Avenue would consist of a counter-clockwise circulating roadway around LEnfant Square. All turns to and from the square would be right turns, eliminating the need for left turn lanes and exclusive left-turn signals. Signal timing optimization along Pennsylvania Avenue, east of the Anacostia River; Roadway resurfacing and pavement marking replacement; Pedestrian, bicycle network, and bus stop amenity spot improvements throughout the study area.

zz zz zz

Implementation DDOT and FHWA, in coordination with the National Park Service (NPS), are proposing these improvements to the intersection at Pennsylvania Avenue and Minnesota Avenue SE. Key to this project is the potential for land transfer between DDOT and NPS to facilitate the reconguration of the Twining Square area. The project has not advanced beyond the environmental assessment stage. Design is anticipated to begin in FY 2014 and construction expected to be funded in FY 2016.

Project Timeline
Sub-Project Name Penn Ave/Minn Ave Intersection
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Design

Construction

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

41

Project Description & Status Project Reference 5.10

11 10
Corridor: Middle Anacostia Crossings Project Cost: $1.7M

Pedestrian Bridge: Anacostia High School to Anacostia Park

Figure 516: Anacostia Pedestrian Bridge Current Conditions

Existing Conditions One of the areas of emphasis in the study was to ensure and enhance the accessibility to Anacostia Park from both sides of the Anacostia river. The Anacostia Freeway, located on the east side of the Anacostia River, is considered the major roadway traversing the study area. A pedestrian overpass exists that provides a connection from the Fairlawn community to Anacostia Park. One access point to the pedestrian bridge is located near the Anacostia High School, while the other is located near the recreational center in Anacostia Park. This structure was in need of some minor repairs, and the existing access ramps to the bridge were not ADA compliant. Improvements The pedestrian bridge over the Anacostia Freeway from the Anacostia High School to the Anacostia Park (east side of the Anacostia River) was upgraded to enhance safety and accessibility. New fencing, railings, lighting, and deck resurfacing were installed or completed to ensure a higher quality facility for pedestrians traveling to and from the Park. The pedestrian bridge now meets ADA requirements. Implementation This project is complete. It was completed as part of the 11th Street Bridge project.

Source: DDOT

Project Timeline Completed in 2012

42

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Project Description & Status

11th Street Bridge: Phase 1

P r o j e c t R e f e r e n c e 5 . 11

11
Corridor: Middle Anacostia Crossings Project Cost: $340.0M

Pre-Existing Conditions The trafc movements on the 11th Street Bridges were incomplete and mixed local and regional trafc, which caused a safety hazard excessive weaving and merging maneuvers. While all trafc movements were provided on the west side of the river, many were not provided on the east side. Southbound motorists on the Anacostia Freeway could not access the bridges to go west; nor could motorists on the bridges go north onto the Freeway. The ramps to make these connections did not exist. This resulted in commuter trafc to and from the north driving through neighborhood streets to get to their destinations. Improvements DDOT reconstructed and recongured the interchange of the Southeast/Southwest Freeway and the Anacostia Freeway over the Anacostia River, a distance of approximately 1 mile. A Record of Decision for the project was released on 2008. DDOT began construction of the 11th Street Bridge Project in December 2009, and Phase 1 was designed to:
zz

Figure 517: 11th Street Bridge During Construction

Source: DDOT

Improve mobility by providing separate freeway and local traffic connections to both directions of the DC 295/Anacostia Freeway, the Southeast-Southwest Freeway and local streets on both sides of the Anacostia River; Provide a shared path for pedestrians and bicycles, as well as rails to allow future streetcar connections; Replace the existing functionally deficient and structurally obsolete bridges; Provide an additional alternate evacuation route from our Nations Capitol; Include new multi-purpose trail connections and environmental investments.

zz

Figure 518: 11th Street Bridge Phase 1 During Construction

zz zz zz

The new river crossing is projected to serve almost 180,000 vehicles per day by 2030. Implementation Phase 1 includes the three new bridges and most of the other amenities noted above. Construction began in December 2009 and was completed in late 2013.
Source: DDOT

Project Timeline Completed in 2013

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

43

Project Description & Status Project Reference 5.12

12
Corridor: Middle Anacostia Crossings Project Cost: $120.0M

11th Street Bridge: Phase 2

Pre-Existing Conditions Phase 2 focused on the 11th Street Bridge/Southeast Freeway Interchange, which is located on the west side of the Anacostia River. This is another incomplete interchange within the study area that did not provide all the movements for local and regional connections. In addition, the Southeast Freeway created a barrier between neighborhood streets as well as the waterfront. Proposed Improvements The $90 million second phase is intended to further improve connections between the Southeast/Southwest Freeway and Virginia Avenue SE, with the new outbound 11th Street Freeway Bridge, as well as boulevard connections between 11th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue SE. Implementation Construction started in 2013 and will be complete in late 2015.

Figure 519: 11th Street Bridge Phase 2 Rendering

Figure 520: 11th Street Bridge Phase 2 Current Conditions

Source: DDOT

Source: DDOT

Project Timeline

Phase Design-Build - Phase 2

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Design

Construction

44

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Project Description & Status

Barney Circle / Southeast Boulevard

Project Reference 5.13

13
Corridor: Middle Anacostia Crossings Project Cost: $50M - $250M

Existing Conditions Currently, the Southeast Freeway comes to an abrupt end just to the west of Barney Circle, where it connects with Pennsylvania Avenue, and its trafc spills out onto local roads. This junction does not operate as a true trafc circle because many of the movements are not provided. DDOT has de-listed this segment from the Interstate System and converted its classication to a primary arterial. Proposed Improvements A boulevard conguration in the Southeast Freeway right-of-way between 11th Street and Barney Circle has been proposed. To maintain exibility in land use, four conceptual plans to redevelop the Southeast Freeway right-of-way, with a boulevard design, were prepared in the Middle Anacostia Crossings Transportation Study (2005). These plans and cross-sections can be implemented in several combinations to best meet the needs of the neighborhood. The boulevard would feed directly into the new Barney Circle that would service all movements. The proposed circle conguration would provide better connectivity to Anacostia Park and the waterfront, and provide increased landscaping opportunities. The project will:
zz

Figure 521: Barney Circle/ Southeast Boulevard

Source: DDOT

Figure 522: Barney Circle / Southeast Boulevard Proposed Improvements

Reconfigure Barney Circle to accommodate all neighborhood turning movements and pedestrian and bicyclist connectivity to the waterfront. Redesign Southeast Freeway to be a great urban boulevard with mixed-uses and landscaping. Reconnect the city grid to the boulevard and mitigate the barrier between the neighborhoods and the Waterfront parks. Provide opportunities for enhanced public transit.
Source: Middle Anacostia Crossings Transportation Study, DDOT (2005)

zz

zz

zz

Implementation DDOT has initiated an environmental assessment and determination process. Construction is anticipated to begin in late 2016 or early 2017 and be complete by late 2018. Implementation of this project will need to be coordinated with several projects within the study corridor, some of which include construction timing of the latter phases of the 11st Street Bridge, Deep Tunnel, and potential CSX Virginia Avenue reconstruction.

MAC 5-14 (Barney Circle/Southeast Boulevard) Project Timeline Sub-Project Name Southeast Boulevard Barney Circle
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Env. Doc.

Design

Construction

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

45

Project Description & Status Project Reference 5.14

14
Corridor: Middle Anacostia Crossings Project Cost: $152M

Virginia Avenue SE / CSX National Gateway 12th Street SE

Existing Conditions The 100 year old Virginia Avenue Tunnel (VAT) is located immediately beneath Virginia Avenue in southeast DC for approximately 4,000 feet and contains a single railroad track. The tunnel is bound by 2nd Street SE near the southern portal and 11th Street SE near the northern portal. Owned and maintained by CSX Transportation, Inc. (CSXT), the VAT has long been identied as one of the most signicant freight bottlenecks on the East Coast. Improvements The purpose of the project is to provide CSXT with the ability to operate double-stack intermodal container freight trains on a vital segment of the nations rail network and eliminate a chokepoint caused by the VATs single track. In addition, the VAT is more than 100 years old and will, in any event, require major rehabilitation or reconstruction at some point.

Figure 523: Virginia Avenue Tunnel Current Conditions

Source: www.JDLand.com

By creating a reconstructed VAT with a vertical height that will allow CSXT to operate double-stack intermodal container freight trains, the railroad will be able to expand its capacity to transport freight in an environmentally sensitive manner. Furthermore, because the new tunnel will re-establish a second set of tracks (the tunnel was originally constructed with two tracks), CSXT will eliminate the chokepoint that currently delays all trains traveling through the Washington region. Figure 524: Virginia Avenue Tunnel Planned Improvements Implementation The project will be implemented as design-build, with CSXT building the improvements. Design is anticipated to begin in early 2014 and depending upon which alternative is selected through the environmental process, construction could be completed as early as 2017 (Alternatives 2 or 3) or as late as 2020 (Alternative 4). DDOT has been asked to consider issuing permits to allow CSXT the temporary usage of air rights in the vicinity of Interstate 295 and the 11th Street Bridges, as well as the temporary closure of the Southeast Freeway/I-295 ramp at 8th Street SE to facilitate construction associated with the VAT. This request will require oversight and approval by FHWA.

Source: CSXT

Project Timeline

Sub-Project Name Virginia Ave SE/CSX National Gateway

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Env. Doc.

Design

Construction

46

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Project Description & Status

Kenilworth Avenue Corridor

Project Cost: $341.3M Figure 525: Kenilworth Avenue Corridor Area Map Kenilworth Avenue is a major highway providing a link between I-395, I-295, and the Baltimore-Washington Parkway. It serves as an important commuter route, carrying over 100,000 vehicles daily between Maryland and Washington, DC. The Kenilworth Avenue Corridor Study was the third major transportation study by DDOT to look at transportation improvements for the AWI area. The study area is located in the northeast and southeast quadrants of Washington, DC and examines the section of Kenilworth Avenue between Pennsylvania Avenue and Eastern Avenue. Kenilworth Avenue lies east of, and roughly parallel to, the Anacostia River. The study explored options for improving Kenilworth Avenue within the context of three major goals:
zz zz zz

Providing a safer, more pedestrian friendly, atmosphere; Creating a more urban setting for Kenilworth Avenue; and Improving access for local neighborhoods.

The study developed recommendations to transform Kenilworth Avenue into an urban roadway which is more pedestrian friendly and more accessible for the adjoining communities and neighborhoods. Discrete projects were identied and incorporated into the AWI transportation program. Below is a brief listing of improvements at key intersections:
zz zz zz zz zz

Nannie Helen Burroughs Avenue East Capitol Street Benning Road Eastern Avenue Pedestrian Bridges at Minnesota Avenue and Deanwood Metrorail Stations

Source: Kenilworth Avenue Corridor Study, DDOT (2007)

Project Timeline

Kenilworth Avenue Corridor

Project Timeline
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

Sub-Project Name Kenilworth Near-Term Imp. Nannie Helen Burroughs East Capitol Street Benning Road Eastern Avenue Kenilworth Ave. Mainline Imp. Parkside Pedestrian Bridge DC 295/Kenilworth Ped Bridge

Planning

Env. Doc. Completed

Design TBD

Construction

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

47

Project Description & Status Project Reference 5.15

15
Corridor: Kenilworth Corridor Project Cost: $18M Figure 526: Kenilworth Avenue Corridor Before Construction

Kenilworth Avenue Corridor (2008 Near-Term Improvements)

Pre-Existing Conditions Access to and across Anacostia Freeway/Kenilworth Avenue is provided via interchanges with Pennsylvania Avenue SE, East Capitol Street, Benning Road NE, Nannie Helen Burroughs Avenue NE, and Eastern Avenue. Many of these interchanges had slip ramps that encouraged lane-changing at highway speeds. Kenilworth Avenue presented a major barrier to pedestrian and bicycle movement, and held numerous safety concerns. Improvements
zz

Creation of a new connection to allow traffic on westbound East Capitol Street to exit southbound and northbound onto Kenilworth Avenue. Consolidation and realignment of the slip ramps between Kenilworth Avenue and the parallel service road north of Nannie Helen Burroughs Avenue. Implementation of a corridor-wide landscaping, signage, and street furniture program. General improvements to the pedestrian and bicycle throughway, curb ramps, pedestrian roadway, lighting and signal, and bicycle parking through specific projects and as part of area-wide programs. Installation of additional lighting throughout the corridor in locations where lighting is lacking. Upgrades to signage to meet FHWA Standards and to effectively communicate major exits.

Source: DDOT

zz

zz zz

Figure 527: Kenilworth Avenue Corridor After Construction

zz

zz

Implementation This project was completed in 2009, in concert with the Nannie Helen Burroughs Avenue Interchange project.
Source: Fort Meyer Construction

Project Timeline Completed in 2009

48

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Project Description & Status

Nannie Helen Burroughs Interchange

Project Reference 5.16

16
Corridor: Kenilworth Corridor Project Cost: $14M

Pre-Existing Conditions Nannie Helen Burroughs Avenue, which passes underneath Kenilworth Avenue and the adjacent CSX Railroad tracks, was very old and in need of replacement. Access for pedestrians and bicyclists was constrained due to the narrowness of the underpasses. In addition, there was no night lighting or clear demarcation of pedestrian paths at street intersections to encourage walking. Improvements The scope of the project included the following elements:
zz

Figure 528: Nannie Helen Burroughs Interchange Improvements Plans

Widening of Kenilworth Avenue to include improved shoulders and the realignment of the Nanny Helen Burroughs Avenue intersection with Kenilworth Terrace and Kenilworth Avenue on and off ramps. The resurfacing of the adjacent service roads and construction of two new signalized intersections on Burroughs Avenue. Replacement of Bridge 19 (Kenilworth Avenue over Burroughs Avenue) with a new twospan steel multi-girder superstructure on integral abutments and cap and column pier, utilizing innovative technology: mechanically stabilized earth walls. Replacement of Bridges 19-1 High (Kenilworth Avenue over Watts Branch), 19-1 Low (Ramp to Nannie Helen Burroughs Avenue) and 48 (ramp to Kenilworth Avenue Southbound) utilizing a new steel multi-beam superstructure on existing substructures improved and widened to provide semi-integral abutments. Installation of new utilities including: storm water collection with water quality catch basins, upgraded decorative street lighting, new intersection signaling, and relocation of existing water mains to better serve surrounding residences and businesses.

Source: Kenilworth Avenue Corridor Study, DDOT (2007)

zz

zz

Figure 529: Nannie Helen Burroughs Interchange Current Conditions

zz

zz

Source: www.cityartdc.org

In addition to the above road and bridge work, the project also included a number of other improvements to benet the local community, including the remodeling of the National Park Service property at the entrance to Kenilworth Park, artistic architectural features, signicant new landscaping with automated irrigation systems, decorative brick paving, and the installation of District-funded mosaic art work produced in cooperation with local residential programs through the Corcoran Gallery of Art and City Arts. Implementation The project started in April 2007 and was completed in July 2012. Project Timeline Completed in 2010

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

49

Project Description & Status Project Reference 5.17

East Capitol Street Interchange

17
Corridor: Kenilworth Corridor Project Cost: $78M

Existing Conditions The existing interchange does not provide for movements from northbound or southbound Kenilworth Avenue to eastbound East Capitol Street, from northbound Kenilworth Avenue to westbound East Capitol Street, or from westbound East Capitol Street to northbound or southbound Kenilworth Avenue. Proposed Improvements The East Capitol Street interchange scope proposes two reconstruction scenarios: one similar to the existing interchange and the other as an urban diamond, but with Kenilworth Avenue realigned to the east closer to the CSX railroad tracks, thus providing new open space between Kenilworth Avenue and the Anacostia River. Project Implementation The Benning Road (Project 5.18) and East Capitol Street interchanges should not proceed simultaneously, nor should either proceed at the same time as any major improvements on New York Avenue (another critical gateway in the District from the east), as each of these roadways provides an alternative to the other during construction. However, due to the proximity of the ramps for the Benning Road and East Capitol Street interchanges (1200 to 1500 feet between adjacent ramps), if the depressed option (Project 5.20) is selected fgr Kenilworth, it may be preferable to reconstruct these interchanges simultaneously to ease the transition between the two along Kenilworth Avenue. Figure 530: East Capitol Street Interchange Improvement Plans

Source: Kenilworth Avenue Corridor Study (2007)

Project Timeline To be determined, dependent upon the availability of funding.

50

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Project Description & Status

Benning Road Interchange

Project Reference 5.18

18
Corridor: Kenilworth Corridor Project Cost: $168M

Existing Conditions The existing interchange at Kenilworth Avenue and Benning Road does not provide for movements from northbound or southbound Kenilworth Avenue to eastbound Benning Road, or from westbound Benning Road to northbound or southbound Kenilworth Avenue. There is only one exit ramp from southbound Kenilworth Avenue to Benning Road, via a circuitous exit ramp. Proposed Improvements Improvements associated with the Benning Road interchange include reconstruction of the Kenilworth Avenue/Benning Road interchange as a multi-level diamond interchange carrying Benning Road over Kenilworth Avenue and providing for all movements. Implementation Due to the increased turning capacity provided by the proposed Benning Road interchange, it would be preferable to construct this interchange prior to the East Capitol Street interchange to provide drivers with a more viable option to avoid East Capitol Street. Neither the Benning Road nor the East Capitol Street interchange should proceed simultaneously with the improvements proposed in the Middle Anacostia River Crossings Transportation Study at Anacostia Freeway / Pennsylvania Avenue SE or Barney Circle, as Pennsylvania Avenue is a viable alternative to either roadway during construction. The environmental documentation (EA) has been initiated by DDOT. Design and construction dependent upon funding availability.

Figure 531: Benning Road Interchange Planned Improvements

Source: Kenilworth Avenue Corridor Study, DDOT (2007)

P r o jBenning e c t T iRoad m e lInterchange ine

Sub-Project Name Benning Road

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Env. Doc.

TBD

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

51

Project Description & Status Project Reference 5.19

19
Corridor: Kenilworth Corridor Project Cost: $11M

Eastern Avenue Interchange

Figure 532: Eastern Avenue Interchange After Construction

Pre-Existing Conditions Built in 1956, the Eastern Avenue Bridge over Kenilworth Avenue (I-295) is a vital link for pedestrians and vehicles between the communities of northeast Washington, DC, that are divided by Kenilworth Avenue. While there are pedestrian bridges at approximately 1/4mile intervals to the south, near the northern terminus, the closest vehicle access across Kenilworth Avenue is approximately 3/4 mile away. The bridge also is an important truck turn-around for the industrial sites in the area. Kenilworth Avenue is a major north-south corridor between Maryland and Virginia and is a commuter route into Washington, DC, from the north, south, and east. The bridge also contributed to a poor pedestrian environment, without landscaping or streetscape features. Furthermore, because of substandard clearances over Kenilworth Avenue, the Eastern Avenue Bridge had been repeatedly hit by over-height vehicles. Improvements The bridge was reconstructed, with the primary objective of increasing the minimum vertical clearance over Kenilworth Avenue and improving vehicle and pedestrian movements across the bridge. The project maintained both U-turn ramps, but relocated them further from the intersection to provide space for pedestrian and landscape improvements, including pedestrian lighting. This required full reconstruction to create a wider bridge deck. Implementation Prefabricated superstructure and pier elements were used to minimize onsite construction duration and trafc impacts. A new pedestrian/bicycle connection between the end of Anacostia Avenue and Eastern Avenue provides additional access to the Anacostia Waterfront and the surrounding neighborhoods and attractions. By using prefabrication techniques, DDOT applied and received a $1M construction grant from FHWAs Highways for Life program, which encourages state transportation departments to use accelerated construction methods in their projects. The project achieved the performance goal of a 50-percent reduction in the time highway users were affected by construction. The project was completed in 2010.

Source: Highways for Life: Eastern Avenue Bridge, FHWA (2010)

Project Timeline Completed in 2010

52

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Project Description & Status

Kenilworth Avenue Mainline Improvements

Project Reference 5.20

20
Corridor: Kenilworth Corridor Project Cost: TBD

Existing Conditions Kenilworth Avenue currently presents a major barrier to pedestrian and bicycle movement east of the Anacostia River. In addition, the roadway is hampered by several short merging zones and the resultant weaving trafc patterns. Proposed Improvements This project would reconstruct Kenilworth Avenue from north of the Anacostia Freeway/ Pennsylvania Avenue interchange to the District-Maryland border. The roadway would be reconstructed as either an eight-lane urban boulevard, a four-lane or six-lane limitedaccess roadway anked by access roads, or a combination of an at-grade four-lane roadway between Pennsylvania Avenue and East Capitol Street and a depressed six-lane roadway anked by at-grade access roads from East Capitol Street to the DC/Maryland border. Implementation If the depressed roadway option is chosen for Kenilworth Avenue, a new vehicular crossing of Kenilworth Avenue at Nash Street and a new pedestrian crossing at Douglass Street will be included. All options will provide landscaping and bicycle/pedestrian improvements throughout the corridor. Planning sketches have been prepared, but environmental documentation has not been initiated at this time. Planning of options is presently underway. Figure 533: Kenilworth Corridor Mainline Planned Improvements

Source: Kenilworth Avenue Corridor Study, DDOT (2007)

Project Timeline

Sub-Project Name Kenilworth Ave. Main-Line Imp.

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Planning

TBD

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

53

Project Description & Status Project Reference 5.21

21
Corridor: Kenilworth Corridor Project Cost: $16M

Parkside Pedestrian Bridge

Existing Conditions The Parkside Pedestrian Bridge will provide safe, well-lit, disabilities-accessible pedestrian travel between neighborhoods and Minnesota Avenue Metrorail station now separated by DC 295 and two sets of railroad tracks just north of the Kenilworth Avenue and Benning Road interchange. Proposed Improvements The proposed bridge will span over DC 295 (Kenilworth Avenue), CSXT tracks and rightof-way, and WMATA tracks and right-of-way. The approach ramps and stairs on the west side will land on public property but travel through the private property of the Parkside Development. The approach ramps and stairs on the east side will land and travel through both public and WMATA property. Implementation The project involves numerous stakeholders and utilities, including a private developer, CSXT, WMATA and Pepco. The project is to be advertised in early 2014, with contract award expected soon afterward.

Figure 534: Parkside Pedestrian Bridge Existing Conditions

Figure 535: Parkside Pedestrian Bridge Conceptual Design

Source: DDOT

Source: DDOT

Project Timeline

Sub-Project Name Parkside Pedestrian Bridge

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Design

Construction

54

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Project Description & Status

DC 295/Kenilworth Pedestrian Bridges

Project Reference 5.22

22
Corridor: Kenilworth Corridor Project Cost: $15.3M

Existing Conditions Kenilworth Avenue is an urban freeway with three trafc lanes in each direction. Adjacent to the freeway, in each direction, are single-lane service roads (with capacity for on-street parking) that are accessible from the freeway via at-grade slip ramps. Currently, three pedestrian bridges that were constructed in the 1950s span over the freeway to connect the communities and services on either side of Kenilworth Avenue. However, the three bridges do not span over the service lanes, which forces pedestrians to cross the non-signalized service roads at-grade. Finally, none of the bridges meet current American with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. Figure 536: DC 295/Kenilworth Pedestrian Bridges Rendering Proposed Improvements The three bridges will be removed and replaced with two bridges that span the freeway and service roads. The proposed bridges will be ADA compliant. Implementation The project has moved through the planning phase and is currently under design. Further progress on the project is subject to including the scope of work for the bridges within larger projects such as South Capitol Street and DC Streetcar.

Source: DDOT

Project Timeline

Sub-Project Name DC 295/Kenilworth Ped Bridge

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Design

Construction

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

55

Project Description & Status

M Street/Southeast-Southwest Corridor

Corridor Cost: $653.4M This corridor is poised for substantial new growth along M Street and in the Southeast /Southwest Waterfront area, between 12th Street SE and 14th Street SW (Study Area). At buildout, the Study will have an additional 36 million square feet of development concentrated within a 0.78 squaremile core subarea. The premise is to redevelop, reinvent, and reconnect this area by better integrating it with the surrounding neighborhoods and improving multimodal travel and public realm within the neighborhood. Efforts are focused on identifying and developing improvements in the following core areas:
zz

The Wharf / Southwest Waterfront: These neighborhoods stretch across 47 acres from the historic Fish Market to Fort McNair. Buzzard Point: This neighborhood consists of 9 acres bounded by the Southwest Waterfront, Fort McNair, Nationals Park, and the Anacostia River. Ballpark District / The Yards: This area is home to Nationals Park and the US DOT, respectively. The core area is bounded by South Capitol Street, M Street, the Anacostia River, and the Washington Navy Yard. Near Southeast / Capitol Quarter: This neighborhood is bounded by New Jersey Avenue, I-695, M Street, and 11th Street.

Figure 537: M Street/SE-SW Corridor Projected Development

zz

zz

zz

zz

Capitol Riverfront Business Improvement District: The Front, located five blocks south of the US Capitol Building, provides modern amenities in a riverfront setting by retrofitting an area with a distinct industrial heritage. M Street Corridor: M Street is a six-lane east-west minor arterial that connects Maine Avenue SW to 11th Street SE, with Maine Avenue extending from M Street to 17th Street NW, connecting the Southwest Waterfront and the National Mall.

zz

Project Timeline
Sub-Project Name M Street SE/SW Transport Study DC United Soccer Stadium 4th Street, SW Reconstruction Maine Avenue SW Improvements The Wharf - Infrastructure MD Ave CSX National Gateway
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

Planning

Env. Doc. Completed

Design TBD

Construction

56

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Project Description & Status

M Street / Southeast-Southwest Transportation Study


Corridor: M Street/SE-SW

Project Cost: $0.9M Pre-Existing Conditions The M Street SE/SW Transportation Study identied current and future transportation challenges and proposed solutions within a roughly 1.7 square-mile area along M Street SE/SW, and the Southwest Waterfront, bounded by 12th Street SE (east) to 14th Street SW (west) and from the Southwest/Southeast Freeway (north) to the Anacostia River/Washington Channel (south). Figure 538: M Street SE/SW Corridor Study Area Study Scope This analysis was conducted through two discrete studies. 2012 Study The rst study analyzed how to integrate transit, bicycling and walking with motor vehicle trafc to best serve neighborhoods in this burgeoning section of the city. In addition, the study seeks ways to most safely and effectively balance the travel needs of residents with those of visitors and workers who will be drawn to new retail and mixed-use development planned for the area. Movement of goods, parking and transportation facilities that give people access to all the new amenities coming to the M Street corridor also are being considered.

Source: DDOT

The study identied 3 corridors that will be signicantly impacted by planned and ongoing development, and therefore warrant investigation to determine the appropriate multimodal improvements (i.e., priority transit). Those corridors are I Street, M Street and Potomac Avenue. 2013 Study The initial study has resulted in the scoping of a subsequent study that is focused on Special Events management in the stadium district (in anticipation of further development of entertainment facilities and ancillary development). This study will help stakeholders better understand the projected transportation demand and impacts; then determine the appropriate strategies and investments to support events management in the stadium district. Implementation The rst study was launched in November 2011 and the nal report was released in late 2012. The Special Events Transportation Analysis was initiated in May 2013 and is expected to be complete by early 2014. Project Timeline

Sub-Project Name M St SE/SW Transport Study

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Planning

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

57

Project Description & Status

Project Reference 5.23

DC United Soccer Stadium

23
Corridor: M St SE/SW Project Cost: $150M Existing Conditions The Major League Soccer team DC United currently plays in the antiquated RFK Stadium, a stadium that is congured for football and is too large for soccer. The stadium also lacks modern amenities and is not conveniently located for the soccer fan demographic. DC United has been actively looking to build a soccer-specic stadium for a number of years. Proposed Improvements This project will construct a 20,000 seat stadium congured specically for soccer in the M Street/Poplar Point area near Nationals Park. Transportation and parking improvements will also be part of the project. The stadium will host additional events such as concerts and other sporting events. Implementation A site has been identied and an agreement reached between the team and the District. A transportation study is currently underway by the District, while stadium concepts are being considered by the team. Construction is likely to begin in 2017 with the stadium to open in 2019. Figure 5-39: DC United Soccer Stadium Daytime Rendering Figure 540: DC United Soccer Stadium Aerial View Rendering

Source: DC United

Source: DC United

Project Timeline
Sub-Project Name DC United Soccer Stadium
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Planning

Env. Doc.

Design

Construction

58

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Project Description & Status

4th Street SW Reconstruction

Project Reference 5.24

24
Corridor: M Street/SE-SW Project Cost: $4M

Pre-Existing Conditions Between I and M Streets SW, the right-of-way of 4th Street SW was interrupted by the Waterside Mall complex, a retail and ofce development built during the 1960s. A trafc study conducted by DDOT in 2002 and 2003 showed rather high average daily trafc numbers (4,800 vehicles per day) for 3rd Street SW. Much of this high trafc load was attributed to the lack of a through-connection on 4th Street. Additional trafc spillover effects were felt on I and M Streets as part of the route around Waterside Mall. Implementation A large, multi-use development, which included over 1 million square feet each of ofce space and residential space and more than 100,000 square feet of retail space, was built at the site of the Waterside Mall. The development was designed to take advantage of street front-oriented retail along the new segment of 4th Street. As part of a project, under the direction of DDOT and the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development, 4th Street SW was rebuilt by the developer, as well as two levels of below-grade parking.

Figure 541: 4th Street SW Current Conditions

Source: Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development

Project Timeline Completed in 2010

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

59

Project Description & Status Project Reference 5.25

25
Corridor: M Street/SE-SW Project Cost: $1.5M

Maine Ave SW Improvements

Figure 542: Maine Avenue Improvements Current Conditions

Existing Conditions Maine Avenue SW connects directly to M Street SW, I-395, and 14th Street SW. Access to the Fish Market from Maine Avenue is via the 9th Street and 7th Street intersections with Maine Avenue and Water Street; and an entrance from eastbound Maine Avenue. Water Street parallels Maine Avenue and functions as a service road for the Southwest Waterfront. The Fish Market parking lot is accessed from the cul-de-sac at the west end of the Water Street service road. Planned redevelopment of the Southwest Waterfront will eliminate the Water Street access to the Fish Market, resulting in the need to provide new direct access from Maine Avenue via the new intersection. Improvements Following the recommendations from the Southwest Waterfront Maine Avenue Trafc Study (2005), this project will install a new intersection along Maine Avenue to provide a separate and independent access to the Fish Market, which is located at the west end of the waterfront complex. The scope of the project includes installing a signalized intersection on Maine Avenue between 9th and 12th Streets, with a median break on Maine Avenue so that vehicles can turn in and out of the Fish Market entrance and so that pedestrians can safely cross Maine Avenue. In addition, the developer of the Southwest Waterfront mixed-use development will remove a section of Water Street from near the new intersection to past M Street SW. Implementation This project will be mostly completed by the developers of the Southwest Waterfront mixed-use development. DDOTs only construction responsibility was the new intersection on Maine Avenue, which cost a total of $1.5 million.

Source: DDOT

Project Timeline DDOT scope completed in 2012. See Project 5-26: The Wharf - Infrastructure for more schedule information.

60

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Project Description & Status

The Wharf Infrastructure

Project Reference 5.26

26
Corridor: M Street/SE-SW Project Cost: $198M

Background DC developers have proposed a mix of hotels, ofces, residential units, retail, a marina and underground parking. Ten acres of parks and open spaces, including a waterfront promenade, will connect the buildings to the surrounding neighborhood. Figure 543: Water Street Infrastructure Improvement Plans Proposed Improvements As part of this projects nancing plan, $198 million is available to the developer to make agreed upon infrastructure investments. The District will issue revenue bonds to be repaid by special assessments, tax increment nancing and payments in lieu of taxes. The infrastructure improvements will be constructed in concert with the approved phasing plan for the real estate development. Improvements will include:
zz zz zz

Work associated with WMATAs Yellow and Green line Metrorail tunnels Site prep and site-wide utility relocation and construction Hardscape, lighting, landscaping, site furnishings, traffic signalization, etc. at key structures, parks and along streets

Source: PN Hoffman
zz zz zz zz

Public area water features and art work Bulkhead/Seawall repair/reconstruction and fendering Public use floating docks, mooring field, and marina Banneker Park stair and connection Figure 544: Water Street Infrastructure Conceptual Design

Implementation The terms of the Developers Tax Increment Financing (TIF) agreement stipulate that these funds will be reimbursed according to the following schedule:
zz zz zz

Phase 1: Approx. 50% of available bond proceeds Phase 2: Approx. 15% of available bond proceeds Phase 3: Approx. 35% of available bond proceeds

Project Timeline
Sub-Project Name The Wharf - Phase 1 The Wharf - Phase 2 The Wharf - Phase 3
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

Construction

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

61

Project Description & Status Project Reference 5.27

27
Corridor: M Street/SE-SW Project Cost: $429M Figure 545: Maryland Avenue SW Existing Conditions

Maryland Avenue SW / CSX National Gateway

Existing Conditions Maryland Avenue is a disconnected series of unimproved public spaces and street segments interrupted by a depressed active rail corridor owned by CSX. The rail line is predominantly used for transporting freight along the eastern seaboard. Passenger trains are limited. From the south, the rail line consists of two tracks over the Long Bridge, and three tracks that run through a short tunnel between 12th and 14th Streets which daylight within an open corridor between 9th and 12th Streets. Along this segment, there are oddlyshaped parcels of under-used land and buildings which turn their back to the corridor, establishing an industrial character. Improvements CSXs National Gateway project proposes to improve the ow of freight between the MidAtlantic and the Midwest states. To increase the movement of freight through the corridor, CSX proposes to expand capacity and upgrade tracks, equipment, and facilities.

Figure 546: Maryland Avenue SW Proposed Improvements

Improvement of the rail corridor provides the ability to increase the number of tracks and increase the vertical clearances. Increasing the vertical clearances will provide the opportunity to accommodate double-stacked trains and to deck the corridor and construct a new Maryland Avenue. Adding a fourth track will increase rail capacity, accommodate electrication of at least one track, and help separate freight trains and commuter trains to the extent possible through the District of Columbia. CSXs improvements dovetail with the Districts plans to reinstitute Maryland Avenue SW with an attractive, vibrant streetscape to activate this part of the federal employment district. Implementation This track lowering will occur in conjunction with two other adjacent sites (located immediately east of the 12th Street overpass) that also require additional vertical clearance. These sites are the I-395 Ramp and the 10th Street Track Lowerings. DDOT is currently conducting a Maryland Avenue SW Planning Study. The study looks at the issues related to implementing the transportation portions of the Small Area Plan, including network analysis.

Project Timeline To be determined, subject to the availability of funding.

62

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Project Description & Status

Anacostia Riverwalk Trail

Project Reference 5.28

28
Project Cost: $50M The Anacostia Riverwalk Trail is a 20-mile multi-use trail along the east and west banks of the Anacostia River in Washington, DC. The Riverwalk Trail serves as a backbone of the Anacostia Waterfront, connecting residents, visitors and communities to the river, one another and numerous commercial and recreational destinations. DDOT has taken the lead in planning and constructing the Riverwalk as a recreational amenity and transportation alternative for District residents. The Trail varies in width to ensure comfort for a wide range of users including bicyclists, inline-skaters, pedestrians, disabled people, and others. Periodic waysides provide seating, system maps, bike racks, and interpretive exhibits.
Source: DDOT

Figure 547: Anacostia Riverwalk Maine Avenue

When completed, The Trail will connect 16 waterfront neighborhoods to the Anacostia National Park and the Anacostia River. Washington residents and visitors will be able to walk and bike on the Riverwalk to several popular destinations, including the Fish Market, Nationals Park, Poplar Point, the Navy Yard, historic Anacostia, RFK stadium, Kingman Island, and The National Arboretum. At either end, the trail will connect to the National Mall at the Tidal Basin and to the Bladensburg Marina Park in Prince Georges County, MD. Completed Segments To date, 15.5 miles of the ultimate 28 miles of the Riverwalk Trail are open and heavily used, including the following two portions of the trail that opened in Spring 2012:
zz

Figure 548: Anacostia Riverwalk FRP Bridge West Bank

Source: DDOT

Maine Avenue, which better connects the Tidal Basin to the Fish Market/Southwest Waterfront. A fiberglass-decked, weathering steel bridge over the CSX railroad tracks along the western side of the Anacostia River just north of the John Philip Sousa Bridge.

Figure 549: Anacostia Riverwalk FRP Bridge East Bank

zz

The Navy Yard component is completed, but due to operational and security concerns this segment is subject to periodic closures. Alternative routes may need to be identified if arrangements cannot be made with the Navy to provide access.

Anacostia Trail P r o j e c Riverwalk t Time line

Project Timeline
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Source: DDOT

Sub-Project Name 11th Street Bridges FRP Bridges Kenilworth Gardens National Mall Connections Arboretum South Capitol Street Trail Buzzard Point Southwest Waterfront Florida Rock Properties Poplar Point

2020

2021

2022

Completed

Design

Construction

TBD

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

63

Project Description & Status

Anacostia Riverwalk Trail (Cont.)


In 2013 the following segments of the trail were opened for use:
zz

The eastern fiberglass bridges over the CSX railroad, completing trail connections on both sides of the river from South Capitol Street to Benning Road. The bike trail on the 11th Street Bridge facilitates access to Anacostia and the Anacostia Park from Capitol Hill. This trail is on the local traffic span of the 11th Street Bridge, which ties in directly to the local street network on either side of the Anacostia.

zz

Segments in Planning/Design DDOT also has 8 segments at some phase of the planning and/or design stage, including:
zz zz zz zz zz zz zz

National Mall Connections National Arboretum Buzzard Point The Wharf Florida Rock Properties Poplar Point South Capitol Trail Figure 550: Anacostia Riverwalk Area Map

Source: DDOT

64

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Project Description & Status

Anacostia Riverwalk Trail (Cont.)


These segments will be delivered by DDOT, National Park Service, or a private developer, and a few segments are highlighted below. Kenilworth Gardens The much-anticipated Kenilworth Aquatic Gardens Segment of the Anacostia Riverwalk Trail is the missing link in an almost 60-mile network of bicycle and pedestrian trails between the District of Columbia and Maryland, bringing economic, health and other benets to nearby communities. By connecting Benning Road in the District with Bladensburg Waterfront Park in Bladensburg, Maryland, the four-mile segment creates new connections between communities, the river and its natural resources while enhancing recreational and educational opportunities for trail users. At the same time, the trail increases accessibility to transit stations and makes bicycle commuting more attractive by shortening travel times by as much as 30 minutes. The segments $19 million construction costs are being funded through a $10 million U.S. Department of Transportation TIGER Grant, combined with $7.5 million from the District of Columbia and $1.5 million from Marylands Cycle Maryland Bikeways Program. The trail will be maintained and operated by the District, National Park Service and Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission. Other trail partners include Federal Highway Administration, National Park Service and Prince Georges County (Maryland). Figure 5 51: Anacostia Riverwalk Kenilworth Gardens Figure 5 52: Anacostia Riverwalk Kenilworth Underpass

Source: DDOT

Source: DDOT

South Capitol Street Trail The goal of the South Capitol Street Trail was to improve bicycle and pedestrian access along South Capitol Street/ Overlook Avenue. The concept plan was developed in December 2010. It extends for about 3.8 miles from the Firth Sterling Street/South Capitol Street intersection, southward along South Capitol Street/Overlook Avenue to Laboratory Road, and eastward under the I295 overpass to Shepherd Parkway. The preferred trail typical section shall consist of a 5-foot separation from the roadway travel lane, 10-foot wide trail and a 2-foot buffer from adjacent property. However, it may be necessary to reduce the roadway travel lane widths to obtain enough room to t the trail and provide a buffer for the relocated power poles and hydrants. Approximately 6,000 to 7,000 linear feet of curb line may need to be relocated to accommodate the trail. The South Capitol Street Trail Concept Plan Update and Functional Plans will be reviewed and updated to reect changes in the area and to develop reports and functional design plans. The preliminary Plans are under development. The delivery method has not yet been determined.

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

65

Project Description & Status

Suitland Parkway Corridor

Corridor Cost: $142.7M The Suitland Parkway Corridor includes the areas and transportation networks adjacent to Suitland Parkway, from the interchange of I-295 and South Capitol Street in Washington, D.C, to the District line. The parkway was conceived in 1937, and built during World War II to provide a road connection between military facilities in the metropolitan area. It connected Camp Springs (now Joint Base Andrews) in Prince Georges County with Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling and the US Capitol in Washington, DC (via South Capitol Street). Suitland Parkway completely traverses Ward 8, beginning at its terminus with South Capitol Street and travels southeast to the District line. It is bordered by several neighborhoods characterized by single-family homes nestled within the hilly terrain of the ward. The corridor is home to numerous community assets St. Elizabeths Hospital, Town Hall Education Arts and Recreation Center (THEARC), and Cedar Hill, Frederick Douglass family estate, which is also home to the Historic Anacostia Museum. In recent years, the need for coordinated and detailed transportation planning has been magnied by the combination of reinvestment by the District government and the introduction of federal agencies at the St. Elizabeths Campus. Many of the proposed projects in the Suitland Parkway Corridor were developed to accommodate trafc associated with the consolidated Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Headquarters at St. Elizabeths Campus. The proposed changes in access are one element of the preferred transportation improvements selected by the General Service Administration (GSA), in coordination with DDOT and FHWA, as part of the EIS for the St. Elizabeths Campus Master Plan (GSA 2012). Figure 553: Suitland Parkway Corridor Area Map

Source: Interstate Justification Request (IJR), DDOT (2012)

Project Timeline

Suitland P r o j e Parkway c t T i Corridor meline Sub-Project Name Suitland Parkway Ped/Bike Trail S. Capitol St Phase 2 (Segment 3) MLK Jr Two-Way Reconstruction MLK Jr Two-Way Widening
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

Completed

Design

Construction

TBD

66

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Project Description & Status

Suitland Parkway Pedestrian/Bike Trail

Project Reference 5.29

29
Corridor: Suitland Parkway Corridor Project Cost: $3.0M

Existing Conditions The Suitland Parkway trail is a short paved multi-use path that runs adjacent to Suitland Parkway in Southeast D.C. The trail is accessible from Pomeroy Street SE, and terminates just before Southern Avenue. There is no trail access from Southern Avenue. Proposed Improvements Project will resurface the existing trail and provide a safety barrier between the trail and roadway. Implementation Design is scheduled to start in 2015. Construction will be coordinated with South Capitol Street Corridor Phase 2, which will build the trail along Suitland Parkway between Firth Sterling and Stanton Road. Funding sources could be from Recreational Trails or CMAQ.

Project Timeline To be determined.

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

67

Project Description & Status Project Reference 5.30

30
Corridor: Suitland Parkway Corridor Project Cost: $122.7M

South Capitol Street Phase 2 - Segment 3

Existing Conditions Though Pierre LEnfant envisioned South Capitol Street as a symbolic gateway in his 1791 plan, the street was eventually constructed as a utilitarian arterial and freeway. It has multiple grade separations with its cross streets, including the urban diamond interchange at M Street. East of the river, South Capitol Street splits into northbound and southbound roadways that run south until the Anacostia Naval Annex. Suitland Parkway merges with South Capitol Street in a complicated series of ramps. Suitland Parkway connects to I-295 at an interchange that only provides some trafc movements; the rest are provided via local street connections. There is no present connection between Suitland Parkway and Martin Luther King, Jr. Figure 554: South Capitol Street Improvement Plans Avenue. Planned Improvements This segment provides a new interchange to improve access to and from Suitland Parkway for local trafc as well as improved access for the relocated Department of Homeland Security facilities at St. Elizabeths Campus. The existing Martin Luther King (MLK), Jr. Avenue Bridge over Suitland Parkway will be replaced and a center ramp, signalized interchange will be created to allow full movements to and from Suitland Parkway to MLK Jr. Avenue. The new MLK, Jr. Avenue Bridge will be wider than the existing structure to accommodate turning lanes and sidewalks along both sides. Implementation While the South Capitol Street Corridor Initial Financial Plan Project indicates that the delivery timeline for Phase 2 includes a ve-year gap following the completion of Phase 1 construction. DDOT foresees commencing Phase 2 nal design and construction as funding is budgeted and as the requisite staff resources to manage the procurement, design, and construction of the phase become available, which is expected to be somewhat sooner.

Source: South Capitol Street Initial Financial Plan, DDOT (2013)

Project Timeline

SPC 5-30 (South Capitol St - Phase 2, Segment 3) Sub-Project Name Suitland Pkwy/MLK Jr. Ave. Intersection
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

Design

Construction

68

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Project Description & Status

MLK Jr. Two-Way Reconstruction

Project Reference 5.31

31
Corridor: Suitland Parkway Corridor Project Cost: $2.0M

Pre-Existing Conditions Martin Luther King (MLK), Jr. Avenue is a fourlane urban minor arterial that runs north-south from the 11th Street Bridge to DC Village, and directly along the western boundary of the St. Elizabeths East Campus site. Prior to 2008, MLK, Jr. Avenue operated as a one-way street between W Street and Good Hope Road, with parking permitted on only one side of the street. Figure 555: MLK Jr. Ave Reconstruction Rendering Improvements In an effort to revitalize the urban setting and encourage new commercial land uses along the Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue corridor, two-way trafc was restored throughout the corridor. This change coincided with the arrival of a new Anacostia Economic Development Corporation Building and DC Government Center on the northeast corner of Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue and Good Hope Road. In addition to changing the trafc patterns on these roads, consideration has been given to future light rail accommodations on both Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue and 13th Street. While the details of where these proposed lines would originate and terminate are still uncertain, opportunities exist for a connection over one or both of the 11th Street bridges. Implementation Along Martin Luther King Jr., Avenue, from Good Hope Road to W Street, the average curbto-curb width is 41 feet. The new roadway cross-section includes a total of four lanes; two dedicated travel lanes (one in each direction), and two parking lanes (one for each direction). Travel lanes are set at 12 feet wide and parking lanes are eight feet wide. At the signalized intersections of Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue/Good Hope Road and Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue/W Street, there are turning areas that use the parking lanes to accommodate turning maneuvers. Sidewalks were not adjusted in this project.

Project Timeline Completed in 2008

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

69

Project Description & Status Project Reference 5.32

32
Corridor: Suitland Parkway Corridor Project Cost: $16.0M

MLK Jr. Two-Way Widening

Existing Conditions Martin Luther King (MLK), Jr. Avenue is a fourlane urban minor arterial that runs north-south from the 11th Street Bridge to DC Village, and directly along the western boundary of the St. Elizabeths East Campus site. Parking is permitted on either side of the street. MLK, Jr. Avenue provides direct pedestrian access to the existing campus gates. Sidewalk widths are typically ve feet, with a ve-foot grass buffer between vehicle travel lanes and sidewalks in most locations. In general, the sidewalks are adequate to carry the relatively low levels of current pedestrian trafc adjacent to the campus. Further south on MLK, Jr. Avenue (near Malcolm X Avenue) the numerous retail establishments, school and multiple bus stops generate higher levels of pedestrian activity. The MLK, Jr. Avenue/Malcolm X Avenue intersection has crosswalks and countdown pedestrian signals. A crossing guard is present during the peak periods to help improve pedestrian safety. However, the numerous curb cuts on this segment of MLK, Jr. Avenue along with the lack of a grassy pedestrian buffer, contribute to a relatively undesirable pedestrian experience. Figure 556: MLK Jr. Ave Widening Improvement Plans Proposed Improvements Improvements include two travel lanes in each direction, an additional turn lane, median, and sidewalks along MLK, Jr. Avenue to improve access to both the East and West Campus portions of the consolidation. MLK, Jr. Avenue improvements continue south of St. Elizabeths Campus to Alabama Avenue. Improvements include wider sidewalks, preservation of existing on-street parking that serves local businesses along MLK, Jr. Avenue, and continuation of two travel lanes in each direction with turn pockets. Widening MLK, Jr. Avenue will accomplish two goals: provide a safe turning alternative into both campuses and ensure a safe pedestrian experience along the East Campus side of MLK. Because of the existing historic wall on the St. Elizabeths West Campus, the proposed widening would have to occur on the East Campus portion, and GSA will continue to work with DDOT in determining the exact alignment of the roadway.

Source: Executive Directors Recommendation Master Plan Amendment, FEMA Headquarters and Transportation Improvements, NCPC (2012)

Implementation The implementation of this project is tied to the appropriation of funding for St. Elizabeths West Campus Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Consolidation.

Project Timeline To be determined, subject to the availability of funds.

70

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Project Description & Status

AWI-Wide

The Anacostia Waterfront Initiative (AWI) area touches a relatively large land mass in the District of Columbia. It is for that reason that this Master Plan has been organized according to distinguishable corridors, with specic projects presented within each corridor. However, there are a number of projects that cross the borders of the corridors, or are adjacent to the AWI but have signicant impact on transportation and development patterns in the AWI area. This section presents those projects. Figure 557: AWI Transportation Study Map

ist

M ar yla nd
ol um bi a fC to

ric

fC to ist ric
Virginia Project Timeline
Project Name St. Elizabeths East Infrastructure 14th Street Bridge Improvements Long Bridge Study DC Streetcar Clean Rivers/CSO Project
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

ol
Source: DDOT

M
2019

ar

yla

nd

um

bi

2020

2021

2022

Env. Doc.

Design

Construction

TBD

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

71

Project Description & Status Project Reference 5.33

33
Corridor: AWI-Wide Project Cost: $249.5M

DC Streetcar

Existing Conditions In response to the transportation, economic, and community development needs facing the District, DDOT developed a transit system plan that establishes new high-quality transit services to connect DC residents to jobs, commercial businesses, recreational facilities, and regional transportation hubs. The plan includes the re-establishment of streetcar service in the District of Columbia. The streetcar system will consist of modern low-oor vehicles operating on surface tracks that are embedded in the street pavement. The vehicles will mostly operate in travel lanes that are shared with automobile trafc, although in some instances the streetcar may take advantage of available right-of-way and operate in exclusive transit-only lanes. The streetcar vehicles for the initial projects will be electrically powered via overhead wires. Vehicles used in subsequent segments will have the ability to travel for limited distances without overhead wires to protect historical viewsheds. The streetcar stops will be generally located every to mile along the routes. The stops will include a small shelter and information regarding fares, route, and schedule. They may also have an off-vehicle fare collection system. As part of its commitment to continued new development and investment in the vicinity of the Anacostia Metrorail station, St. Elizabeths Campus and along South Capitol Street, Firth Sterling Avenue, and Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue, the District has identied streetcar as an important supplement to Metrorail. The goals of the new DC Streetcar system are simple: Figure 5-59: DC Streetcar Planned Rolling Stock
zz zz zz zz zz

Figure 5-58: DC Streetcar Proposed Routes in AWI Area

Source: DDOT

Link neighborhoods Provide quality service to attract and reach new transit ridership. Offer a broader range of transit options for District residents. Reduce short inner-city auto trips, parking demand, traffic congestion and air pollution. Encourage economic development along streetcar corridors.

Source: DDOT

Project Timeline
Sub-Project Name Anacostia Initial Segment One-City Line 11th Street Bridge-M Street
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Env. Doc.

Design

Construction

TBD

72

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Project Description & Status

DC Streetcar (Continued)
Proposed Improvements The DC Streetcar program will plan and deliver the following street-running routes in the AWI study area, as part of the 37-mile DC Streetcar System Plan: Anacostia Initial Segment An Environmental Assessment (EA) study is currently examining the potential for a streetcar extension between the Anacostia Metrorail station and the 11th Street Bridge, through historic Anacostia. This study will aid in identifying the alignment that best suits the goals of the project and the interests of the community. Additionally, in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, the project team is also evaluating the potential effects on historic and cultural resources within the study area. Estimated Cost: $40M

Project Reference 5.33

Figure 560: DC Streetcar Car Barn Training Facility Rendering

Source: DDOT

H Street Extension (to Minnesota Avenue or Benning Road Metrorail Station & Georgetown DDOT is studying the possibility of extending streetcar service from its current planned termini on Benning Road, across the Anacostia River, connecting with either the Benning Road or Minnesota Avenue Metro stations, and to Georgetown as part of the new One City line. Estimated Cost: $71.5M M Street Line/11th Street Bridge NEPA study underway in 2014. The M Street Southeast/Southwest Transportation Planning Study analyzed how to integrate transit (including streetcar), bicycling and walking with motor vehicle trafc in this growing section of the District. This segment would serve the emerging M Street corridor and provide another direct connection to development east of the Anacostia River. Furthermore, streetcar service will continue east to Buzzard Point and link up with the Southwest Waterfront. This would be an extension of the existing Anacostia segment of the Streetcar Estimated Cost: $94.8M North/South Corridor Transit Study The North-South Corridor Transit Study is evaluating the potential to improve transit options in a study area roughly bound by 16th St NW on the west, 5th St NW on the east, Takoma/Silver Spring in the north, and Buzzard Point in the south. This improved transit option would serve growing neighborhoods in Wards 1 and 4 along with the greater Southwest community and the entertainment venues of Chinatown, the National Mall, and the Southwest Waterfront. Estimated Cost: TBD Testing and Commissioning Site The Testing and Commissioning Site will serve as a critical piece of infrastructure for the operation of DC Streetcar service. Vehicles will be tested at this site in advance of their operation on H Street/Benning and future corridors. Estimated Cost: $20M Car Barn Training Facility A Car Barn will serve as an operations and maintenance facility. Streetcars will be inspected, cleaned, and when needed, repaired in the Car Barn. It will also provide ofce space, locker rooms and a break room for streetcar personnel. The Car Barn Training Center (CBTC), to be located at the corner of Benning Road and 26th Street NE, will serve as the Operations & Maintenance (O&M) base and a command center for the H Street/Benning Road and One City Lines. Estimated Cost: $20M Implementation
zz

Construction is currently underway on the Testing and Commissioning Site that will be housed on the Anacostia line and was completed in Fall 2013. The Anacostia Extension EA will be finalized by Summer 2014. A Benning Road Feasibility Study was completed for the H Street Extension, and the Benning Road Extension Planning Study will be conducted by 2014. More detailed planning work will be undertaken for the M Street Line as follow-on work to the M Street SE-SW Transportation Study, beginning in 2014.

zz zz

zz

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

73

Project Description & Status Project Reference 5.34

34
Corridor: AWI-Wide Project Cost: $56M Figure 561: St. Elizabeths East Campus Site Plan

St. Elizabeths East Campus Infrastructure

Existing Conditions The project is located on the 170 acre east campus of the former St. Elizabeths Hospital. It will be redeveloped in two stages over the next 20 years into a mixed-use site. The master plan for development calls for new residential, retail, educational and business uses on the site. There will be adaptive re-use of approximately 1 million SF of existing historical buildings on the site. An additional 4 million SF of new development, as well as a 750,000 SF FEMA headquarters building, are planned for the East Campus. Hospital operations have been moved to a new parcel east of the redevelopment sites. New infrastructure systems and transportation systems will be needed to serve the new uses and the increased density of the development. NEPA work and 30% Roadway plans have been prepared by DDOT. This effort has resulted in a completed Environmental Assessment (EA) for the impacts of the redevelopment and the proposed roadway system, with a Finding of No Signicant Impact (FONSI) being obtained in July 2012. Proposed Improvements The scope of work to be completed under the design-build contract for this Project will be identied in the RFP. This work is anticipated to include, among other things, design services, labor, and materials necessary to perform all work required to support the design and construction of the following: survey; roadway; permanent and/or temporary structures; geotechnical; environmental; hydraulics; trafc control devices; transportation management plan; utilities; site and building demolition; hazardous materials inspection/testing and abatement; quality control and quality assurance; public involvement/relations; (n) quality control inspection and QC materials testing and sampling; street lighting and overall project management of design-builders activities. Implementation The Design-Build contactor is anticipated to begin work by 2nd quarter, 2014.

Source: St. Elizabeths: Envisioning the Future, DMPED (2012)

Figure 562: St. Elizabeths East Campus Concept Rendering

Source: St. Elizabeths: Envisioning the Future, DMPED (2012)

AWI P r o j(St. e c Elizabeths t T i m e lInfrastructure) ine Phase Design Construction


2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Design

Construction

74

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Project Description & Status

Water Coach/Taxi

Project Reference 5.35

35
Corridor: AWI-Wide Project Cost: TBD

Existing Conditions Despite the fact that the Potomac and Anacostia Rivers are central to the region, no effective water-borne transit service is in operation. The growing attraction of current waterfront destinations, such as Georgetown Waterfront and National Harbor, combined with the planned improvements at The Wharf and the proposed investment in the Alexandria and Anacostia waterfronts, bolster the argument for the introduction of this transportation mode into the regional system. Figure 5-63: Water Coach/Taxi Diamond Teague Park Pier Proposed Improvements DDOT has partnered with the Northern Virginia Regional Commission (NVRC) to conduct a market assessment to determine the viability of reliable commuter ferry service in the National Capital Region. The project area ranges from the Anacostia River from the Sousa Bridge to the conuence with the Potomac and the Potomac from Georgetown to the Wilson Bridge. Preliminary studies indicate that DC Water Taxi routes with the following termini hold the most potential, in terms of market demand and efcient travel times:
zz zz zz zz zz zz

Georgetown Southwest Waterfront/Old Sea Terminal Buzzard Point Navy Yard/Diamond Teague Park Poplar Point Others: National Mall, Kennedy Center
Source: Capitol Riverfront BID

The service would be all-weather and provide connections to other transportation modes. Implementation The timing for service implementation is unknown at this time.

Project Timeline To be deternined, subject to the availability of funding.

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

75

Project Description & Status

14th Street Bridge Improvements


Corridor: AWI-Wide Project Cost: $13.0M Existing Conditions The 14th Street Bridges consist of three bridges that carry Interstate 395 over the Potomac River between Virginia and Washington, DC. The easternmost bridge (the Arland D. Williams, Jr. Memorial Bridge) carries four lanes of northbound trafc, the westernmost bridge (the George Mason Memorial Bridge) carries four lanes of southbound trafc, and the center bridge (the Rochambeau Bridge) carries both northbound and southbound HOV trafc (two lanes in each direction). The interchange between the George Washington Memorial Parkway and I-395 does not operate well and is a source of trafc congestion during both AM and PM peak periods. On the north side of the river, I-395 splits at the 14th Street junction. The closely-spaced ramps and roadway geometry create signicant weaving and merging that result in congestion on the north side of the river. Proposed Improvements The EIS proposes improvements to the 14th Street Bridges corridor focusing on reducing congestion and improving trafc operations and safety. This could include the reconguration of ramps and/or the replacement of bridges. The DEIS has been released and there has been an extended comment period. There is no conrmed schedule for the FEIS and Record of Decision. Figure 5-64: 14th Street Bridge Project Area

Source: DDOT

Implementation Improvements to the 14th Street Bridges Corridor should occur sometime after the completion of the 11th Street Bridge improvements. Both bridges are major regional trafc routes and completing these improvements rst would provide system-wide benets. After the 14th Street Bridges improvements are made and trafc operations are improved, the regional network will be able to better handle trafc detours and shifts due to other AWI project construction (e.g. Kenilworth Avenue Corridor). Project Timeline The Environmental Review Process is Underway.

76

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Project Description & Status

Long Bridge Study


Corridor: AWI-Wide

Project Cost: $2.9M Existing Conditions The Long Bridge is a two-track railroad bridge that crosses the Potomac River connecting Virginia and the District of Columbia. It is owned and maintained by CSX, and carries trafc from three railroad operators CSX, Amtrak and VRE carrying about 80 trains a day (1/3 freight, 2/3 passenger). It is the sole railroad bridge between the District of Columbia and the Commonwealth of Virginia. Today, eight Amtrak long distance trains use the bridge along with four Northeast Corridor trains to Richmond, two of which continue to Newport News. Southeast Corridor High Speed Rail service from North Carolina and Virginia will also use the Long Bridge when in operation. Figure 5-65: Long Bridge Project Area Proposed Improvements DDOT and the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) have launched a study to evaluate improvements needed for the Long Bridge.
zz zz

Analyze multi-modal connectivity and operational improvements Analyze the long-term multi-modal capacity improvements that include the future operating requirements of high-speed and intercity passenger rail, commuter rail, transit, bike and pedestrian, and freight services over the Potomac River Analyze structure of the bridge and identify short-term remediation projects

zz

Source: DC Long Bridge Preliminary Engineering/NEPA Study, DDOT (2009)

Implementation The project is currently in the planning phase. DDOT is leveraging a $3M FRA grant to conduct a study, which will identify a portfolio of short-term projects and long-range recommendations. The study is targeted to be complete by early 2014.

Project Timeline The study is targeted to be complete by early 2014.

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

77

Project Description & Status

AWI Master Drainage Plan


Corridor: AWI-Wide

Under Development
Existing Conditions The Government of the District of Columbia owns and operates its own Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4), which discharges stormwater from various outfall locations throughout the District into its waterways. In response to litigation from numerous environment groups, EPA has worked with the District to develop an enhanced stormwater management strategy, consisting of measurable outputs for addressing the issues raised during the litigation and mediation process. In support of the MS4 requirements and the Districts broader sustainable development principles, DDOT is enforcing enhanced stormwater regulations in the Anacostia Waterfront Development Zone (AWDZ). The cumulative impact of these regulations will have a signicant impact on the Districts ability to meet MS4 requirements. Proposed Improvements There are two sets of stormwater regulations. The AWDZ delineates standards for public and private development. It was adopted into DC Code in 2008, and in 2012 DDOE was granted the authority to enforce the regulations. It requires that for each site, 1.2 inches of rainwater is retained locally and 1.7 inches treated locally (based upon a 24-hour, 2-year storm). Projects built in the right-of-way must meet the standards to Maximum Extent Possible (MEP). DDOT is developing Low-Impact Design (LID) guidance (Permeable Pavement, BioRetention Ponds, street trees) that were nalized in the 3rd quarter of 2013. Implementation The citywide regulations took effect on July 22, 2013 (1.2 inches of on-site retention), and reviews are being built into the typical design process (at 30/60/90% reviews). With the increased use of design-build, DDOT is exploring the most effective way to implement when using that contracting vehicle.

Project Cost: TBD Figure 566: Anacostia Waterfront Development Zone

Source: DDOE

Figure 5-67: AWI Master Stormwater Plan Typical Section: Stormwater Planter

Source: DDOE

Project Timeline The Stormwater Management Plan regulations are in effect. Monitoring will be ongoing for the term of the AWI.

78

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Project Description & Status

Clean Rivers/CSO Project


Corridor: AWI-Wide Project Cost: TBD

Existing Conditions Figure 5-68: Clean Rivers/ The Clean Rivers Project is at the center of the Districts efforts to improve water quality CSO Project in the Anacostia River and achieve the vision of an active and useable urban river. The Districts National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit issued by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requires the preparation of a Long-Term Control Plan (LTCP). The LTCP is a plan with a schedule to control Combined Sewer Overow (CSO) discharges to the area waterways. The LTCP planning effort began in 1998. A draft of the LTCP was made available to the public and submitted to the EPA and the District Department of Health in June 2001. After receiving public comments on the Draft and Final LTCP, which proposed signicant reductions in CSO, it was approved in December 2004. In 2010, DC Water named the LTCP the Clean Rivers Project. Proposed Improvements The Clean Rivers Project is DC Waters ongoing program to reduce combined sewer overows into the Districts waterways - the Anacostia and Potomac Rivers and Rock Creek. The Project is a massive infrastructure and support program designed to capture and clean water during heavy rainfalls before it ever reaches the rivers. This project cuts through the heart of the AWI study area, and will impact the stormwater management design of all AWI transportation improvements. DDOTs primary method to support the Clean Rivers Project is through the development and construction of Green Infrastructure and/or Low-Impact Development (LID) in conjunction with its transportation projects. Green Infrastructure uses vegetation and soil to manage rainwater where it falls, and LID principles and practices can manage water in a way that reduces the impact of built areas and promotes the natural movement of water within an ecosystem or watershed. Implementation DC Water is the implementing agency for the Clean Rivers Project. DDOT supports this major initiative through the purposeful design of LIDs and green infrastructure into all of the projects within the AWI project area.

Project Timeline

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

79

Project Description & Status

Private Development Review


Corridor: AWI-Wide

Reviews As Necessary

Project Cost: TBD Existing Conditions DDOT reviews transportation projects, developer and zoning plans to ensure they are consistent with, and do not adversely impact, DDOTs multi-modal strategic objectives, the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan, and the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative Master Plan. This is accomplished by:
zz

Convening and guiding a structured review process for evaluating transportation impacts Providing and administering policy framework; and Providing consistent public space policy guidance.

zz zz

Implementation To achieve this goal, DDOT has adopted a framework for managing development reviews in a standardized format which focuses on 10 Key Areas.

1. Strategic Elements 2. Roadway Capacity and Operations 3. Bicycle and Pedestrian Network 4. Site Access and Loading 5. Safety 6. Parking 7. General Streetscape and Public Space/Realm 8. Transit Service 9. Transportation Demand Management 10. Performance Monitoring and Measurement
AWI considerations falls into the Strategic Elements Key Area of the process outlined above, which would be broad enough to include program-level outcome goals as well as AWI Transportation Architecture Design Guidelines.

Project Timeline This project will be ongoing.

80

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Project Description & Status

National Park Service Anacostia Park Master Plan

42

Corridor: AWI-Wide Project Cost: TBD

Existing Conditions Authorized in the 1920s as part of a river project to protect water Figure 5-69: Anacostia Park Master Plan quality and recreation opportunities, Anacostia Park, including Kenilworth Aquatic Gardens and marsh, is a multi-use park within a narrow ood plain. Hundreds of acres are available for nature watching, sports playing and picnicking, while the Anacostia Park Pavilion has space for roller skating and for holding special events. The historic Langston Golf Course offers an 18-hole course as well as a driving range and pro-shop. A public boat ramp provides access to the tidal Anacostia River for recreational boating. Anacostia Park does not currently have a comprehensive plan to provide Park managers with guidance for management decisionmaking. In 2001, the NPS initiated a general management plan (GMP) for Anacostia Park but this plan was not completed. An internal draft GMP was produced in 2005 and will be the foundation of the Plan. Proposed Improvements The National Park Service (NPS) is preparing a Management Plan/Environmental Assessment for Anacostia Park. The Plan would provide broad guidance and long-term strategies for management of the Park, to protect the Parks natural and cultural resources, provide for public understanding and use Source: National Park Service of the Park, and promote partnership opportunities that would support and complement NPS management of the Park. The Plan would provide a decision-making framework for NPS staff in developing more detailed implementation plans and in determining whether future actions proposed by NPS or others are consistent with NPS goals for Anacostia Park. Implementation The current planning process will revisit, adopt, and update, as needed, the contents of the draft GMP based on additional input from the NPS, other federal, state, and local agencies, and the public. The planning process will reinitiate scoping to provide more current information with which to guide the development of planning alternatives. The planning process will also include an opportunity for the public to provide input on the draft plan alternatives prior to the release of the Plan for public review later this year.

Project Timeline To be determined.

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

81

Project Description & Status

Non-Active Projects

The Anacostia Waterfront Initiative has been in existence and moving forward since 2000. While its focus and mission has remained unchanged, the specic projects that have been developed and advanced have evolved during that decade. Whether it is for nancial, programmatic or policy considerations, some projects that have been presented in previous Master Plans are no longer being pursued. Below is a listing and brief description of those projects: Pennsylvania Avenue/DC 295 Interchange Reconguration The John Phillip Sousa Bridge carries Pennsylvania Avenue over the Anacostia River. Because it was previously not possible for vehicles crossing the 11th Street Bridge to go north on The Anacostia Freeway, the Sousa Bridge was used to make this heavily congested movement. The interchange east of the river does not allow for the southbound-Anacostia Freeway-to-westbound-Pennsylvania Avenue trafc movement. In addition, Pennsylvania Avenue, the Southeast Freeway and the Anacostia Freeway are all evacuation routes and truck routes for the District. In previous AWI Master Plan iterations, DDOT proposed the following improvements: zz Reconstructing the Pennsylvania Avenue/ Figure 5-70: Pennsylvania Ave/DC 295 Interchange Reconguration Anacostia Freeway interchange to be a signalized traffic oval providing all movements.
zz

Lowering the Anacostia Freeway below Pennsylvania Avenue in a tunnel or depressed freeway. Reconstructing the Southeast Freeway/ Pennsylvania Avenue/RFK Stadium Access Road junction as an at-grade signalized traffic circle.

zz

The 11th Street Bridges Project has provided for these regional movements and connections. Consequently, this project is no longer being pursued. I-295/I-395 Tunnel
Source: DDOT

Currently, I-395 crosses the Potomac River from Virginia on the 14th Street Bridges; crosses the Washington Channel of the Potomac River; bears east and forms a barrier between LEnfant Plaza, other federal buildings and residential Southwest neighborhoods. Finally I-395 turns north and enters the Third Street Tunnel, south of the US Capitol. Interstate 295 runs north from an interchange with the Capital Beltway west of the Woodrow Wilson Bridge; parallels the Potomac and Anacostia Rivers until it passes South Capitol Street; bears north to cross the river on the 11th Street Bridges; then turns west to end at the junction with I-395 south of the US Capitol. Part of the vision for a revitalized Anacostia Waterfront and Near Southeast neighborhood included the removal of the elevated Southeast Freeway (I-295 east of South Capitol Street), and introduction of an urban boulevard. To facilitate this, the high numbers of commuter trafc that currently use the 11th Street Bridges and the Southeast Freeway to travel between I-295 east of the Anacostia River and I-395 must be diverted onto a different facility. The proposed tunnel would connect to I-295 in the Poplar Point area near the South Capitol Street/Suitland Parkway/I-295 interchange, cross under the Anacostia River somewhere within the South Capitol Street corridor, and connect to I-395 near the entrance to the Third Street Tunnel. Because of the regional improvements under construction for Phase 1 & 2 of the 11th Street Bridge Project and the South Capitol Street Corridor Project, this I-295/I-395 Tunnel Project is no longer being pursued.

82

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Project Description & Status

New York Avenue Improvements New York Avenue corridor is located in the northeast and northwest quadrants of the District and links the downtown area with Prince Georges County, Maryland. New York Avenue serves as a principal commuter, evacuation and truck route. DDOT studied this corridor in 2006, and for the purposes of that study, the corridor was divided into six improvement zones so as to distinguish between the functionality of each zone and to provide recommendations specic to the characteristics of the zone. The recommendations for the improvement zones included:
zz

Creating an urban boulevard entry way into the District, with New York Avenue as a six-lane divided highway with dedicated pedestrian and bicycle facilities and landscaped areas along both sides of the roadway. Urban design, landscape improvements, and mixed-use development becoming the focus at intersections. Creating a linear park and promenade along the north side of the roadway, with New York Avenue as a six-lane roadway with one and two left-turn lanes at key intersections, a wide median, a dedicated bike lane in the inbound direction, and a dedicated sidewalk on the south side.

zz zz

Primarily due to the cost of these improvements ($1B), this project is no longer being pursued. Reservation 13 Roadway Network The Reservation 13 site has historically been isolated from adjacent neighborhoods. The site includes major institutional uses such as a hospital and a correctional facility. Its limited connectivity continues today; in particular, there is no direct connection from Independence Avenue to points south. With the implementation of the Hill East Master Plan, the District envisions an active community integrated into the Figure 5-71: Reservation 13 Site Plan adjacent neighborhoods, as well as the waterfront. The roadway from Barney Circle to the RFK Stadium is presently owned by the National Park Service. The main use of this roadway is to connect the Southeast Freeway with RFK Stadium parking facilities. The road runs along the Anacostia Waterfront and is used by many groups of recreational users. This route is not an ofcial District of Columbia roadway and is not maintained as such. The improvements associated with the Reservation 13 Roadway Network project included replacing a section of the RFK Stadium access road with a twolane low-speed road with bicycle accommodations. The new roadway would follow the RFK Stadium access road alignment between Barney Circle and the southeastern corner of the Reservation 13 site, where it would connect with the future Massachusetts Avenue extension. The roadway would then curve to the north, running along Reservation 13s eastern border, and ultimately connect with Independence Avenue. The road would

Source: DMPED

provide access to the adjacent Anacostia Riverwalk Trail. In addition, the development would improve the existing streets and introduce new roads and infrastructure, where necessary. DMPED is currently pursuing a more incremental approach, and the site is not prepared for DDOT to implement the full buildout of the street network at this time.

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

83

Key Development Projects

6. KEY DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS


6.1 Relationships between Infrastructure and Development Projects in the Anacostia Waterfront
A key component of the Master Plan is the implementation of infrastructure projects to complement existing and future development in the area. For the benet of the overall goals of the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative, infrastructure and development projects must be timed in a coordinated manner. DDOT is committed to making sure the construction timing of all projects will support the Districts development goals as well as the construction timetables of development projects and vice versa. DDOT has planned for infrastructure projects to facilitate economic development throughout the AWI area. At its heart, the AWI is a collaborative effort among several local agencies, including DDOT, to improve identied corridors through upgraded infrastructure, economic development, and context sensitive solutions. DDOT is renewing the transportation system in the AWI area so that it supports increased levels of residential, commercial, recreational and institutional activities. The Anacostia Riverwalk, in addition to providing greater pedestrian access to many areas of future development, serves an additional purpose in connecting several of the citys most treasured parks and open spaces. In particular, the Riverwalk will connect the heavily-used tourist destinations around the National Mall and Capitol Hill with under-appreciated park areas in the eastern part of the city, including the National Arboretum, Kenilworth Aquatic Gardens, and Kingman Island. Some projects that had completed the planning phase have not moved into construction and some projects that had been proposed have failed to move forward into planning and design due to recent economic conditions. For example, Hill East (also known as Reservation 13) is a large 67-acre site to the east of the Stadium-Armory Metrorail station. In 2008, the District Government solicited proposals from developers for the development of the entire site pursuant to a master plan that had been developed by the DC Ofce of Planning. However, proposals received revealed that large subsidies would be required of the District Government so the project is on hold. Some planned and proposed developments fail to materialize for other reasons. For example, the National Childrens Museum had been negotiating a relocation from Capitol Hill to LEnfant Plaza. This relocation along with signicant renovations to the LEnfant Plaza complex was assumed in the 2008 Master Plan Update. However, the negotiations to relocate the Childrens Museum fell through and it moved to National Harbor in Prince Georges County instead. The planned renovations at LEnfant Plaza remain largely on hold. The DC Ofce of Planning has re-categorized these renovations from planned to proposed, reecting greater uncertainty about whether or when they will proceed. The development outlook for Washington DC and for the AWI area remains robust. In 2001, the Naval Sea Command moved 6,000 employees from Crystal City to the Navy Yard. Due to the work of Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton and others, the federal government agreed to relinquish part of the Navy Yard Campus for private development. In 2006 the U.S. Department of Transportation moved to this area with about 5,000 employees. Combined with renovations to Arena Stage and the construction of a new baseball stadium, these actions catalyzed an enormous amount of new development in the M Street SE/SW Corridor. More recent actions such as the move of the D.C. Department of Employment Services to the Minnesota Avenue Metrorail station area and the pending relocation of the US Coast Guard and the Department of Homeland Security to the west campus of St. Elizabeths have created development interest on the east bank of the Anacostia, as well. The redevelopment of transportation infrastructure has played an important role, too. The reconstruction of 4th Street SW, between I Street and M Street, the improvement of pedestrian and cycling facilities between the Tidal Basin and M Street SW, the rehabilitation and lowering of the Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge, the completion of the Kenilworth mainline improvements and the redesign and reconstruction of the 11th Street Bridges are an important part of this story. Combined with Metrorail and Metrobus services (and new Circulator bus services) and proposed streetcar facilities and services, access to the AWI area is improving. The recent development activity should not be taken for granted. There is a trend in both the public and private sectors to use less ofce space per employee and to rely more on telecommuting for at least occasional work. Thus, it remains important to diversify the Districts economy and to ensure a good mix of residential, employment retail, entertainment, educational and cultural developments to create an environment that is attractive to businesses and residents alike. At the same time, it is equally important to keep housing costs affordable for both existing and potential new residents.

84

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Key Development Projects

The following pages provide a brief overview of some of the developments that have been built within the AWI area since the inception of the AWI or that are expected to be constructed there within the planning horizon. The Ofce of Planning (OP) maintains a database of development projects. OP provided data in the 4th quarter of 2013 for projects completed since 2001, under construction, planned or proposed for the AWI Study area. Tables 6-1 through 6-5 list the projects in the OP development database. For forecasting population and employment, OP assumes projects completed or under construction will deliver and be absorbed by 2015 (including any backll if the occupants simply moved from one District space to another). Planned projects are assumed to be completed and absorbed by 2020. Proposed projects are assumed to be completed and absorbed by 2025 and New Neighborhoods are assumed to be completed and absorbed by between 2020 and 2030. Since 2001, 7,609 housing units have been completed. Of these approximately 45% are categorized as affordable. Units are affordable if there are long-term restrictions of at least 15 years that limit occupancy eligibility to households earning no more than 80% of the average median income for the Metropolitan area. Units under construction total 4,471 of which about 35% are deemed affordable. Housing units in the planning phase total 6,566. Housing units in projects that are proposed (including both proposed and new neighborhoods) total 11,641. Since 2001, over 12 million square feet of non-residential space (commercial ofce, retail or institutional) have been completed. It is estimated that approximately 41,000 employees are associated with these developments. Projects under construction total over 5 million square feet and are estimated to create over 4,000 permanent jobs after construction has ended. [This number does not contain the likely number of jobs associated with the Department of Homeland Security.] Projects that are planned, proposed or included in New Neighborhoods comprise almost 16 million square feet and are assumed to create approximately 44,000 permanent jobs by 2030. Because there are over 250 individual development projects in the AWI study area, each one will not be described. However, for each of the phases listed a table that describes some of these projects is provided. The information shows that there is development activity throughout the AWI area in parts of Wards 5, 6, 7 and 8. Its not just the gross amount of development that determines demands on transportation facilities and services. Location is also a crucial factor. Therefore the maps accompanying each table show where some of the more signicant completed, planned and proposed developments are located in relation to the AWI transportation corridors.

6.2. AWI Development Hot Spots


Although development is occuring throughout the AWI area, there are unusually large concentrations of development in the Capitol Riverfront and Anacostia neighborhoods. To give these projects a bit more avor, maps of these neighborhoods development hot spots are being included, provided courtesy of the Washington, DC Economic Partnership (WDCEP) and their sponsors. Accompanying each map is a page of photos and renderings of a few highlighted projects.

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

85

Key Development Projects

Figure 6-1: Status of Development Projects in the AWI Study Area

86

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Key Development Projects

Table 6-1-1: Status of Development Projects in the AWI Study Area


Number Development Name
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 20 M Street Velocity Condos Federal Gateway Portals Phase III, The Residence Inn by Marriott 80 M Street Polk Court Apartments Navy Yard Redevelopment Unified Communications Center Maritime Plaza Phase I Maritime Plaza Phase II Potomac Center (South Tower) Potomac Center II (North Tower) Capitol Square Mandarin Hotel Carver Theater Capitol Park Plaza Apartments Capitol Hill Towers 810 Potomac Avenue King Greenleaf Recreation Center TMA Charter School Phase 1 Danbury Station Parkway Overlook West Capital Hill Investors Cesar Chavez Charter School - Capitol Hill Campus Henson Ridge Syphax Village Monterey Park 300 M Street Bolling View Department of Transportation Headquarters Elmwood South Condos Townhomes on Capitol Hill U-Haul Marine Barracks Neval Thomas Elementary School Capitol Visitor Center Arena Stage expansion Department of Employment Services U.S. Botanical Gardens National Botanical Garden Potomac Place Lennox School Townhomes Lennox School Condos 701 Howard Road 300 Independence Avenue Ralph Waldo "Petey" Greene Community Services Cent Patriot Plaza I Patriot Plaza II Patriot Plaza III Park Police Anacostia Operations Facility Anacostia Gateway Savannah Heights St. Coletta of Greater Washington Cesar Chavez Charter School Lotus Square Jenkins Row Washington Nationals Baseball Stadium Howard Hill Apartments 116 North Carolina Avenue 1015 Half Street 70 / 100 I Street Post Plant Redevelopment 100 M Street SE Capitol View 821 Howard Road Anacostia Senior High School Saint Elizabeth's Hospital Expansion Fort McNair Lincoln Hall Plaza 8 Onyx on First 909 at Capitol Yards Savoy Middle School Mayfair Mansions Camden Apartments American Trucking Association AGC Townhouse 2309 Pennsylvania Avenue Apartments Southeast Academy for Scholastic Excellence Bolling Air Force Residential

Address
20 M Street, SE 76 L Street, SE 1100 New Jersey Avenue, SE 1201 Maryland Ave, SW 333 E Street, SW 80 M Street, SE 625 G Street, SE 951 N St, SE 2720 Martin Luther King Jr Avenue, SE 1201 M Street, SE 1220 12th Street, SE 550 12th Street, SW 500 12th Street, SW 7th Street & G Street, SW 1330 Maryland Avenue, SW 2405 Martin Luther King Jr Ave, SE 201 I Street, SW and 101-103 G Street, SW 140 L Street, SE 810 Potomac Ave, SE 201 N Street, SW Howard Rd & Martin Luther King, Jr. Ave, 5-165 and 132-152 Danbury Street, SW 2701 Robinson Place, SE 407 8th St, SE 709 12th St, SE 3201 Stanton Road, SE 1360 Half Street, SW 3329 7th Street, SE 300 M Street, SE 401 Orange Street, SE 1204 4th St, SE 10 Danbury, SW 614 - 654 I St, SE 1501 South Capitol, SW 1011 7th St, SE 650 Anacostia Ave, NE US Capitol's East Plaza 1101 6th Street, SW 4180 Minnesota Ave, NE Independence Ave and 1st Street, SW Independence Ave and 3rd Street, SW 800 Fourth St, SW 407-419 G St, SE & 705-711 5th St, SE & 724-26 4th St, SE 407-419 G St, SE & 705-711 5th St, SE & 724-26 4th St, SE 701 Howard Road, SE 300 Independence Ave, SE 2907-2913 Martin Luther King Jr, Ave, SE 395 E Street, SW 375 E Street, SW 355 E Street, SW 1900 Anacostia Drive, SE 1838 Martin L King Jr Ave, SE Savannah Street & 4th Streets, SE Independence Avenue and 19th Street, SE 3701 Hayes St, NE 800 Kenilworth Ave, NE 1399 Pennsylvania Ave, SE South Capitol & N St, SE 1345 Howard Rd, SE 116 North Carolina Ave, SE 1015 Half St, SE 70 I St, SE 225 Virginia Ave, SE 100 M St, SE 401 3rd St, SW 821 Howard Road, SE 1635 16th Street, SE 2700 Martin Luther King Jr Ave, SE 262 5th Ave SW 522-24 Raleigh St, SE 1100 1st St, SE 909 New Jersey Ave, SE 2400 Shannon Place, Se 3724 Hayes St, NE 1325 South Capitol St 100 North Carolina Ave, SE 53 D Street, SE 2309 Pennsylvania Ave SE 645 Milwaukee Pl, SW Bolling Air Force Base

Ward
6 6 6 2 2 6 6 6 8 6 6 2 2 6 2 8 6 6 6 6 8 8 8 6 6 8 6 8 6 8 6 8 6 6 6 7 6 6 7 2 2 6 6 6 8 6 8 2 2 2 8 8 8 6 7 7 6 6 8 6 6 6 6 6 2 8 8 8 6 8 6 6 8 7 6 6 6 8 8 8

Timing Land Use


6/1/2007 12/1/2009 8/1/2003 6/1/2006 2/1/2005 7/1/2001 10/1/2003 7/1/2001 8/31/2006 11/1/2001 1/1/2003 4/1/2003 6/1/2005 11/1/2001 3/1/2004 3/1/2009 12/1/2003 6/1/2006 7/1/2001 2/1/2005 8/1/2005 11/1/2007 12/1/2001 7/1/2003 9/1/2006 12/1/2008 11/1/2004 4/1/2002 5/1/2001 12/4/2005 9/1/2006 12/1/2000 1/1/2000 1/24/2002 9/1/2004 5/8/2012 12/1/2008 9/1/2010 12/1/2010 12/1/2001 12/1/2005 5/10/2005 6/1/2004 2/1/2006 8/1/2002 4/1/2003 1/1/2005 4/1/2005 12/1/2009 12/1/2009 12/1/2002 6/1/2007 5/25/2006 12/1/2006 9/1/2007 10/20/2006 9/1/2007 3/1/2008 1/5/2005 7/5/2005 6/1/2011 7/1/2008 3/7/2012 2/1/2009 10/1/2007 10/1/2002 11/3/2005 3/1/2010 12/1/2008 5/1/2002 10/1/2008 6/1/2009 12/1/2009 12/1/2009 6/1/2013 5/23/2011 3/1/2002 4/1/2010 12/1/2008 1/1/2012 Office Mixed Use Office Office Hotel Office Multi-Family Residential Office Office Office Office Office Office Single Family Residential Hotel Public/Institutional Multi-Family Residential Mixed Use Office Public/Institutional Public/Institutional Single Family Residential Residential Retail/Restaurant Public/Institutional Residential Residential Residential Office Residential Office Multi-Family Residential Single Family Residential Industrial Public/Institutional Public/Institutional Public/Institutional Hospitality Office Public/Institutional Public/Institutional Multi-Family Residential Single Family Residential Multi-Family Residential Public/Institutional Office Public/Institutional Office Office Office Public/Institutional Office Multi-Family Residential Public/Institutional Public/Institutional Multi-Family Residential Mixed Use Mixed Use Multi-Family Residential Multi-Family Residential Office Multi-Family Residential Office Mixed Use Office Office Public/Institutional Public/Institutional Public/Institutional Retail/Restaurant Multi-Family Residential Multi-Family Residential Public/Institutional Multi-Family Residential Multi-Family Residential Office Office Mixed Use Public/Institutional Single Family Residential

Developer
Lerner Enterprises Cohen Companies Spaulding and Slye Colliers Republic Properties Corporation Donohoe Construction Spaulding and Slye Colliers Stanton Development Corporation NAVSEA DC Government Lincoln Property Company Lincoln Property Company JBG Companies JBG Companies Eakin Youngentob Associates Inc Mandarin Oriental Hotels Clark Construction Group Inc InterState Business Corporation Valhal Corporation HF Enterprises LLC DC Department of Parks and Recreation Thurgood Marshall Ac Jade Development Com NHT Enterprise Preservation Capitol Hill Investors Cesar Chavz Charter School Mid-City Urban LLC Manna Inc Monterey Park LLC Potomac Investment Properties Anacostia Economic Development Corporation JBG Companies Elmwood South Condos DCHA U-Haul US Marines Corps DC Public Schools Architect of the Capitol Washington Drama Society Abbott Development Group Architect of the Capitol Architect of the Capitol Monument Realty LLC Stanton Development Corporation Stanton Development Corporation Advantage Schools Inc Stanton Development Corporation United Planning Organization Trammell Crow Company Trammell Crow Company Trammell Crow Company US Park Police AEDC-NCRC-DRI Partners Inc AHD Inc Building Hope Kenilworth Avenue Apartments LLC JPI Sports & Entertainment Commission Jubilee Enterprises Melton Management Douglas Wilson - Prudential JPI District of Columbia/Stonebridge Carras Opus Clark Construction Jenco Development DC Public Schools District of Columbia US Government Faison Development JPI DC Pulblic Schools CPDC/MHCDO Camden Development American Trucking Association Associated General Contractors Chapman Development Southeast Academy for Scholastic Excellence US Air Force

Status
Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

87

Key Development Projects

Figure 6-1: Status of Development Projects in the AWI Study Area

88

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Table 6-1-2: Status of Development Projects in the AWI Study Area


Number Development Name
81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 3211 - 3218 8th Street Matthews Memorial Residential Monument Ball Park Office Washington Highland Library Construction MPD Forensics Crime Lab Bowen School MPD Conversion Hill Center Phelps Vocational High School Foundry Lofts Parkside Senior Apartments Waterfront Station Phase I Sheridan Terrace (Townhomes at Stanton Square) Arthur Capper/ Carrollsburg Dwellings Excel Academy Park Chelsea Phase I Waterfront Station Phase II Saint Elizabeth's West 22nd St Condos Pollin Memorial Residential Development Square 699N Phase II Minnesota Benning TOD Parkside Community College - Medical Center Twelve 12 Apartments Maples, The 1211 G Street Residences Friendship Charter School Kenilworth-Parkside Recreation Center Saint Matthews Square M Street & New Jersey Avenue Residential Federal Gateway II Yards, The Phase II Florida Rock I Second Family Home Parkside New Neighborhood Hines Elementary School Redevlopment Capitol Hill Day School Randall School W Street Homes Jemal's KFC Q St Hostel Marina Place Residential Waterfront Station Phase III 6th & Maine Condominiums Ballpark Hotel First and M Street Mixed Use 400 6th Street Office Portals Phase IV, The Portals Phase V, The Poplar Point Southwest Waterfront Hill East New Neighborhood (DC Gen Hosp) Saint Elizabeth's East Barry Farms New Community 100 V Street

Address
3211 - 3218 8th St SE 2634 Martin Luther King Jr Ave, SE 55 M St SE 115 Atlantic St, SW 415 4th St SW 101 M St SW 921 Pennsylvania Ave, SE 704 26th Street, NE 301 Tingey St, SE 600 Barnes St NE 1100 4th St, SW 2451 - 2457 Stanton Road, SE 400 L St, Se 2501 Martin L King Jr Avenue, SE 880 New Jersey Ave, SE 401 M St, SW 2695 Martin Luther King Jr Av SE 1406 22nd St SE 712 Anacostia Ave, NE 55 K St SE 4004 Minnesota Ave, NE 720 Kenilworth Ave, NE 1212 4th St SE 619 D St SE 1211 G St, SE 2705 Martin Luther King Jr Ave, SE 4300 Anacostia Ave, NE 222 M Street, SW 1111 New Jersey Ave, SE 250 M Street, SE 400 N St, SE 100 Potomac Avenue, SE 2612 Bowen Rd, SE 701 Kenilworth Tr, NE 310 7th St SE 210 South Carolina, SE 850 Delaware Ave, SW 1244 W St, SE 1442 Pennsylvania Ave SE 128 Q St SW 2100 1st St SW 600 M St SW 1265 1st St SE 1st & M Street, SE 400 6th St, SW 1301 Maryland Ave, SW 1399 Maryland Ave, SW Anacostia River 800 Water Street, SW Independence Avenue, SE & 19th Street, SE 2702 Martin Luther King Jr Ave, SE 1249 Eaton Rd SE 100 V St, SW

Ward
8 8 6 8 2 2 6 5 6 7 6 8 6 8 6 6 8 8 7 6 7 7 6 6 6 8 7 6 6 6 6 6 8 7 6 6 2 8 6 2 6 6 6 6 6 2 2 2 8 6 6 8 8 6

Timing Land Use


12/1/2007 12/29/2011 4/15/2009 6/1/2012 12/1/2012 4/13/2010 11/1/2011 8/1/2008 10/1/2011 10/1/2011 3/1/2010 11/1/2013 12/1/2010 1/1/2015 10/1/2014 12/1/2013 12/1/2015 1/1/2015 4/1/2014 7/1/2015 7/1/2014 12/1/2014 12/1/2014 12/1/2015 12/1/2014 3/1/2015 6/1/2016 1/1/2018 9/1/2014 12/1/2015 6/1/2013 12/1/2015 12/1/2015 12/1/2015 1/1/2012 2/1/2014 9/1/2013 9/1/2015 2/1/2016 9/1/2015 9/1/2016 12/1/2016 12/1/2017 11/1/2016 7/1/2017 9/1/2014 9/1/2014 1/1/2025 1/1/2015 1/1/2020 1/1/2020 9/1/2014 2/1/2015 Multi-Family Residential Mixed Use Office Public/Institutional Public/Institutional Public/Institutional Public/Institutional Public/Institutional Multi-Family Residential Multi-Family Residential Office Single Family Residential Mixed Use Public/Institutional Multi-Family Residential Mixed Use Office Multi-Family Residential Multi-Family Residential Multi-Family Residential Mixed Use Public/Institutional Mixed Use Multi-Family Residential Multi-Family Residential Public/Institutional Public/Institutional Multi-Family Residential Office Office Mixed Use Mixed Use Multi-Family Residential Mixed Use Mixed Use Public/Institutional Multi-Family Residential Single Family Residential Mixed Use Hotel Multi-Family Residential Mixed Use Multi-Family Residential Hotel Mixed Use Office Office Office Mixed Use Mixed Use Mixed Use Mixed Use Mixed Use Office

Developer
Continental Developmet Corp Matthews Memorial Church Monument Realty DC Public Library Metropolitan Police Department OPEFM Old Naval Hospital Foundation DC Public Schools Forest City PHS LLC Forest City/Vornado William C Smith - DCHA EYA United Housing of Prayer William C Smith Forest City/Kaempfer GSA AF Development Pollin Memorial Community Development Toll DC LO Donatelli & Klein/Blue Skye LANO Forest City The Maples DC LLC Friendship Charter School DC Department of Parks and Recreation TC/CSG St. Matthews LLC NJS Associates (Donohoe Construction?) William C Smith Forest City Enterprises Florida Rock Properties Frost Labule LLC Bank of America CDC DMPED - Stanton/Eastbanc Capitol Hill Day School CACB Holdings/Telesis Corporation Four Points Douglas Development Carr Hospitality Buzzard Point LLC Forest City/Vornado PN Hoffman Capital Riverfront Hotel LLC - Skanska Skanska TC MidAtlantic Development IV, Inc. Republic Properties Corporation Republic Properties Corporation TBD PN Hoffman DC Government DC Government DCHA Akridge

Status
Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Under Construct. Under Construct. Under Construct. Under Construct. Under Construct. Under Construct. Under Construct. Under Construct. Under Construct. Under Construct. Under Construct. Under Construct. Under Construct. Under Construct. Under Construct. Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Proposed/New Proposed/New Proposed/New Proposed/New Proposed/New Proposed/New Proposed/New Proposed/New

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

89

Figure 6-2: Selected Completed Development Projects

90

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Table 6-2: Completed Development Projects in the AWI Study Area


Number Development Name
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 20 M Street Velocity Condos Federal Gateway Portals Phase III, The Residence Inn by Marriott 80 M Street Polk Court Apartments Navy Yard Redevelopment Unified Communications Center Maritime Plaza Phase I Maritime Plaza Phase II Potomac Center (South Tower) Potomac Center II (North Tower) Capitol Square Mandarin Hotel Carver Theater Capitol Park Plaza Apartments Capitol Hill Towers 810 Potomac Avenue King Greenleaf Recreation Center TMA Charter School Phase 1 Danbury Station Parkway Overlook West Capital Hill Investors Cesar Chavez Charter School - Capitol Hill Campus Henson Ridge Syphax Village Monterey Park 300 M Street Bolling View Department of Transportation Headquarters Elmwood South Condos Townhomes on Capitol Hill U-Haul Marine Barracks Neval Thomas Elementary School Capitol Visitor Center Arena Stage expansion Department of Employment Services U.S. Botanical Gardens National Botanical Garden Potomac Place Lennox School Townhomes Lennox School Condos 701 Howard Road 300 Independence Avenue Ralph Waldo "Petey" Greene Community Services Cent Patriot Plaza I Patriot Plaza II Patriot Plaza III Park Police Anacostia Operations Facility Anacostia Gateway Savannah Heights St. Coletta of Greater Washington Cesar Chavez Charter School Lotus Square Jenkins Row Washington Nationals Baseball Stadium Howard Hill Apartments 116 North Carolina Avenue 1015 Half Street 70 / 100 I Street Post Plant Redevelopment 100 M Street SE Capitol View 821 Howard Road Anacostia Senior High School Saint Elizabeth's Hospital Expansion Fort McNair Lincoln Hall Plaza 8 Onyx on First 909 at Capitol Yards Savoy Middle School Mayfair Mansions Camden Apartments American Trucking Association AGC Townhouse 2309 Pennsylvania Avenue Apartments Southeast Academy for Scholastic Excellence Bolling Air Force Residential 3211 - 3218 8th Street Matthews Memorial Residential Monument Ball Park Office Washington Highland Library Construction MPD Forensics Crime Lab Bowen School MPD Conversion Hill Center Phelps Vocational High School Foundry Lofts Parkside Senior Apartments Waterfront Station Phase I

Address
20 M Street, SE 76 L Street, SE 1100 New Jersey Avenue, SE 1201 Maryland Ave, SW 333 E Street, SW 80 M Street, SE 625 G Street, SE 951 N St, SE 2720 Martin Luther King Jr Avenue, SE 1201 M Street, SE 1220 12th Street, SE 550 12th Street, SW 500 12th Street, SW 7th Street & G Street, SW 1330 Maryland Avenue, SW 2405 Martin Luther King Jr Ave, SE 201 I Street, SW and 101-103 G Street, SW 140 L Street, SE 810 Potomac Ave, SE 201 N Street, SW Howard Rd & Martin Luther King, Jr. Ave, 5-165 and 132-152 Danbury Street, SW 2701 Robinson Place, SE 407 8th St, SE 709 12th St, SE 3201 Stanton Road, SE 1360 Half Street, SW 3329 7th Street, SE 300 M Street, SE 401 Orange Street, SE 1204 4th St, SE 10 Danbury, SW 614 - 654 I St, SE 1501 South Capitol, SW 1011 7th St, SE 650 Anacostia Ave, NE US Capitol's East Plaza 1101 6th Street, SW 4180 Minnesota Ave, NE Independence Ave and 1st Street, SW Independence Ave and 3rd Street, SW 800 Fourth St, SW 407-419 G St, SE & 705-711 5th St, SE & 724-26 4th St, SE 407-419 G St, SE & 705-711 5th St, SE & 724-26 4th St, SE 701 Howard Road, SE 300 Independence Ave, SE 2907-2913 Martin Luther King Jr, Ave, SE 395 E Street, SW 375 E Street, SW 355 E Street, SW 1900 Anacostia Drive, SE 1838 Martin L King Jr Ave, SE Savannah Street & 4th Streets, SE Independence Avenue and 19th Street, SE 3701 Hayes St, NE 800 Kenilworth Ave, NE 1399 Pennsylvania Ave, SE South Capitol & N St, SE 1345 Howard Rd, SE 116 North Carolina Ave, SE 1015 Half St, SE 70 I St, SE 225 Virginia Ave, SE 100 M St, SE 401 3rd St, SW 821 Howard Road, SE 1635 16th Street, SE 2700 Martin Luther King Jr Ave, SE 262 5th Ave SW 522-24 Raleigh St, SE 1100 1st St, SE 909 New Jersey Ave, SE 2400 Shannon Place, Se 3724 Hayes St, NE 1325 South Capitol St 100 North Carolina Ave, SE 53 D Street, SE 2309 Pennsylvania Ave SE 645 Milwaukee Pl, SW Bolling Air Force Base 3211 - 3218 8th St SE 2634 Martin Luther King Jr Ave, SE 55 M St SE 115 Atlantic St, SW 415 4th St SW 101 M St SW 921 Pennsylvania Ave, SE 704 26th Street, NE 301 Tingey St, SE 600 Barnes St NE 1100 4th St, SW

Ward
6 6 6 2 2 6 6 6 8 6 6 2 2 6 2 8 6 6 6 6 8 8 8 6 6 8 6 8 6 8 6 8 6 6 6 7 6 6 7 2 2 6 6 6 8 6 8 2 2 2 8 8 8 6 7 7 6 6 8 6 6 6 6 6 2 8 8 8 6 8 6 6 8 7 6 6 6 8 8 8 8 8 6 8 2 2 6 5 6 7 6

Timing LandUse
6/1/2007 12/1/2009 8/1/2003 6/1/2006 2/1/2005 7/1/2001 10/1/2003 7/1/2001 8/31/2006 11/1/2001 1/1/2003 4/1/2003 6/1/2005 11/1/2001 3/1/2004 3/1/2009 12/1/2003 6/1/2006 7/1/2001 2/1/2005 8/1/2005 11/1/2007 12/1/2001 7/1/2003 9/1/2006 12/1/2008 11/1/2004 4/1/2002 5/1/2001 12/4/2005 9/1/2006 12/1/2000 1/1/2000 1/24/2002 9/1/2004 5/8/2012 12/1/2008 9/1/2010 12/1/2010 12/1/2001 12/1/2005 5/10/2005 6/1/2004 2/1/2006 8/1/2002 4/1/2003 1/1/2005 4/1/2005 12/1/2009 12/1/2009 12/1/2002 6/1/2007 5/25/2006 12/1/2006 9/1/2007 10/20/2006 9/1/2007 3/1/2008 1/5/2005 7/5/2005 6/1/2011 7/1/2008 3/7/2012 2/1/2009 10/1/2007 10/1/2002 11/3/2005 3/1/2010 12/1/2008 5/1/2002 10/1/2008 6/1/2009 12/1/2009 12/1/2009 6/1/2013 5/23/2011 3/1/2002 4/1/2010 12/1/2008 1/1/2012 12/1/2007 12/29/2011 4/15/2009 6/1/2012 12/1/2012 4/13/2010 11/1/2011 8/1/2008 10/1/2011 10/1/2011 3/1/2010 Office Mixed Use Office Office Hotel Office Multi-Family Residential Office Office Office Office Office Office Single Family Residential Hotel Public/Institutional Multi-Family Residential Mixed Use Office Public/Institutional Public/Institutional Single Family Residential Residential Retail/Restaurant Public/Institutional Residential Residential Residential Office Residential Office Multi-Family Residential Single Family Residential Industrial Public/Institutional Public/Institutional Public/Institutional Hospitality Office Public/Institutional Public/Institutional Multi-Family Residential Single Family Residential Multi-Family Residential Public/Institutional Office Public/Institutional Office Office Office Public/Institutional Office Multi-Family Residential Public/Institutional Public/Institutional Multi-Family Residential Mixed Use Mixed Use Multi-Family Residential Multi-Family Residential Office Multi-Family Residential Office Mixed Use Office Office Public/Institutional Public/Institutional Public/Institutional Retail/Restaurant Multi-Family Residential Multi-Family Residential Public/Institutional Multi-Family Residential Multi-Family Residential Office Office Mixed Use Public/Institutional Single Family Residential Multi-Family Residential Mixed Use Office Public/Institutional Public/Institutional Public/Institutional Public/Institutional Public/Institutional Multi-Family Residential Multi-Family Residential Office

Developer
Lerner Enterprises Cohen Companies Spaulding and Slye Colliers Republic Properties Corporation Donohoe Construction Spaulding and Slye Colliers Stanton Development Corporation NAVSEA DC Government Lincoln Property Company Lincoln Property Company JBG Companies JBG Companies Eakin Youngentob Associates Inc Mandarin Oriental Hotels Clark Construction Group Inc InterState Business Corporation Valhal Corporation HF Enterprises LLC DC Department of Parks and Recreation Thurgood Marshall Ac Jade Development Com NHT Enterprise Preservation Capitol Hill Investors Cesar Chavz Charter School Mid-City Urban LLC Manna Inc Monterey Park LLC Potomac Investment Properties Anacostia Economic Development Corporation JBG Companies Elmwood South Condos DCHA U-Haul US Marines Corps DC Public Schools Architect of the Capitol Washington Drama Society Abbott Development Group Architect of the Capitol Architect of the Capitol Monument Realty LLC Stanton Development Corporation Stanton Development Corporation Advantage Schools Inc Stanton Development Corporation United Planning Organization Trammell Crow Company Trammell Crow Company Trammell Crow Company US Park Police AEDC-NCRC-DRI Partners Inc AHD Inc Building Hope Kenilworth Avenue Apartments LLC JPI Sports & Entertainment Commission Jubilee Enterprises Melton Management Douglas Wilson - Prudential JPI District of Columbia/Stonebridge Carras Opus Clark Construction Jenco Development DC Public Schools District of Columbia US Government Faison Development JPI DC Pulblic Schools CPDC/MHCDO Camden Development American Trucking Association Associated General Contractors Chapman Development Southeast Academy for Scholastic Excellence US Air Force Continental Developmet Corp Matthews Memorial Church Monument Realty DC Public Library Metropolitan Police Department OPEFM Old Naval Hospital Foundation DC Public Schools Forest City PHS LLC Forest City/Vornado

Status
Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

91

Figure 6-3: Development Projects Under Construction in the AWI Study Area

92

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Key Development Projects

Table 6-3: Development Projects Under Construction in the AWI Study Area
Number Development Name
92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 Sheridan Terrace (Townhomes at Stanton Square) Arthur Capper/ Carrollsburg Dwellings Excel Academy Park Chelsea Phase I Waterfront Station Phase II Saint Elizabeth's West 22nd St Condos Pollin Memorial Residential Development Square 699N Phase II Minnesota Benning TOD Parkside Community College - Medical Center Twelve 12 Apartments Maples, The 1211 G Street Residences Friendship Charter School

Address
2451 - 2457 Stanton Road, SE 400 L St, Se 2501 Martin L King Jr Avenue, SE 880 New Jersey Ave, SE 401 M St, SW 2695 Martin Luther King Jr Av SE 1406 22nd St SE 712 Anacostia Ave, NE 55 K St SE 4004 Minnesota Ave, NE 720 Kenilworth Ave, NE 1212 4th St SE 619 D St SE 1211 G St, SE 2705 Martin Luther King Jr Ave, SE

Ward
8 6 8 6 6 8 8 7 6 7 7 6 6 6 8

Timing LandUse
11/1/2013 12/1/2010 1/1/2015 10/1/2014 12/1/2013 12/1/2015 1/1/2015 4/1/2014 7/1/2015 7/1/2014 12/1/2014 12/1/2014 12/1/2015 12/1/2014 3/1/2015 Single Family Residential Mixed Use Public/Institutional Multi-Family Residential Mixed Use Office Multi-Family Residential Multi-Family Residential Multi-Family Residential Mixed Use Public/Institutional Mixed Use Multi-Family Residential Multi-Family Residential Public/Institutional

Developer
William C Smith - DCHA EYA United Housing of Prayer William C Smith Forest City/Kaempfer GSA AF Development Pollin Memorial Community Development Toll DC LO Donatelli & Klein/Blue Skye LANO Forest City The Maples DC LLC Friendship Charter School

Status
Under Construct. Under Construct. Under Construct. Under Construct. Under Construct. Under Construct. Under Construct. Under Construct. Under Construct. Under Construct. Under Construct. Under Construct. Under Construct. Under Construct. Under Construct.

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

93

Key Development Projects

Figure 6-4: Planned Development Projects in the AWI Study Area

94

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Key Development Projects

Table 6-4: Planned Development Projects in the AWI Study Area


Number Development Name
107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 Kenilworth-Parkside Recreation Center Saint Matthews Square M Street & New Jersey Avenue Residential Federal Gateway II Yards, The Phase II Florida Rock I Second Family Home Parkside New Neighborhood Hines Elementary School Redevlopment Capitol Hill Day School Randall School W Street Homes Jemal's KFC Q St Hostel Marina Place Residential Waterfront Station Phase III 6th & Maine Condominiums Ballpark Hotel First and M Street Mixed Use 400 6th Street Office 4300 Anacostia Ave, NE 222 M Street, SW 1111 New Jersey Ave, SE 250 M Street, SE 400 N St, SE 100 Potomac Avenue, SE 2612 Bowen Rd, SE 701 Kenilworth Tr, NE 310 7th St SE 210 South Carolina, SE 850 Delaware Ave, SW 1244 W St, SE 1442 Pennsylvania Ave SE 128 Q St SW 2100 1st St SW 600 M St SW 1265 1st St SE 1st & M Street, SE 400 6th St, SW

Address

Ward
7 6 6 6 6 6 8 7 6 6 2 8 6 2 6 6 6 6 6 2

Timing LandUse
6/1/2016 1/1/2018 9/1/2014 12/1/2015 6/1/2013 12/1/2015 12/1/2015 12/1/2015 1/1/2012 2/1/2014 9/1/2013 9/1/2015 2/1/2016 9/1/2015 9/1/2016 12/1/2016 12/1/2017 11/1/2016 7/1/2017

Public/Institutional Multi-Family Residential Office Office Mixed Use Mixed Use Multi-Family Residential Mixed Use Mixed Use Public/Institutional Multi-Family Residential Single Family Residential Mixed Use Hotel Multi-Family Residential Mixed Use Multi-Family Residential Hotel Mixed Use Office

DC Department of Parks and Recreation TC/CSG St. Matthews LLC NJS Associates (Donohoe Construction?) William C Smith Forest City Enterprises Florida Rock Properties Frost Labule LLC Bank of America CDC DMPED - Stanton/Eastbanc Capitol Hill Day School CACB Holdings/Telesis Corporation Four Points Douglas Development Carr Hospitality Buzzard Point LLC Forest City/Vornado PN Hoffman Capital Riverfront Hotel LLC - Skanska Skanska TC MidAtlantic Development IV, Inc.

Developer

Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned

Status

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

95

Key Development Projects

Figure 6-5: Proposed/New Neighborhood Development Projects in the AWI Study Area

96

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Table 6-5: Proposed/New Neighborhood Development Projects in the AWI Study Area
Number Development Name
127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 Portals Phase IV, The Portals Phase V, The Poplar Point Southwest Waterfront Hill East New Neighborhood (DC Gen Hosp) Saint Elizabeth's East Barry Farms New Community 100 V Street 1301 Maryland Ave, SW 1399 Maryland Ave, SW Anacostia River 800 Water Street, SW Independence Avenue, SE & 19th Street, SE 2702 Martin Luther King Jr Ave, SE 1249 Eaton Rd SE 100 V St, SW

Address

Ward
2 2 8 6 6 8 8 6

9/1/2014 9/1/2014 1/1/2025 1/1/2015 1/1/2020 1/1/2020 9/1/2014 2/1/2015

Timing LandUse
Office Office Mixed Use Mixed Use Mixed Use Mixed Use Mixed Use Office

Republic Properties Corporation Republic Properties Corporation TBD PN Hoffman DC Government DC Government DCHA Akridge

Developer

Proposed/New Proposed/New Proposed/New Proposed/New Proposed/New Proposed/New Proposed/New Proposed/New

Status

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

97

Key Development Projects

Anacostia Waterfront Development Hot Spots

98

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Key Development Projects

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

99

Key Development Projects

Capitol Riverfront Development Hot Spots

100

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Key Development Projects

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

101

Key Development Projects

6.3. Conclusion About the Development Environment


Finally, it needs to be re-iterated that the development environment in the District is very dynamic. For example, the FBI proposed leaving its Pennsylvania Avenue location for a new, as yet undetermined, campus. Mayor Gray has proposed Poplar Point as a possible location, but this possibility is too uncertain at this time to be reected in the Ofce of Plannings development database. Likewise, in January 2013, the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) released a concept plan, The SW Ecodistrict - A Vision Plan for a Sustainable Future. This proposal encompasses a 15-block area around LEnfant Plaza in Southwest DC. This ambitious plan looks at redevelopment of several federal and private sector properties along with substantial changes to the transportation infrastructure. Among other goals, the plan proposes to make dramatic savings in energy and water consumption, to reduce the volume of stormwater runoff and to improve pedestrian connections between the Mall and the Southwest Waterfront. For details about NCPCs plan, see http://www.ncpc.gov/swecodistrict/. Some of the transportation proposals in the SW Ecodistrict Plan are renements of earlier plans by FHWA and DDOT. However these proposed improvements such as enhanced landscaping and stormwater treatment along the LEnfant Promenade, decking over the railroad tracks to re-establish Maryland Avenue SW, decking over the SE/SW Freeway, and improving the pedestrian connection between Banneker Park and the Southwest Waterfront, lack any source of funding. Thus they were considered to be very speculative and long-range proposals when the plan was issued. Yet the General Services Administration (GSA) surprised some by moving forward with the project to redevelop many of the federal buildings in this area pursuant to NCPCs SW Ecodistrict Plan. For information about GSAs process, see http://www.gsa.gov/portal /category/104359. So, some of the information in this document becomes obsolete as soon as it is written. OP and DDOT continually update their information and plans based on evolving development proposals. Be sure to check with the appropriate authorities if you need up-to-date information.

102

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Appendix A

APPENDIX A
List of AWI Planning & Environmental Studies
The development of the Master Plan included research on the previous planning and environmental efforts throughout the AWI area. Because the AWI is an interagency effort, the documents listed below were prepared by various District entities. DDOT uses these documents as a starting point for further project stages such as design and construction. Pertinent information from the planning and environmental documents was distilled into the list shown below. Only those projects with nal plans or studies are listed. Documents Dening the AWI Vision Anacostia Waterfront Initiative Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) March 2000 Signed on March 22, 2000, The MOU Agreement signed by 20 Federal and District agencies, pledged their cooperation to transform the Anacostia River from the citys forgotten river into a vibrant economic corridor that could rival any urban waterfront in the world. [A summary of the MOU can be found on page 6/129 in the Anacostia Waterfront Framework Plan mentioned below.] Anacostia Waterfront Framework Plan, DCOP November 2003 The AWI Framework Plan identied ve major themes to guide development and revitalization efforts in the Anacostia Waterfront area, and identied eight neighborhoods, including the South Capitol Street Corridor, to be studied in greater detail. http://www.scribd.com/doc/92302048/The-Anacostia-Waterfront-Framework-Plan-2003 Anacostia Waterfront Transportation Master Plan Created in 2005 and updated in 2007 and 2008. The 2007 Update can be found online at: http://ddot.dc.gov/DC/DDOT/Publication%20Files/Projects%20and%20Planning/Planning%20and%20Research/AWI/ DDOT_AWI_NEPA-TransportationMasterplan_2007.pdf Anacostia Waterfront Transportation Architecture Guidelines July 26, 2006 http://www.anacostiawaterfront.org/awi-documents/anacostia-waterfront-transportation-architecture-designguidelines/ Anacostia Waterfront Initiative 10 Years of Progress September 2010 http://www.scribd.com/doc/90421120/Anacostia-Waterfront-Initiative-10-Years-of-Progress AWI Web Site
www.anacostiawaterfront.org/

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

A-1

Appendix A

South Capitol Street Corridor Documents


South Capitol Street Urban Design Study, NCPC January 2003 This South Capitol Street and Urban Design Study was a cooperative effort between the Districts Ofce of Planning and the National Capital Planning Commission. It provides fundamental information regarding design, open space, and land use that was used in a larger effort, the South Capitol Street/Gateway Improvement Study. South Capitol Gateway and Corridor Improvement Study, DDOT September 2003 This study proposed that South Capitol Street be transformed into an urban boulevard that would accommodate transit, pedestrians, and cyclists. It recommended a new Frederick Douglass Bridge on a more southerly alignment. South Capitol Street Report by Urban Land Institute (ULI) Advisory Panel, NCPC & DCOP Novemeber 2003 This document summarized the specic land use, transportation, and urban design recommendations for the South Capitol Street Corridor and pointed out the need to strengthen physical connections between neighborhoods and activity centers. South Capitol Gateway and Anacostia Access Studies, DDOT October 2004 These studies further developed the recommendations of the South Capitol Gateway and Corridor Improvement Study and stressed the need for replacement of the Frederick Douglass Bridge and redesign of the I-295/South Capitol Street/Suitland Parkway interchange. South Capitol Street Task Force Recommendations, NCPC January 2005 These recommendations reexamined the South Capitol Corridor and recommended a trafc oval at South Capitol and Potomac with a major memorial/open space at that location. It prescribed a more urban character for South Capitol Street north of M Street with smaller parcels and a larger scale south of M Street with a center median and limited cross streets. Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge Alignment Study December 2005 This study considered the technical constraints of the proposed alignments for the new Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge. This study was a technical report to the South Capitol Street EIS. Ballpark District Development Strategy Plan, DCOP & AWC September 2006 The Ballpark District Development Strategy Plan created a vision for development of the areas surrounding the Washington Nationals Ballpark site to the east of South Capitol Street. It analyzed the level and feasibility of various development types.

A-2

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Appendix A

South Capitol Street Noise Technical Report, November 2006 South Capitol Street Air Quality Technical Reports, November 2006 Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge Alignment Study Report, March 2007 http://www.scribd.com/doc/92302048/The-Anacostia-Waterfront-Framework-Plan-2003 Trafc Operations & Parking Plan Washington Nationals Ballpark, Washington DC -- Draft July 18, 2007 http://ddot.dc.gov/DC/DDOT/On+Your+Street/Trafc+Management/Parking/ci.Trafc+Operations+and+Parking+Pla n+for+the+Baseball+Park.print South Capitol Street Final Environmental Impact Statement / Section 4(f) Evaluation March 2011 http://www.southcapitoleis.com/ South Capitol Street Technical Reports Compiled March 2011 http://www.southcapitoleis.com/ South Capitol Street / Overlook Avenue Trail December 2010 http://dc.gov/DC/DDOT/On+Your+Street/Bicycles+and+Pedestrians/Trails/South+Capital+Street+Trail

Middle Anacostia Crossings Corridor Documents


Middle Anacostia River Crossings Transportation Study, DDOT July 2005 As part of the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative, a transportation study was conducted for the Middle Anacostia area of the District of Columbia. The study evaluated trafc and safety issues and considered improvement options. http://www.anacostiawaterfront.org/awi-documents/pennsylvania-potomac-avenues-documents/middle-anacostiariver-crossings-mac-transportation-study-nal-report-2005/ 11th St Bridges Legal Sufciency Draft of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement - Volumes 1 & 2, May 2006 11th Street Bridges EIS, DDOT October 2007 Both the Draft EIS and the Final EIS documents describe the environmental impacts associated with the reconstruction and reconguration of the interchange of the Southeast/Southwest Freeway and the Anacostia Freeway over the Anacostia River in Southeast Washington, DC. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and District Department of Transportation (DDOT) sponsored the project and prepared the EIS. http://www.anacostiawaterfront.org/awi-documents/11th-street-bridge-documents/11th-street-bridges-nalenvironmental-impact-statement-feis/

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

A-3

Appendix A

Good Hope Road, SE at Naylor Road, SE Intersection Safety Study and Technical Appendices August 2009 Good Hope Road, SE at 25th St SE / Naylor Road, SE Intersection Safety Study August 2009

M Street SE/SW & Southwest Waterfront Documents


Parking and Circulation Study for SW Waterfront Improvements, October 2001 DC SW Waterfront Pedestrian Circulation Study January 2003 SW Waterfront Preliminary Framework Plan, February 21, 2003 Southwest Waterfront Plan, OP/NCPC February 2003 The Southwest Waterfront Plan is a redevelopment framework for nearly 50 acres of waterfront in the Southwest quadrant of Washington. The plan envisions replacing parking lots and underutilized streets with a mix of public plazas, cultural venues, restaurants, shops and residences to create a vibrant neighborhood and regional waterfront destination. Fourth Street SW Transportation Study, DDOT March 2003 The District of Columbia Department Transportation (DDOT) conducted a study that evaluated the potential impacts of proposed redevelopment at Waterside Mall. Southwest Waterfront- Maine Access / Improvements Study, DDOT October 2004 This study considered future conditions on Maine Avenue, without Water Street and with a new signalized entrance to the Fish Market. Water Street is planned to be removed as part of future development under the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative (AWI). A planning horizon of ten years was used in assessing effects from future developments that will generate more trips along Maine Avenue. Noise Barrier Constructability Study - SE/SW Freeway Final Report, January 2006 L Enfant Promenade and Benjamin Banneker Park EA Environmental Assessment for Improvements to L Enfant Promenade and Benjamin Banneker Park March 2006 http://www.e.fhwa.dot.gov/les/projects/environment/lenfantpublicea_appendix.pdf Trafc Impact Study Marina View, Washington DC, December 4, 2006 Air Rights Development over the Southwest Freeway in Washington DC National Capital Planning Commission July 24, 2010 http://www.sts.virginia.edu/wip/research_papers/2010/Kaufmann.pdf

A-4

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Appendix A

St Matthews Redevelopment Southwest DC Preliminary DDOT Site Plan Review Sept 1, 2010 Maryland Avenue SW Small Area Plan The Maryland Avenue SW Plan was initiated in February 2011 to study the feasibility of reconstructing a major missing link in the LEnfant street grid, Maryland Avenue SW, and creating a more diverse land use mix in the heart of the Southwest Rectangle, between the National Mall and Southwest Waterfront. Through participation in the National Capital Planning Commissions (NCPCs) Southwest Ecodistrict initiative, the Ofce of Planning (OP) completed the Maryland Avenue SW Plan after working with and obtaining input from government agency representatives, land owners, ofce workers, nearby neighbors, and transit and railway operators. http://planning.dc.gov/DC/Planning/In+Your+Neighborhood/Wards/Small+Area+Plans,+Studies,+and+Reports+for+ All+Wards/Maryland+Ave.+Small+Area+Plan M Street SE/SW Transportation Planning Study December 2012 This study was initiated to consider current transportation conditions, review the planned future land uses and to determine solutions for potential impacts within the study area. It also sought solutions to improve safety, mobility and the quality of local connections to the regional transportation infrastructure. http://www.anacostiawaterfront.org/awi-documents/m-street-se-sw-transportation-study-documents/m-street-seswtransportation-study-nal-report/ SW Ecodistrict A Vision Plan for a More Sustainable Future (National Capital Planning Commission) January 2013 http://www.ncpc.gov/swecodistrict Long Bridge Study Begun September 2012 - Not Complete The District Department of Transportation (DDOT) and CSX began the Long Bridge Study to address the signicant bottleneck that exists over the Potomac River. The study will assess the feasibility of improving the span and corridor for multiple modes of transportation (freight and passenger rail, Metrorail, and bicycle/pedestrian access) which will inuence operations at LEnfant Station.

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

A-5

Appendix A

Kenilworth Avenue Corridor Documents


Kenilworth Avenue Corridor Study, DDOT August 2006 The Kenilworth Avenue Corridor Study was the third major transportation study by the District Department of Transportation (DDOT) and looked at transportation improvements for the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative (AWI) area. This study examined the section of Kenilworth Avenue between Pennsylvania Avenue and Eastern Avenue and suggested ways for the facility to provide a safer, more pedestrian friendly atmosphere, create a more urban setting for Kenilworth Avenue, and improve access for local neighborhoods. Northern Ward 7 Waterfront Plan: Washington DC Urban Design Associates January 2007

Anacostia Riverwalk Documents


Anacostia Riverwalk Trail Environmental Assessment (EA), National Park Service December 2005 This Environmental Assessment was prepared in coordination with DDOT to assist the National Park Service in identifying and evaluating the potential environmental impacts and benets of the Anacostia Riverwalk. A public meeting was held regarding the Riverwalk EA on January 16, 2005.

Suitland Parkway Corridor Documents


St. Elizabeths East: Master Plan & Design Guidelines June 4, 2012 The 180-acre campus, comprising part of a former mental health hospital complex, is one of the Districts largest redevelopment sites. It can support approximately ve million square feet of mixed-use development. The East Campus Master Plan creates a framework for residential, commercial, cultural, and institutional uses. http://www.stelizabethseast.com/wp-content/uploads/21087-GL-DRAFT_2012_0605_FINAL_with_appendices.pdf

Other Documents Relevant to the AWI Area


Extending the Legacy: Planning Americas Capital for the 21st Century, NCPC September 1996 This study presented a revised vision for the Districts Monumental Core, including the South Capitol Street Corridor. It envisioned a bustling mix of federal, local, and private uses for South Capitol Street, and a major public building or monument at the point where the corridor meets the river. http://www.ncpc.gov/ncpc/Main(T2)/Planning(Tr2)/ExtendingtheLegacy.html Master Plan for Reservation 13/Hill East, DC Ofce of Planning February 2003 The plan for the Hill East waterfront envisions transforming Reservation 13 from an isolated campus to a mixeduse waterfront neighborhood. By extending neighborhood-scaled streets, the site can accommodate diverse uses including health care, civic, residential, educational, recreational, community and other public uses along with unrestricted access to the Anacostia waterfront. http://planning.dc.gov/DC/Planning/In+Your+Neighborhood/Wards/Ward+6/Small+Area+Plans+&+Studies/Master+ Plan+for+Reservation+13,+Hill+East+Waterfront

A-6

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Appendix A

DC Transit Alternative Analysis-Anacostia Streetcar Study, WMATA/DDOT January 2004 The D.C. Alternative Analysis/Anacostia Corridor Demonstration Project was an 18-month joint study between WMATA and DDOT to develop a locally preferred transit investment for the Districts highest priority corridors. The study analyzed the benets, costs and impacts of light rail or bus rapid transit in four District corridors, and developed an implementation and phasing plan for the system. Using Value Capture to Finance Infrastructure and Encourage Compact Development April 2004 This article in the Public Works Management and Policy Journal explores how value capture techniques can help make urban infrastructure self-nancing while simultaneously promoting more affordable and compact development that reduces per capita infrastructure requirements and costs while promoting job creation and affordable housing. https://www.mwcog.org/uploads/committee-documents/k15fVl1f20080424150651.pdf AWI Poplar Point Target Area Master Plan, DCOP June 2005 The plan called for community and culturally focused development near the Anacostia Metro Station and mixed-use development along Howard Road. DC Comprehensive Plan, DCOP March 2006 This major revision of the District Elements of the comprehensive plan described major changes to the land use for the AWI area. H Street NE Corridor Transportation Study, DDOT December 2006 The H Street NE Corridor Transportation Study focused on ways to improve transit, pedestrian facilities, parking, and reduce vehicular impacts on the corridor. This study was the foundation for improvements to the streetscape along H Street, including the sidewalks, lighting, trees and other elements. New York Avenue Corridor Study, DDOT/OP August 2007 The New York Avenue Corridor, from the District of Columbia / Prince Georges County line to 7th Street, NW, has been identied in the Districts strategic transportation plan as a potential multimodal and intermodal corridor. This study outlines the plan for the Corridor. Plans of Proposed DC Streetcar System Anacostia Operations & Maintenance Facility April 21, 2008 Monumental Core Framework Plan April 2009 This plan was developed by the National Capital Planning Commission with the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts as a comprehensive guide to planning for the areas surrounding the National Mall. http://www.ncpc.gov/ncpc/Main(T2)/Publications(Tr2)/iframpages/monumental_core_framework_plan_a. html#framework

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

A-7

Appendix A

Value Capture and Tax-Increment Financing Options for Streetcar Construction June 2009 This study by the Brookings Institution, HDR, RCLCO and Re-Connecting America explores the funding options for paying for the construction costs of a proposed streetcar line using the H Street Corrridor between the Minnesota Avenue Metro station and Union Station as a case study. http://www.reconnectingamerica.org/resource-center/books-and-reports/2009/value-capture-and-tax-incrementnancing-options-for-streetcar-construction/ DC Streetcar System Plan - H St/ Benning Rd and Future Segments and Extensions, DDOT October 2010 http://dc.gov/DC/DDOT/Publication%20Files/On%20Your%20Street/Mass%20Transit/DC%20Streetcar/Streetcar_ SystemPlan_Oct2010.pdf DC Streetcar Web Site February 2013 http://www.dcstreetcar.com/ Sustainable DC Initiative April 2013 In the fall of 2011, Mayor Gray called upon the public and city agencies to collaborate on a plan to make the District one of the most sustainable cities in the world. In April 2012, Sustainable DC released its vision. In 2013, Sustainable DC released an initial action plan consisting of 143 actions to help achieve the vision. Information about Sustainable DC can be obtained from www.sustainable-dc.org .

A-8

a n a c o s t i a wat e r fro n t .o rg

Appendix B

APPENDIX B

APPENDIX B
List of Environmental Commitments

List of Environmental Commitments

Corridor SCSC SCSC SCSC SCSC SCSC SCSC MAC MAC MAC MAC MAC MAC MAC MAC KC KC KC KC KC KC KC KC MEW MEW MEW MEW MEW ART ART ART ART ART SPC SPC SPC SPC

Project Name Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge Rehab Ballpark Roadways (2008 Near-Term Improvements) South Capitol St Near Term Improvements (Seg 1 & 2) South Capitol St Long Term Improvements (Seg 4 & 5) I-295/Malcolm X Bridge Rehabilitation I-295/Malcolm X Interchange MAC Near Term Improvements Penn Ave & Minn Ave Intersection Penn Ave & Potomac Ave Intersection Pedestrian Bridge: Anacostia High School to Anacostia Park 11th Street Bridge - Phase 1 11th Street Bridge - Phase 2 Barney Circle/Southeast Boulevard Virginia Avenue CSX National Gateway - 12th St SE Kenilworth Corridor Near Term Improvements Nannie Helen Burroughs Interchange East Capitol St Interchange Benning Rd Interchange Eastern Avenue Interchange Kenilworth Avenue Mainline Improvements Parkside Pedestrian Bridge DC-295/Kenilworth Pedestrian Bridges M Street SE/SW Corridor Transportation Study 4th Street SW Reconstruction Maine Avenue Improvements The Wharf - Infrastructure Maryland Ave SW - CSX National Gateway Anacostia Riverwalk Trails (ART) FRP Bridges National Arboretum Riverwalk Trail Kenilworth Garden Trail South Capitol Street Bike Trail Suitland Parkway Ped/Bike Trail South Capitol St Long Term Improvements (Segment 3) MLK Jr. Avenue Widening MLK Jr. Avenue Two-Way Reconstruction

Level of Environmental Commitment CE EA EIS DC ER

CC X X

NOTES N/A Completed

X X St. Elizabeths West Improvements, GSA Actions St. Elizabeths West Improvements, GSA Actions X X X X X X X X completed Kenilworth interchanges will need either DC law or EA. Public Circulation, end Sept 25th EA at FHWA for review Completed as part of 11th Street Bridges

EA underway Level I Level III X X X X To be started 4th Quarter 2013

X X X Done by NPS

X X X X district env: H/Benning; AILS. Federal: Anacostia Ext EA: at FTA for review. Benning Ext EA, Anacostia to SW Waterfront (M Street SE/SW) EA, and Union Station to Georgetown EA to start soon. 2 DC ER, 3 EAs; other segments planned Pre-environmental Doc. Study Phase June 2012 EA Eastern Federal Lands Long range study phase, with FRA Pre-environmental Doc. Study Phase St Elizabeths West Campus- EA completed

AWI-Wide DC Streetcar

AWI-Wide AWI-Wide AWI-Wide AWI-Wide AWI-Wide AWI-Wide AWI-Wide AWI-Wide

Water Coach/Taxi St. Elizabeths East Campus Infrastructure 14th Street Bridge Improvements Long Bridge Study AWI Master Drainage Plan DC Water Clean Rivers Improvements Private Development Projects National Park Service-Anacostia Park Master Plan

X X

NPS project, DDOT coord on access and circulation if this is NY Ave over RR - then it is complete (mostly)

Non-Active New York Avenue Improvements Non-Active Reservation 13 Roadway Network

Six Key Transportation Corridors: SCSC: South Capitol Street Corridor MAC: Middle Anacostia Crossings Corridor KC: Kenilworth Corridor MEW: M Street SE/SW Corridor ART: Riverwalk Corridor SPC: Suitland Parkway Corridor

LEGEND
CE: Categorical Exclusion EA: Environmental Analysis EIS: Environmental Impact Statement DC ER: DC Environmental Review CC: Construction Completed

A na cos t i a Wa t er fro n t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ma s t e r P l a n 2014 U p d a t e

B-1

APPENDIX C
Anacostia Waterfront Transportation Mobility Study - 2014 Update
Introduction
Public agencies draw on a variety of data sources and must coordinate with one another to ensure that their projections for the future are reasonable. As with other major metropolitan areas, the District of Columbia carries out such planning and coordinating among multiple agencies. The District of Columbia Office of Planning (DC OP) and the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG) work together, along with other jurisdictions in the area, to develop reasonable estimates regarding the size and location of future population and employment in the region. The Washington region is currently designated as nonattainment for the federal health standards for ozone and fine particles (PM2.5), and is a maintenance area for Wintertime Carbon Monoxide (CO). Because the region is a nonattainment area for these types of air pollution, the Environmental Protection Agency requires the Metropolitan Planning Organization for the region, the National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board (TPB), to show that it will meet clean air standards in the future. To do this, TPB utilizes population estimates, employment estimates, and development location projections, combined with data about the regions transportation networks and vehicle ownership, to develop a sophisticated model that estimates future transportation trips and indicates how much pollution will be produced by the projected vehicular and transit traffic. This model, commonly known as the MWCOG Model, is the federally-approved regional travel demand forecast model used for all major transportation projects in the Metropolitan Washington region. A quantifiable output data set from the MWCOG model is an assignment of trips to the various modes of transportation provided in the region (i.e. vehicular, bus, metro rail, non-motorized, etc.) and an assignment of vehicular traffic to the regions roadway network. This assignment provides estimated average daily traffic volumes on various segments of the roadway network. The information produced from the MWCOG Model helps inform the region about future levels of congestion on both the roadway and transit networks. Likewise, when significant new transportation projects are completed (such as a new highway interchange, new lanes on a major arterial roadway, or the extension of bus or rail transit services) they change the transportation network and alter the ways in which some people chose to travel. The Anacostia transportation infrastructure improvements contained in the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative (AWI) Transportation Master Plan have been developed to achieve the transportation goals of the AWI Framework Plan. They are not intended to eliminate congestion, but to manage it. While the old infrastructure configurations accommodated regional traffic at the expense of neighborhood access and mobility needs, and while the AWI transportation infrastructure improvements are intended to help remedy this situation, there still needs to be a balance between meeting local and regional transportation needs. The Anacostia River separates downtown jobs in the urban core from a significant portion of the regions population living in predominantly residential areas to the east and southeast. In 2005, DDOT and TPB initiated a comprehensive study that used the regional model for land use, transportation and air quality (the MWCOG Model) to help estimate the transportation impacts of the AWI transportation infrastructure improvements. The process and results were described in the 2005 Anacostia Waterfront Transportation Mobility Study (2005 Mobility Study). This study was included as a component of the 2005 AWI Transportation Master Plan and subsequent updates as Appendix 3 or Appendix C. Since the 2005 Mobility Study, continued efforts have been underway to update and better integrate the separate AWI infrastructure improvement projects into a unified transportation network. This effort has involved making refinements and improvements to: Population, employment and land use projections;
C-1

The MWCOG transportation model; and Transportation network configurations and project scopes.

In particular, the following projects have undergone significant changes in configuration and scope since previous updates to the AWI Transportation Master Plan: St. Elizabeths East and West Campus Infrastructure Requirements; Replacement of the Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge and South Capitol Street Corridor improvements; Replacement of the 11th Street Bridges; Southeast Boulevard improvements (formerly the Southeast Freeway east of 11th Street); and DC Streetcar Network. Also, some projects that had been anticipated in 2005 are no longer under active consideration as of the beginning of 2014. The significant projects in this category include: A Tunnel underneath South Capitol Street and the Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge that would connect I-395 to I-295; Pennsylvania Avenue / I-295 Interchange Oval; Massachusetts Avenue Bridge over the Anacostia; and Reservation 13 Roadway. For each of the major projects under active consideration (except for the DC Streetcar Network), DDOT has reached (or is about to reach) a point where the project configurations and scopes are final. As projects transition from initial conceptual planning through the design phase, they undergo a comprehensive environmental evaluation process pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). For major projects, this may require an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) or an Environmental Assessment (EA). In these instances, the changes in population and job estimates, as well as future land use projections, are integrated into refined transportation models that are used in conjunction with the final project configurations in order to produce updated future traffic volume projections and corresponding emissions / air quality impact estimates. Notwithstanding these improvements and updates to traffic forecasting, it must be understood that updated forecasts represent snapshots based on the best estimates and assumptions at the times the model is run. But real world events that will change these estimates and assumptions are continually unfolding: Will the General Services Administration or DC Government relocate one or more federal or local agencies to Poplar Point or to nearby locations? What population increases will occur in Washington, DC, adjacent jurisdictions, and the rest of the region? What changes will occur in transportation technology and transportation finance mechanisms? What changes will occur in transit facilities, services and fares? What will happen to fuel prices? Will individuals and families change the way that they make daily transportation decisions (what trips to take and what mode(s) to use)? All of these developments (and others) will create changes in transportation demand and necessitate changes in the way that we build, operate and maintain transportation facilities and services. Some changes, such as the way in which people make transportation decisions, may necessitate modifying or refining the models that we use to estimate the relationship between transportation demand and supply. When using results of the transportation model, it is important to remember that comparisons are not relevant between estimated future traffic volumes and existing traffic volumes. This would be an apples to oranges comparison, due to major differences in future land use and population commuting patterns. The usefulness of these models is to compare the operating characteristics of the transportation network at a future time under differing assumptions about land use (holding everything else constant) or transportation facilities and services (holding everything else constant).
C-2

Summary
In order to verify that the proposed development plans and transportation improvements within the Anacostia Waterfront area correspond to what the transportation network can support, DDOT, DC OP, and the Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development (DMPED) have employed the federally-approved MWCOG regional travel demand model and cooperative land use forecasts as a primary evaluation tool. This report summarizes the coordinated activities of DDOT, DC OP and DMPED related to the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative, and lays out how these agencies coordinate with one another in the process of developing the future land use and transportation infrastructure for the District. Both DDOT and DC OP (in coordination with DMPED) supply MWCOG with planning and programming information, and use MWCOGs land use and transportation projections as one way to evaluate their projects. Although the procedures used follow logical steps, the various permutations of travel demand models and the system for determining future land use involves laying out many complex processes. The 2014 Update to the Mobility Study depicts how very large amounts of data and information are organized to develop a sensible picture of the operating characteristics of the future transportation network. When used to evaluate major new projects, the MWCOG Model is run to determine if the future population will be better served by the proposed transportation network than by the existing network. Two alternative future networks can also be compared to see which ones function better to handle projected future demand. Likewise, alternative future land uses can be assumed (keeping the transportation network constant) to see how changes in land use affect transportation system performance. This report is composed of six sections that explain facets of the land use and transportation planning process and how modeling activities served to inform and confirm transportation projects in the 2014 Update of the AWI Transportation Master Plan: Section 1 provides additional background details regarding the mobility study. The goal of the study is to demonstrate that the planned transportation improvements meet future demand better than the existing transportation facilities and services would. Section 2 discusses the transportation planning process and land use forecasts developed by MWCOG. MWCOG uses a four-step, trip-based model to determine area travel demand on the regional transportation system. As an input to the travel demand model, MWCOGs land-use forecasts rely on information gathered from local agency land-use planners, supplied through the land use planning process, to determine future households, population and employment. Since the MWCOG Model is used by DDOT in its planning studies and in its environmental analyses of proposed projects, an explanation of the basic workings of the MWCOG Model is important to gaining an understanding of the process. Section 3 summarizes the DC OPs role in the development process, specifically how they track development projects and estimate future land use, and how they supply that information to other agencies, including MWCOG. This section also provides highlights of major development projects in the Office of Plannings development database. Section 4 discusses the methodology of the 2014 Update of the Mobility Study and the planning process conducted for each of DDOTs transportation planning studies. In particular, this section demonstrates how the MWCOG Model is the foundation for determining future traffic volumes and future traffic impacts. As studies move from the conceptual planning level to full design and construction or implementation, DDOT updates future traffic volume forecasts and future transportation impacts using the latest MWCOG Models and land use forecasts, to ensure that anticipated development and infrastructure growth have been captured in its evaluation. Projects are carefully analyzed as to how they accommodate future traffic conditions. Section 5 explains the major findings of the 2014 Update of the Mobility Study in light of updated land use data, updated travel demand data, and an updated travel demand model (discussed in Sections 1, 2 and 3). Updated data
C-3

and modeling have been used recently by District and federal agencies to evaluate future land use and transportation conditions in the AWI area. This Mobility Study accounts for recently completed planning and environmental studies on major projects within the AWI study area, including: St. Elizabeths Department of Homeland Security Headquarters Consolidation Master Plan and EIS St. Elizabeths East Campus Infrastructure Study, Master Plan, and Transportation Network Environmental Assessment South Capitol Street Corridor EIS M Street SE/SW Transportation Planning Study In conclusion, DDOT, through its individual transportation planning studies and project development, has taken a comprehensive look at future land use and travel demand in the AWI study area, in order to demonstrate that the proposed improvements to the Anacostia Waterfront transportation infrastructure serve the future travel demand better than the existing transportation network. Section 6 provides a list of references used for the 2014 Update of the Mobility Study.

C-4

Section 1

Background

Major metropolitan areas in the United States are required to analyze potential impacts from future land development and how that influences and is affected by the network of streets, roads, bridges, transit facilities and services and other transportation infrastructure. DDOT is charged with planning and building the transportation infrastructure to implement the program of improvements identified as the AWI transportation projects. As in many communities, within the AWI area there is concern from the public that the planned infrastructure will not be able to accommodate anticipated growth from planned and proposed development in the District and the region. DDOT has made a point of identifying and planning projects that improve the citys transportation infrastructure without unnecessary widening of roadways and, at the same time, accommodating development projects that are proposed or planned in many parts of the city. The projected increases in commercial and residential development programmed as part of the AWI have created concerns among some communities that the transportation infrastructure will not be able to handle this growth and that DDOT has underestimated future traffic impacts. DDOT is dedicated to openness concerning transportation planning and appreciates that the community needs a full understanding of the development assumptions used by the District and DDOT in their planning studies. With a clearer understanding of the process, the public will be more well-informed and better be able to understand the impact of land use and transportation projects proposed for the area, as well as have confidence in the recommendations from the planning studies and be assured that the planned infrastructure will accommodate future growth. One important element of DDOTs objectives in developing transportation infrastructure projects is the concern that increased roadway capacity will only contribute to non-attainment of air quality standards because traffic will expand to fill the newly available space. DDOT is dedicated to making sure that there is a balanced, sustainable, multi-modal transportation network to serve the AWI area. DDOT is equally dedicated to the concept that no community can build its way out of traffic congestion. Instead, improvements proposed for the District (and specifically within the AWI area) seek to maximize the efficient use of the existing system while providing missing logical connections. This includes encouraging the use of travel modes such as carpooling, car-sharing, transit, cycling and walking that are more economical and efficient regarding their demand for public space. This Mobility Study serves as a tool that is just one component of the outreach that DDOT consistently undertakes in the project planning and development process. The purpose of the 2014 Update to the Mobility Study is to provide an update to members of the community within the AWI area and the general public, as well as to provide information regarding the federally-mandated planning process established by the US DOT and utilized by DDOT.

Figure 1. The AWI Planning Area


C-5

Section 2

MWCOG Land Use Forecasts

The following section discusses the MWCOG planning process and what materials and information they gather to form their land use forecasts. The MWCOG Model assumptions are the basis for all transportation planning projects undertaken in the metropolitan Washington region. Section 2.1 Modeling Activities Like every major municipal area in the United States, the Washington metropolitan region follows a defined transportation planning process. The National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board (TPB) is the recognized metropolitan planning organization (MPO) for the Washington metropolitan region. Although its board operates independently of the MWCOG, its staff is provided by the National Capital Region Transportation Planning Department within MWCOG. The TPB has developed the transportation planning process based on federal requirements that forecast the transportation impacts, needs, and travel patterns over a 20-25 year time frame. Most of the process is performed by using computer-based travel demand models. The TPB, in conjunction with the MWCOG, uses regional travel demand models to produce regional travel demand forecasts and air quality assessments in order to support long-range planning, and for the development of key planning documents. The MWCOG Model is essential for the development of the Constrained Long Range Transportation Plan1 (CLRP) and the six-year Transportation Improvement Program2 (TIP). Any time that the CLRP and TIP are amended, the regions transportation networks (roads and transit), as well as all new projects, must be modeled to ensure air quality conformity for the region. Federal law, including the Clean Air Act of 1990 (as amended), requires travel demand modeling to show that the CLRP and TIP are in conformity with regional air quality improvement goals. (For the remainder of this report, with perhaps a few exceptions, MWCOG will be referenced instead of distinguishing between MWCOG and the TPB.) The modeling process produces travel forecasts (in the form of vehicle trips, vehicle miles of travel, transportation mode choice options, and vehicular speed data) that can be used in a variety of decision-making opportunities by the local jurisdictions. The regional travel forecasting model is also used in other functions throughout the region. State departments of transportation (DDOT, VDOT, MDOT), the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA), and local transportation agencies all use the model to develop future travel demand for corridor studies and other analyses. The model helps determine the future impacts of proposed infrastructure within the region. The model is also used to examine the regional and local mobility of various population segments. It is important to note that travel demand modeling and forecasting is not an exact science; travel patterns and traffic volumes over a long period of time cannot be predicted with precise accuracy. However, the output from the models can be used as a basis for comparison. Transportation decision makers and local governments can use the output from the models to analyze different transportation options and determine the potential effects those options would have on the regional and/or local system, such as the effects of various potential land use and development scenarios on future traffic congestion levels. Section 2.1.1 MWCOG Regional Travel Demand Model The current officially-adopted travel demand model in use by MWCOG is Version 2.3 (adopted by MWCOG November 16, 2011) in conjunction with the Round 8.1 Cooperative Forecasts for land use. The MWCOG travel demand model is refined on a periodic basis with newly collected data or with emerging forecasting techniques. During the refinement
1The CLRP is a financially constrained comprehensive plan of transportation projects and a system-wide collection of strategies that the TPB realistically anticipates can be implemented over the next 25 years. Federal law requires that the CLRP be updated every three years. The TPB has typically amended the CLRP every year. 2 The TIP provides detailed information showing which projects in the CLRP will be completed over the next six-year period. The TIP, like the CLRP, is subject to federal review and must meet air quality conformity requirements. TPB develops a new TIP every year.
C-6

process, there typically will be a draft travel demand model that is under development and available for public review. For some of the earlier AWI transportation studies, previous versions of the MWCOG Model were used to forecast future travel demand. For the 2005 Mobility Study, for example, version 2.1D #50 was used. However, as proposed transportation facilities and services are created, they are incorporated into a computer representation of the physical transportation network. Then as future travel demand and traffic studies are performed for NEPA studies, planning documents, or other purposes, all transportation facilities and services (including those that may have initially been analyzed according to a prior model version) are analyzed according to the most recent version of the travel demand model.

Figure 2. MWCOGs Member Jurisdictions (Source: MWCOG 2012)

Figure 3. Map of MWCOGs Traffic Analysis Zones (includes wider modeling area) (Source: MWCOG 2012)

The AWI area, though sizeable, is only a small portion of the entire area covered by the MWCOG Model; it covers an area of 7,400 square miles, or 23 jurisdictions (counties and cities), including adjacent counties/municipalities outside of MWCOGs member jurisdictions. When the original 2005 Anacostia Mobility Study was undertaken, this area was divided into about 2,000 Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs). Today, MWCOGs model consists of 3,722 TAZs. Dividing up large TAZs into smaller ones provides the MWCOG Model with a greater ability to provide meaningful results at the sub-regional level of analysis. The highway network represents over 27,000 road segments and the transit network includes over 600 routes, including such modes as Metrorail, Metrobus and other local bus service, commuter bus, and commuter rail systems. Section 2.1.2 The FourFour-Step Process For its regional travel demand model, MWCOG uses the four-step process to determine travel demand. The four main steps of this process are:

Trip generation - determine the number of daily trips that take place in the region by estimating the number of trip ends produced in and/or attracted to each transportation analysis zone (TAZ) in the region.

C-7

Trip distribution - determine the geographical linkages between the trips produced and those attracted to develop complete trips. Mode choice - determine the mode of travel for commuters (mass transit, drive alone, or carpooling). Trip assignment - determine the routes travelers choose to reach their destinations.

The four-step model is a trip-based model that is used, in one form or another, by almost every MPO that performs regional modeling. The first three steps are used to estimate the demand for travel. In the fourth step, trip assignment, the travel demand is brought into equilibrium with the travel supply, as trips are loaded onto one or more networks. The fourth step in the process is an iterative process, based on regional congestion, as shown in Figure 4 below.

Figure 4. Standard Four-Step Travel Demand Forecasting Process (Source: Swanson, J. (2012). Forecasting Future Travel Patterns. The Region, National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board, Annual Review of Transportation Issues in the Washington Metropolitan Region, 51, pp 9-15.) Section 2.1. 2.1.3 Model Inputs There are two major pieces of information that are used in the MWCOG Model, as demonstrated in the figure above: land use inputs (top left box) and transportation inputs (bottom center boxes). Transportation inputs include highway transportation network, public transportation network, planned improvements, and potential network changes. Information regarding the transportation inputs comes from the existing transportation network, coupled with current transit fares and policies, local jurisdictions transportation plans, and proposed roadway and transit improvements. Land use inputs include forecasts of future population, household growth, and employment. MWCOGs Cooperative Forecasting Program develops the land use inputs using information from real estate development, market conditions, adopted land use plans, and planned transportation improvement impacts. The data developed through this program
C-8

reflects the best judgment of planning officials from the local jurisdictions. This enables local and regional planning efforts to be coordinated using common assumptions with regards to future growth. The Cooperative Forecasts combine regional data, based on national economic trends and regional demographics, with location projections of population, households, and employment. Section 2.2 describes the development of the commonly-used land use forecasts for the MWCOG Model. The MWCOG Model is empirically estimated and calibrated using observed data. Major sources of observed data used to calibrate and validate the model include census data, household travel surveys, automobile travel time surveys, airline passenger surveys, WMATA Metrorail surveys, traffic counts, and truck surveys. Section 2.1. 2.1.4 Model Outputs The MWCOG Model produces information including highway and transit trips and traffic volumes. Other outputs include:

Travel flows (vehicular volumes) on links Speeds on links Origin/destination patterns, represented by zone-to-zone trip tables segmented by travel mode Mode splits Emissions (requires post processor and emissions models)

The outputs are used to provide decision makers with information regarding future mobility and air quality estimates in the region. Section 2.2 Land Use Forecasting The Cooperative Forecasting program is a joint effort by the MWCOG, federal and local governments to produce a consistent set of long-range economic and demographic forecasts for use in metropolitan and local planning programs. The process ensures that as each jurisdiction carries out its planning and forecasting activities, each jurisdiction has the same basic information inputs and uses the same parameters as neighboring jurisdictions. The process provides common assumptions about future growth and development in the region and results in forecasts of employment, households and population in five-year increments for the entire metropolitan area. The resulting forecasts apply not only to individual member jurisdictions, such as the District or Loudoun County, but also for any traffic zone within each jurisdiction. The Cooperative Forecasting program, established in 1975, works to provide forecasts on which to base functional plans in the areas of transportation, water resources, air quality, housing, land use, and energy. Each series of forecasts constitutes a round. Each round covers a period of 20-30 years. Major rounds (Round 6, Round 7, and Round 8) have been prepared following significant events in metro area demographics, typically the release of Census data, but also major changes in development or transportation infrastructure. Forecasts are also updated annually by MWCOG based on adjustments made by local jurisdictions. These updated forecasts are referred to by adding a number after the major round number, such as Round 8.1, Round 8.2, etc. The current forecasts developed by MWCOG are the Round 8.1 land use forecasts, approved by MWCOGs Board of Directors in July 2012. Round 8.2 was adopted by the Transportation Planning Board on July 10, 2013, and formally approved use of these inputs in the air quality conformity analysis of the 2013 CLRP and FY2013-2018 TIP. The Round 8.2 land use data will be available for use by jurisdiction members in the fall of 2013. The modeling activities for the earlier AWI studies (South Capitol Corridor Gateway Improvement and Anacostia Access Studies, Middle Anacostia River Crossings Transportation Study, Kenilworth Avenue Corridor Transportation Study) used the Round 6.3 land use forecasts. Round 6.3 was approved by MWCOGs Board of Directors on October 8, 2003. The purpose of the model refinements associated with the Round 6.3 figures was to incorporate actual Census 2000 figures
C-9

for population and households to correct the projected 2000 figures used in the initial Round 6 data set. Similarly, the Round 8.2 figures incorporate actual Census 2010 data and was used in the St. Elizabeths Department of Homeland Security Headquarters Consolidation Master Plan and EIS, the St. Elizabeths East Campus Infrastructure Study and Transportation Network Environmental Assessment, and the M Street SE-SW Transportation Study, as well as in the ongoing South Capitol Street Supplement Final Environmental Impact Statement and DC Streetcar NEPA studies. Section 2.2.1 Methodology The Cooperative Forecasts is a multi-stage, top-down/bottom-up process undertaken by MWCOGs Planning Directors Technical Advisory Committee and the Cooperative Forecasting and Data Subcommittee. Both committees employ both a regional econometric model and local jurisdictional forecasts in their determination of the cooperative forecasts. The regional econometric model projects the employment, population, and households for the metropolitan Washington area based on national economic trends and local demographic factors. The model is based on the 1983 definition of the Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) that includes the MWCOG member jurisdictions, as well as other counties in the region. At the same time, local jurisdictions, such as Washington DC, develop independent projections of employment, population, and households, based on pipeline development, market conditions, planned transportation improvements, and adopted land use plans and zoning. While doing this, local jurisdictions consider the preliminary regional projections. The Cooperative Forecasting and Data Subcommittee, which is composed of local government planners, economists, and demographers, reviews and reconciles the two sets of projections. The model and the local jurisdictional projections must be within three percent of each other for the new set of Cooperative Forecasts to be reconciled. MWCOG Cooperative Forecasting Process

Figure 5. MWCOG Cooperative Forecasting Process (Source: MWCOG 2012) Once the forecasts are reconciled and approved by the Cooperative Forecasting and Data Subcommittee, the forecasts are then presented and approved by the following committees at MWCOG: the Planning Directors Technical Advisory Committee, the Metropolitan Development Policy Committee, and ultimately the MWCOG Board of Directors, which is composed of local elected officials from throughout the region. Recognizing that market conditions and policies may change, the subcommittee also reviews the forecasts annually, and allows local governments to make minor adjustments to reflect these changes. The forecasts may also be adjusted to reflect local governments assessments of the likely housing and employment impacts due to major new transportation facilities. In Washington, DC, the Office of Planning (DC OP) is responsible for submitting data to MWCOG for the development of the cooperative forecasts. DC OP staff members serve on the various MWCOGs committees, including the
C-10

Cooperative Forecasting and Data Subcommittee and Planning Directors Technical Advisory Committee, to serve as representatives for the District of Columbia. DC OP develops employment, population, and household forecasts based on planned developments and state data, and must be constrained by the DC Comprehensive Plan and associated master plan documents. DC OP also reviews the forecasts from MWCOG and makes recommendations on refinements or adjustments before approving the forecasts for publishing. By providing cooperative land use forecasts, MWCOG is able to provide a consistent set of local and regional forecasts for use in program and facility planning throughout the region. According to the federally mandated planning process, any travel demand modeling activities performed as part of corridor and planning studies must use the officially adopted version of the travel demand model, usually the most recent version, and the most recent model inputs, including land use forecasts. The most recent land use forecasts have been agreed upon by the TPB, MWCOG, and the local jurisdictions. DDOT uses the most recent land use forecasts as part of the officially adopted travel demand model so as to remain in compliance with federal procedures. Use of the most recent model inputs is important if future roadway projects are vying for federal funding, and will need to be added to the CLRP for future years. Section 2.2.2 MWCOGs Round 8.2 8.2 Cooperative Land Use Forecasts Earlier rounds of the Cooperative Land Use Forecasts were used in the travel demand modeling activities for most of the AWI transportation studies conducted prior to 2013. These include the South Capitol Street Gateway Improvement and Anacostia Access Studies, the South Capitol Street EIS, the Middle Anacostia River Crossings Study, and the Kenilworth Avenue Corridor Study. It should be noted, then, that the employment, population, and household forecast data from those earlier rounds served as the basis for developing future traffic volumes and determining future transportation impacts at that time. However, planning and environmental studies are performed periodically as changes in the project development process require. As a result, more recent planning and environmental studies employ the most recent land use and transportation modeling versions available, including the M Street Transportation Planning Study, the St. Elizabeths Master Plan/NEPA studies for the East and West Campuses, and the Supplemental FEIS for the South Capitol Street project. As mentioned above, Round 8.2 incorporates actual 2010 Census data and was used in the more recent NEPA studies and planning studies for the AWI area. Section 2.2.3 DC Growth Trends According to the Round 8.2 forecasts, employment, population, and households are all projected to increase over the next 30 years. Between 2010 and 2040, jobs in the District of Columbia are expected to increase by 25 percent. The Districts population also is expected to grow even more during that time by 28 percent. In addition, the number of households is expected to grow by 27 percent. Table 1 displays the Round 8.2 forecasts for employment, population, and households.

Table 1. Round 8.2 Land Use Forecast Trends (Source: MWCOG, 2013)

Category
Employment Population Households

Actual 2000
678,017 572,059 248,331

Forecasts 2010 2015


812,947 653,871 287,617

2020
865,726 676,323 298,115

2025
902,631 701,566 309,979

2030
929,641 722,760 318,252

2035
955,757 741,178 326,410

2040
982,647 771,162 339,889

783,460 601,720 266,707

C-11

Chart 1. Round 8.2 Land Use Forecast Trends (Source: MWCOG, 2013)
1,100,000

1,000,000

900,000

800,000

700,000

600,000

Employment Population

500,000

Households

400,000

300,000

200,000

100,000

0 2000 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

Section 2.2.4 AWI Study Area Growth Out of approximately 3,722 TAZs that comprise the DC metropolitan area, about 100 zones lie in the study area for the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative. Figure 6 shows the TAZs in the AWI study area. Table 2 shows the comparison of 2010 census data to 2040 forecasts in the AWI study area. According to the Round 8.2 land use forecasts, there will be an increase of nearly 40 percent in population and households and an increase of almost 65% in employment over a thirty-year period in the AWI study area. Table 2. 2010 Census vs. 2040 Forecasts in AWI Study Area (Source: MWCOG, 2013)

Employment 2010 2040 % Change 120,584 197,409 39%

Population 158,225 217,993 27%

Households 66,915 93,178 28%

C-12

Figure 6. Map of TAZs in AWI study area (Source: MWCOG 2013)


C-13

Figure 7. 2040 Employment Forecasts (Source: MWCOG 2013)


C-14

Figure 8A. 2040 Population Forecasts (Source: MWCOG 2013)


C-15

Figure 8B. 2040 Household Forecasts (Source: MWCOG 2013)


C-16

Figures 9 and 10A / 10B show the map of the targeted growth areas in the AWI study area. Areas of expected employment growth include Buzzard Point, St. Elizabeths, Near Southeast, Poplar Point, Anacostia and Northeast DC. The Round 8.1 forecast also projects significant employment growth in the Navy Yard district. A 28-percent growth in population is forecasted for the AWI study area. Areas such as the Southwest Waterfront, Buzzard Point, Near Southeast, Poplar Point, Saint Elizabeths East Campus, and Hill East are expected to double their population. Significant population increases are also projected for the South Capitol Street corridor. Where the MWCOG land use forecasts indicate a significant amount of growth, this growth is incorporated into the travel demand modeling analysis. Because this growth was accounted for in the regional travel demand model, the modeling efforts undertaken for the AWI transportation studies also included the anticipated growth in these neighborhoods. Thus, traffic volumes and the subsequent analyses of traffic impacts as documented in each of these studies reflect the anticipated growth in these areas.

C-17

Figure 9. Employment Growth between 2010 and 2040 (Source: MWCOG 2013)
C-18

Figure 10A. Population Growth between 2010 and 2040 (Source: MWCOG 2013)
C-19

Figure 10B. Household Growth between 2010 and 2040 (Source: MWCOG 2013)
C-20

Section 3

DC Office of Planning

The previous sections of the AWI Mobility Study described the regional planning bodys efforts to accommodate land use and transportation changes in its regional modeling efforts. This section will explain some of the key activities of DC OP, which initially was the lead agency behind the development of the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative. DC OP performs three functions, discussed below, that significantly contribute to District development and that provide crucial inputs for regional land use planning: Development review; Long-range planning; and Neighborhood planning and development. The Development Review Division assesses plans that are generally large, complex, and precedent-setting in their potential to change the character of an area. The division reviews development applications submitted to the Office of Zoning, and reports on each developments potential neighborhood impacts, consistency with the DC Comprehensive Plan and the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process. Development Review staff also provide recommendations for a public hearing. Because DC OP knows about and reviews all of these major developments, when they provide information to MWCOG they are able to report on significant, real-world changes that can help supplement and finetune classic regional forecasting equations. The Long Range Planning Division is responsible for guiding long-term (20-year) planning and policy decisions for the District. The division works to identify, analyze, interpret and explain emerging trends in the District, as well as evaluate existing and proposed policies in light of detailed data analysis. The Long Range Planning Division is responsible for developing and monitoring the District Elements of the Comprehensive Plan, the Districts only legislatively mandated plan. Staff members of the Comprehensive Planning unit, which is under the Long Range Planning Division, participate in a number of MWCOG committees and provide inputs to MWCOG on the citys land use plans. As with the development review division, the long range planning staff understands both the typical demographic and economic trends affecting the Districts evolution as well as its unique elements and dynamics. The Neighborhood Planning & Development/ Urban Design Division works to revitalize neighborhoods, restore economic health, create a world-class waterfront, and encourage a diverse and dynamic downtown. This division develops neighborhood strategic plans for each of the citys 39 neighborhood clusters, develops comprehensive strategies for large-scale development, and develops master plans for neighborhood revitalization. It is this division that laid the groundwork for the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative. This division is in touch with the Districts residents through regular and numerous public meetings and private communications. Section 3.1 Development Activity in the AWI Study Area DC OP is continually monitoring and coordinating all development throughout the District, including the redevelopment of the AWI study area. Figure 11 shows the history of development activity within the District between 2001 and 2013, and anticipated trends through 2015 (based on projections for projects under construction as of mid2013). As explained in the previous section, there is significant development slated for the District of Columbia, particularly in the AWI study area. The combined development activity in this area since 2001 (in parts of Wards 5, 6, 7 and 8) consists of over 200 development projects in various stages of planning, design, construction and completion. All projects combined, if completed as envisioned, will create over 50 million square feet of new or renovated market uses. Another factor of note is that many of the projects in the AWI study area are characterized as mixed-use development (a combination of either commercial office space, commercial retail, and/or residential, as well as other uses). Figure 12 illustrates the geographical location and density of major development in the District.

C-21

Based on projected development construction estimates, as of mid-2013

Figure 11. District Development History and Trends (Source: Washington DC Economic Partnership, DC Development Report)
Section 3.2 DC OP Development Methodology Generally, the Office of Planning tracks development projects that are larger than 10 units or 5,000 square feet of a commercial land use. Each project is tracked by status and defined by one of the following categories: proposed, planned, under construction, and completed.

Proposed / Conceptual - Proposed projects are defined as a potential development where a developer, individual, or organization has ability and interest in developing a project and has made that interest public. DC OP becomes aware of these projects through news reports or other sources, but has limited information on them or, in some cases, is large redevelopment or planned neighborhoods. Planned - Projects are defined as planned when a developer has site control and funds committed or the project has received approval from the Office of Zoning. Delivery of the project is expected within five years. Under Construction - Projects are defined as under construction once a building permit has been issued on the project. Delivery of the project is expected within two years. Completed - Projects are defined as completed once the first certificate of occupancy is issued on a project, except in the case of a multi-phase project, where each phase of the project is tracked separately.

DC OP maintains a database of all development projects that meet the criteria described above. They use this information in a number of ways. They review and analyze Office of Zoning development applications and report to the Office of Zoning on impacts of the proposed development and project compliance with the DC Comprehensive Plan. DC OP uses development information, along with market trends, to provide inputs to the MWCOG Cooperative Land Use Forecasts. They develop neighborhood revitalization plans and economic development plans that consider future development activity. DC OPs development methodology plays a key role in assessing the impacts of development and infrastructure for the AWI region.
C-22

Figure 12 shows the status of developments for the AWI study area, as taken from the Office of Plannings development database, and Figure 13 shows Small Area Planning (SAP) areas. The development projects include mixed-use, residential, office, institutional, and hospitality uses.

C-23

This page intentionally left blank

C-24

127 128 15

4 13

77 126 85 12 116 14 43 42 86 17 117 62 72 130 38 96 91 122 123 108 20 100 61 1 83 2 6 125 124 89 111 27 75 58 18 71 64 3 109 110 31 29 103 93 35 95 63 44 7 33 49 48 50 5 65 76 60 104

115

24 87

INSET 3
25 105 57 119 99 36 19 10 11 90 114 74

107

55 102

56

INSET 2
69 120

8 101

39

34 112 67

Washington DC Development Projects in the AWI Study Area


Number DevelopmentName
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 20MStreet VelocityCondos FederalGateway PortalsPhaseIII,The ResidenceInnbyMarriott 80MStreet PolkCourtApartments NavyYardRedevelopment UnifiedCommunicationsCenter MaritimePlazaPhaseI MaritimePlazaPhaseII PotomacCenter(SouthTower) PotomacCenterII(NorthTower) CapitolSquare MandarinHotel CarverTheater CapitolParkPlazaApartments CapitolHillTowers 810PotomacAvenue KingGreenleafRecreationCenter TMACharterSchoolPhase1 DanburyStation ParkwayOverlookWest CapitalHillInvestors CesarChavezCharterSchoolCapitolHillCampus HensonRidge SyphaxVillage MontereyPark 300MStreet BollingView DepartmentofTransportationHeadquarters ElmwoodSouthCondos TownhomesonCapitolHill UHaul MarineBarracks NevalThomasElementarySchool CapitolVisitorCenter ArenaStageexpansion DepartmentofEmploymentServices U.S.BotanicalGardens NationalBotanicalGarden PotomacPlace LennoxSchoolTownhomes LennoxSchoolCondos 701HowardRoad 300IndependenceAvenue RalphWaldo"Petey"GreeneCommunityServicesCent PatriotPlazaI PatriotPlazaII PatriotPlazaIII ParkPoliceAnacostiaOperationsFacility AnacostiaGateway SavannahHeights St.ColettaofGreaterWashington CesarChavezCharterSchool LotusSquare JenkinsRow WashingtonNationalsBaseballStadium HowardHillApartments 116NorthCarolinaAvenue 1015HalfStreet 70/100IStreet PostPlantRedevelopment 100MStreetSE CapitolView 821HowardRoad

Address
20MStreet,SE 76LStreet,SE 1100NewJerseyAvenue,SE 1201MarylandAve,SW 333EStreet,SW 80MStreet,SE 625GStreet,SE 951NSt,SE 2720MartinLutherKingJrAvenue,SE 1201MStreet,SE 122012thStreet,SE 55012thStreet,SW 50012thStreet,SW 7thStreet&GStreet,SW 1330MarylandAvenue,SW 2405MartinLutherKingJrAve,SE 201IStreet,SWand101103GStreet,SW 140LStreet,SE 810PotomacAve,SE 201NStreet,SW HowardRd&MartinLutherKing,Jr.Ave, 5165and132152DanburyStreet,SW 2701RobinsonPlace,SE 4078thSt,SE 70912thSt,SE 3201StantonRoad,SE 1360HalfStreet,SW 33297thStreet,SE 300MStreet,SE 401OrangeStreet,SE 12044thSt,SE 10Danbury,SW 614654ISt,SE 1501SouthCapitol,SW 10117thSt,SE 650AnacostiaAve,NE USCapitol'sEastPlaza 11016thStreet,SW 4180MinnesotaAve,NE IndependenceAveand1stStreet,SW IndependenceAveand3rdStreet,SW 800FourthSt,SW 407419GSt,SE&7057115thSt,SE&724264thSt,SE 407419GSt,SE&7057115thSt,SE&724264thSt,SE 701HowardRoad,SE 300IndependenceAve,SE 29072913MartinLutherKingJr,Ave,SE 395EStreet,SW 375EStreet,SW 355EStreet,SW 1900AnacostiaDrive,SE 1838MartinLKingJrAve,SE SavannahStreet&4thStreets,SE IndependenceAvenueand19thStreet,SE 3701HayesSt,NE 800KenilworthAve,NE 1399PennsylvaniaAve,SE SouthCapitol&NSt,SE 1345HowardRd,SE 116NorthCarolinaAve,SE 1015HalfSt,SE 70ISt,SE 225VirginiaAve,SE 100MSt,SE 4013rdSt,SW 821HowardRoad,SE

Ward Timing LandUse


6 6 6 2 2 6 6 6 8 6 6 2 2 6 2 8 6 6 6 6 8 8 8 6 6 8 6 8 6 8 6 8 6 6 6 7 6 6 7 2 2 6 6 6 8 6 8 2 2 2 8 8 8 6 7 7 6 6 8 6 6 6 6 6 2 8 6/1/2007 12/1/2009 8/1/2003 6/1/2006 2/1/2005 7/1/2001 10/1/2003 7/1/2001 8/31/2006 11/1/2001 1/1/2003 4/1/2003 6/1/2005 11/1/2001 3/1/2004 3/1/2009 12/1/2003 6/1/2006 7/1/2001 2/1/2005 8/1/2005 11/1/2007 12/1/2001 7/1/2003 9/1/2006 12/1/2008 11/1/2004 4/1/2002 5/1/2001 12/4/2005 9/1/2006 12/1/2000 1/1/2000 1/24/2002 9/1/2004 5/8/2012 12/1/2008 9/1/2010 12/1/2010 12/1/2001 12/1/2005 5/10/2005 6/1/2004 2/1/2006 8/1/2002 4/1/2003 1/1/2005 4/1/2005 12/1/2009 12/1/2009 12/1/2002 6/1/2007 5/25/2006 12/1/2006 9/1/2007 10/20/2006 9/1/2007 3/1/2008 1/5/2005 7/5/2005 6/1/2011 7/1/2008 3/7/2012 2/1/2009 10/1/2007 10/1/2002 Office MixedUse Office Office Hotel Office MultiFamilyResidential Office Office Office Office Office Office SingleFamilyResidential Hotel Public/Institutional MultiFamilyResidential MixedUse Office Public/Institutional Public/Institutional SingleFamilyResidential Residential Retail/Restaurant Public/Institutional Residential Residential Residential Office Residential Office MultiFamilyResidential SingleFamilyResidential Industrial Public/Institutional Public/Institutional Public/Institutional Hospitality Office Public/Institutional Public/Institutional MultiFamilyResidential SingleFamilyResidential MultiFamilyResidential Public/Institutional Office Public/Institutional Office Office Office Public/Institutional Office MultiFamilyResidential Public/Institutional Public/Institutional MultiFamilyResidential MixedUse MixedUse MultiFamilyResidential MultiFamilyResidential Office MultiFamilyResidential Office MixedUse Office Office

Developer
LernerEnterprises CohenCompanies SpauldingandSlyeColliers RepublicPropertiesCorporation DonohoeConstruction SpauldingandSlyeColliers StantonDevelopmentCorporation NAVSEA DCGovernment LincolnPropertyCompany LincolnPropertyCompany JBGCompanies JBGCompanies EakinYoungentobAssociatesInc MandarinOrientalHotels ClarkConstructionGroupInc InterStateBusinessCorporation ValhalCorporation HFEnterprisesLLC DCDepartmentofParksandRecreation ThurgoodMarshallAc JadeDevelopmentCom NHTEnterprisePreservation CapitolHillInvestors CesarChavzCharterSchool MidCityUrbanLLC MannaInc MontereyParkLLC PotomacInvestmentProperties AnacostiaEconomicDevelopmentCorporation JBGCompanies ElmwoodSouthCondos DCHA UHaul USMarinesCorps DCPublicSchools ArchitectoftheCapitol WashingtonDramaSociety AbbottDevelopmentGroup ArchitectoftheCapitol ArchitectoftheCapitol MonumentRealtyLLC StantonDevelopmentCorporation StantonDevelopmentCorporation AdvantageSchoolsInc StantonDevelopmentCorporation UnitedPlanningOrganization TrammellCrowCompany TrammellCrowCompany TrammellCrowCompany USParkPolice AEDCNCRCDRIPartnersInc AHDInc BuildingHope KenilworthAvenueApartmentsLLC JPI Sports&EntertainmentCommission JubileeEnterprises MeltonManagement DouglasWilsonPrudential JPI DistrictofColumbia/StonebridgeCarras Opus ClarkConstruction JencoDevelopment

Status
Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed

107 88

INSET 3

74 55 56 36 99 102 114 90 39 101

37 41 40 127 1284 13 15 12 12649 50 48 5 65 85 77 60 76 46 115 116 1042487 14 105 43 7 33 25 86 42 17 117 62 63 44 57 119 95 72 13038 96 100 18 93 35 61 2 91 71 19 3 6 109 64 1 29 110 31 123 108 83 122 10 125 103 20 11 124 89 8 27 111 7558 34 120 112 67 69 52 129 51 134 118 121 45 66 73 16 21 94 59 133 113 92 82 97 9 23 73 16 21 94 133 82 80 84 97 9 22 32 23 26 106 79 30 70 81 28 47 132 68 59 113 92 30 53 106 132 79 47 70 81 68 26 54 131

20 27 75 34

125 124 58 112

31 103 89 111 8

10 11

INSET 2

98

78

120

67 52 129 134 121 45 66 51 118

INSET 1

Note: See Figures 12B or 12C for Development Project numbers shown on this map that are not listed in this table.

28

0 4,000 8,000 16,000 Feet


Legend
Washington D.C. Boundary AWI Area Boundary STATUS - DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS Completed Under Construction Planned Proposed/New Neighborhood Primary R/W Lines Parks Water

INSET 1
53

Figure 12A - Status of Development Projects in Washington DC

127 128 15

4 13

77 126 85 12 116 14 43 42 86 17 117 62 72 130 38 96 91 122 123 108 20 100 61 1 83 2 6 125 124 89 111 27 75 58 18 71 64 3 109 110 31 29 103 93 35 95 63 44 7 33 49 48 50 5 65 76 60 104

115

24 87

INSET 3
25 105 57 119 99 36 19 10 11 90 114 74

107

55 102

56

INSET 2
69 120

8 101

39

34 112 67

Washington DC Development Projects in the AWI Study Area


Number DevelopmentName
67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 AnacostiaSeniorHighSchool SaintElizabeth'sHospitalExpansion FortMcNairLincolnHall Plaza8 OnyxonFirst 909atCapitolYards SavoyMiddleSchool MayfairMansions CamdenApartments AmericanTruckingAssociation AGCTownhouse 2309PennsylvaniaAvenueApartments SoutheastAcademyforScholasticExcellence BollingAirForceResidential 321132188thStreet MatthewsMemorialResidential MonumentBallParkOffice WashingtonHighlandLibraryConstruction MPDForensicsCrimeLab BowenSchoolMPDConversion HillCenter PhelpsVocationalHighSchool FoundryLofts ParksideSeniorApartments WaterfrontStationPhaseI SheridanTerrace(TownhomesatStantonSquare) ArthurCapper/CarrollsburgDwellings ExcelAcademy ParkChelseaPhaseI WaterfrontStationPhaseII SaintElizabeth'sWest 22ndStCondos PollinMemorialResidentialDevelopment Square699NPhaseII MinnesotaBenningTOD ParksideCommunityCollegeMedicalCenter Twelve12Apartments Maples,The 1211GStreetResidences FriendshipCharterSchool KenilworthParksideRecreationCenter SaintMatthewsSquare MStreet&NewJerseyAvenueResidential FederalGatewayII Yards,ThePhaseII FloridaRockI SecondFamilyHome ParksideNewNeighborhood HinesElementarySchoolRedevlopment CapitolHillDaySchool RandallSchool

Address
163516thStreet,SE 2700MartinLutherKingJrAve,SE 2625thAveSW 52224RaleighSt,SE 11001stSt,SE 909NewJerseyAve,SE 2400ShannonPlace,Se 3724HayesSt,NE 1325SouthCapitolSt 100NorthCarolinaAve,SE 53DStreet,SE 2309PennsylvaniaAveSE 645MilwaukeePl,SW BollingAirForceBase 321132188thStSE 2634MartinLutherKingJrAve,SE 55MStSE 115AtlanticSt,SW 4154thStSW 101MStSW 921PennsylvaniaAve,SE 70426thStreet,NE 301TingeySt,SE 600BarnesStNE 11004thSt,SW 24512457StantonRoad,SE 400LSt,Se 2501MartinLKingJrAvenue,SE 880NewJerseyAve,SE 401MSt,SW 2695MartinLutherKingJrAvSE 140622ndStSE 712AnacostiaAve,NE 55KStSE 4004MinnesotaAve,NE 720KenilworthAve,NE 12124thStSE 619DStSE 1211GSt,SE 2705MartinLutherKingJrAve,SE 4300AnacostiaAve,NE 222MStreet,SW 1111NewJerseyAve,SE 250MStreet,SE 400NSt,SE 100PotomacAvenue,SE 2612BowenRd,SE 701KenilworthTr,NE 3107thStSE 210SouthCarolina,SE 850DelawareAve,SW

Ward Timing LandUse


8 8 6 8 6 6 8 7 6 6 6 8 8 8 8 8 6 8 2 2 6 5 6 7 6 8 6 8 6 6 8 8 7 6 7 7 6 6 6 8 7 6 6 6 6 6 8 7 6 6 2 11/3/2005 3/1/2010 12/1/2008 5/1/2002 10/1/2008 6/1/2009 12/1/2009 12/1/2009 6/1/2013 5/23/2011 3/1/2002 4/1/2010 12/1/2008 1/1/2012 12/1/2007 12/29/2011 4/15/2009 6/1/2012 12/1/2012 4/13/2010 11/1/2011 8/1/2008 10/1/2011 10/1/2011 3/1/2010 Public/Institutional Public/Institutional Public/Institutional Retail/Restaurant MultiFamilyResidential MultiFamilyResidential Public/Institutional MultiFamilyResidential MultiFamilyResidential Office Office MixedUse Public/Institutional SingleFamilyResidential MultiFamilyResidential MixedUse Office Public/Institutional Public/Institutional Public/Institutional Public/Institutional Public/Institutional MultiFamilyResidential MultiFamilyResidential Office

Developer
DCPublicSchools DistrictofColumbia USGovernment FaisonDevelopment JPI DCPulblicSchools CPDC/MHCDO CamdenDevelopment AmericanTruckingAssociation AssociatedGeneralContractors ChapmanDevelopment SoutheastAcademyforScholasticExcellence USAirForce ContinentalDevelopmetCorp MatthewsMemorialChurch MonumentRealty DCPublicLibrary MetropolitanPoliceDepartment OPEFM OldNavalHospitalFoundation DCPublicSchools ForestCity PHSLLC ForestCity/Vornado WilliamCSmithDCHA EYA UnitedHousingofPrayer WilliamCSmith ForestCity/Kaempfer GSA AFDevelopment PollinMemorialCommunityDevelopment TollDCLO Donatelli&Klein/BlueSkye LANO ForestCity TheMaplesDCLLC

Status
Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Under Construction Under Construction Under Construction Under Construction Under Construction Under Construction Under Construction Under Construction Under Construction Under Construction Under Construction Under Construction Under Construction Under Construction Under Construction Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned

107 88

INSET 3

74 55 56 36 99 102 114 90 39 101

37 41 40 127 1284 13 15 12 12649 50 48 5 65 85 77 60 76 46 115 116 1042487 14 105 43 7 33 25 86 42 17 117 62 63 44 57 119 95 72 13038 96 100 18 93 35 61 2 91 71 19 3 6 109 64 1 29 110 31 123 108 83 122 10 125 103 20 11 124 89 8 27 111 7558 34 120 112 67 69 52 129 51 134 118 121 45 66 73 16 21 94 59 133 113 92 82 97 9 23 73 16 21 94 133 82 80 84 97 9 22 32 23 26 106 79 30 70 81 28 47 132 68 59 113 92 30 53 106 132 79 47 70 81 68 26 54 131

20 27 75 34

125 124 58 112

31 103 89 111 8

10 11

INSET 2

98

78

11/1/2013 SingleFamilyResidential 12/1/2010 MixedUse 1/1/2015 Public/Institutional

120

67 52 129 134 121 45 66 51 118

INSET 1

10/1/2014 MultiFamilyResidential 12/1/2013 MixedUse 12/1/2015 Office 1/1/2015 4/1/2014 7/1/2015 7/1/2014 MultiFamilyResidential MultiFamilyResidential MultiFamilyResidential MixedUse

Note: See Figures 12A or 12C for Development Project numbers shown on this map that are not listed in this table.

96 97 98 99 100 101 102

28

0 4,000 8,000 16,000 Feet


Legend
Washington D.C. Boundary AWI Area Boundary STATUS - DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS Completed Under Construction Planned Proposed/New Neighborhood Primary R/W Lines Parks Water

12/1/2014 Public/Institutional 12/1/2014 MixedUse 12/1/2015 MultiFamilyResidential 12/1/2014 MultiFamilyResidential 3/1/2015 6/1/2016 1/1/2018 9/1/2014 12/1/2015 6/1/2013 12/1/2015 12/1/2015 12/1/2015 1/1/2012 2/1/2014 Public/Institutional Public/Institutional MultiFamilyResidential Office Office MixedUse MixedUse MultiFamilyResidential MixedUse MixedUse Public/Institutional MultiFamilyResidential

103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117

INSET 1
53

FriendshipCharterSchool DCDepartmentofParksandRecreation TC/CSGSt.MatthewsLLC NJSAssociates(DonohoeConstruction?) WilliamCSmith ForestCityEnterprises FloridaRockProperties FrostLabuleLLC BankofAmericaCDC DMPEDStanton/Eastbanc CapitolHillDaySchool CACBHoldings/TelesisCorporation

Figure 12B - Status of Development Projects in Washington DC

127 128 15

4 13

77 126 85 12 116 14 43 42 86 17 117 62 72 130 38 96 91 122 123 108 20 100 61 1 83 2 6 125 124 89 111 27 75 58 18 71 64 3 109 110 31 29 103 93 35 95 63 44 7 33 49 48 50 5 65 76 60 104

115

24 87

INSET 3
25 105 57 119 99 36 19 10 11 90 114 74

107

55 102

56

INSET 2
69 120

8 101

39

34 112 67

Washington DC Development Projects in the AWI Study Area


Number DevelopmentName
118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126
107 88

Address
1244WSt,SE 1442PennsylvaniaAveSE 128QStSW 21001stStSW 600MStSW 12651stStSE 1st&MStreet,SE 4006thSt,SW 1301MarylandAve,SW 1399MarylandAve,SW AnacostiaRiver 800WaterStreet,SW IndependenceAvenue,SE&19thStreet,SE 2702MartinLutherKingJrAve,SE 1249EatonRdSE 100VSt,SW

Ward Timing LandUse


8 6 2 6 6 6 6 6 2 2 2 8 6 6 8 8 6 9/1/2013 9/1/2015 2/1/2016 9/1/2015 9/1/2016 12/1/2016 12/1/2017 11/1/2016 7/1/2017 9/1/2014 9/1/2014 1/1/2025 1/1/2015 1/1/2020 1/1/2020 9/1/2014 2/1/2015 SingleFamilyResidential MixedUse Hotel MultiFamilyResidential MixedUse MultiFamilyResidential Hotel MixedUse Office Office Office MixedUse MixedUse MixedUse MixedUse MixedUse Office

Developer
FourPoints DouglasDevelopment CarrHospitality BuzzardPointLLC ForestCity/Vornado PNHoffman CapitalRiverfrontHotelLLCSkanska Skanska TCMidAtlanticDevelopmentIV,Inc. RepublicPropertiesCorporation RepublicPropertiesCorporation TBD PNHoffman DCGovernment DCGovernment DCHA Akridge

Status
Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Proposed/New Neighborhood Proposed/New Neighborhood Proposed/New Neighborhood Proposed/New Neighborhood Proposed/New Neighborhood Proposed/New Neighborhood Proposed/New Neighborhood Proposed/New Neighborhood

WStreetHomes Jemal'sKFC QStHostel MarinaPlaceResidential WaterfrontStationPhaseIII 6th&MaineCondominiums BallparkHotel FirstandMStreetMixedUse 4006thStreetOffice PortalsPhaseIV,The PortalsPhaseV,The PoplarPoint SouthwestWaterfront HillEastNewNeighborhood(DCGenHosp) SaintElizabeth'sEast BarryFarmsNewCommunity 100VStreet

127 128 129 130 131

INSET 3

74 55 56 36 99 102 114 90 39 101

37 41 40 127 1284 13 15 12 12649 50 48 5 65 85 77 60 76 46 115 116 1042487 105 43 7 33 25 86 42 17 117 62 63 44 57 119 95 72 13038 96 100 18 93 35 61 2 91 71 19 3 6 109 64 1 29 110 31 123 108 83 122 10 125 103 20 11 124 89 8 27 111 7558 34 120 112 67 69 52 129 51 134 118 121 45 66 73 16 21 94 59 133 113 92 82 14 97 9 23 73 16 21 94 133 82 80 84 97 9 22 32 23 26 106 79 30 70 81 28 47 132 68 59 113 92 30 53 106 132 79 47 70 81 68 26 54 131

132 133 134

20 27 75 34

125 124 58 112

31 103 89 111 8

10 11

INSET 2

98

78

120

67 52 129 134 121 45 66 51 118

INSET 1

Note: See Figures 12A or 12B for Development Project numbers shown on this map that are not listed in this table.

28

0 4,000 8,000 16,000 Feet


Legend
Washington D.C. Boundary AWI Area Boundary STATUS - DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS Completed Under Construction Planned Proposed/New Neighborhood Primary R/W Lines Parks Water

INSET 1
53

Figure 12C - Status of Development Projects in Washington DC


28 25 26

0 4,200 8,400 16,800 Feet


15


22

Number SmallAreaPlanning(SAP)Name
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 AnacostiaTransitAreaStrategicPlan BarryFarms,ParkChester,WadeRdRedevPlan Bellevue BenningRoadLandDevelopmentPlan Brookland/CUAMetroStationAreaPlan Central14thStreetCorridorSmallAreaPlan CHASEActionPlan ColumbiaHeightsPublicRealmFrameworkPlan ConventionCenterAreaStrategicDevelopmentPlan DeanwoodStrategicDevelopmentPlan FloridaAvenueMarket GeorgiaAvenue/PetworthMetroStationPlan GloverParkCommercialDistrictStudy HStreetRevitilizationPlan KennedyStreetCooridorRevitalizationPlan MarylandAvenueSouthwestPlan MtPleasantStreetRevitalization NOMAVision NortheastGateway PennsylvaniaAvenueSELandDevelopmentPlan PoplarPoint(preplanning) RiggsRoad/SouthDakotaAvenue(1/4Mile) SouthwestNeighborhoodPlan StElizabethsEastRedevelopmentFrameworkPlan TakomaCentralDistrictPlan UpperGeorgiaAvenueLandDevelopmentPlan UptownDestinationDistrictPlan(DUKE) WalterReedArmyMedicalCenterRedevelopmentPlan


12


17 8


13


27 9


11 19 18 14


10


16


23 21 2 1 7


20


24

Legend
Washington D.C. Boundary AWI Area Boundary SAP Boundaries Primary R/W Lines Parks Water

Figure 13 - Small Area Planning (SAP) Areas in Washington DC

Section 4

Transportation Review for the AWI Mobility Study

New highway and transit projects or improvements must be evaluated prior to construction to determine how well they address future demand. The future demand design-horizon year for an entirely new facility or an improvement to an existing facility is usually 20 to 30 years in the future. The design-horizon year is typically established as 15 to 20 years beyond the opening year for a newly-constructed project. As a result of this need for a long-term forecast of future travel demand, state departments of transportation (such as DDOT, VDOT, and MDOT), regional transportation agencies such as WMATA or the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority, and local transportation agencies all use MWCOGs travel demand models to produce demand forecasts for their corridor and sub-area studies. These studies must be performed in cooperation with the TPB and in accordance with federal planning requirements, so they all use the MPO-approved regional model. Federal regulations require that corridor or sub-area studies be performed when any major highway or transit investments are being considered, and receive particular scrutiny if federal funds are to be used. The forecasts derived from the regional models are used to analyze different transportation options and determine the potential effects those options would have on the regional and local systems. In particular, the forecasts can help determine future traffic congestion levels, which assist local transportation officials in making informed decisions. Because state and local jurisdictions are all using the most recent travel demand model and cooperative land use forecasts, there is some assurance that individual land use and infrastructure decisions are made with an understanding of how they will perform in a regional context. The evaluation of the design-horizon year for any given transportation improvement involves taking travel forecasts, and determining how those forecasts specifically affect intersections within the study area. Specific counts of existing traffic volumes at an intersection provide the basis for how future trips may be distributed in a given area. Within traffic analysis zones (TAZs), there are individual links established to represent the facilities where automobiles travel. If there are 30,000 trips in a TAZ, not all of them travel on every link. Instead, trips are focused along specific routes, based on information in the model that designates origins and destination. Once travel forecasts are disseminated among area roadways, and distributed through specific intersections, the resulting model output can provide a better understanding of what will happen at a given intersection once an improvement is put in place. For example, if DDOT knows what the volumes are on specific links within a TAZ, particularly a link with a new left-turn lane proposed, then DDOT will be able to predict how many automobiles will use the new turn lane. Section 4.1 Summary of ProjectProject-Level Traffic Modeling The MWCOG Regional Travel Demand Model Version 2.1 and the officially adopted Cooperative Land Use Forecasts were used in each of the transportation studies for the AWI network. (For the studies mentioned below, the officiallyadopted forecasts were Round 6.3, adopted 2003, and Round 6.4A, adopted 2004.) Although the studies were conducted separately, the fact that the MWCOG Model was used shows that the same development assumptions from the MWCOG land use forecasts were used in each model application, and thus the resulting traffic forecasts were replicated for each study. Similar modeling assumptions were used in the modeling activities for each study. The current MWCOG land use forecasts were used for each of the studies to provide continuity in land use assumptions for each modeling activity. Roadway networks were refined where needed, and the model was calibrated with real-world traffic data to ensure accuracy. The table below presents a summary of the travel demand modeling activities in each of the AWI transportation projects that were most recently modeled by DDOT.

C-29

Table 3. Summary of Travel Demand Models for recent AWI Transportation Studies
St. Elizabeths Department of Homeland Security Headquarters Final EIS May 2012 Version 2.2/TP+ Round 7.2A 2035 (1) Barney Circle / Southeast Boulevard EA & (2) Penn Ave / Potomac Ave EA (1) Summer 2014 (2) Spring 2014 Version 2.3.39/TP+ Round 8.1 2040

South Capitol Street Final EIS Study Completed MWCOG Travel Demand Model Land Use Forecast Horizon Year March 2011 Version 2.2/TP+ Round 7.2A 2030

St. Elizabeths East Campus EA June 2012 Version 2.2/TP+ Round 7.2A 2035

M Street SE-SW Transportation Planning Study December 2012 Version 2.2/TP+ Round 8.0A 2035

South Capitol Street Supplemental EIS Winter 2014 Version 2.2/TP+ Round 8.0A 2040

Section 4.2 AWI Transportation Study Model Networks In previous AWI transportation studies (as well as current project studies), the MWCOG travel demand model was used to provide estimates of the future travel situation in order to evaluate the proposed transportation improvements in the AWI study area. In each study, the future was evaluated using at least two different ideas of what the future travel conditions would be: a No-Build condition, and a Build condition. The No-Build condition for a particular project, as the name implies, consists of the future horizon year without the subject project in place, but with only adjacent planned transportation improvements in the surrounding areas. The No-Build condition would generally represent the roadway network we see today, coupled with other programmed improvements as listed in the long range plan and 2030, 2035, or 2040 traffic forecasts (depending on the specific project). This scenario would be the basis for making a comparative evaluation of the impacts of the Build condition, and would serve to guide transportation decision makers on what improvements, if any, were necessary. In contrast, the Build scenario would involve adding the proposed roadway improvements currently being studied to the No-Build condition. A Build scenario usually consists of the proposed roadway improvements coupled with the planned transportation improvements from the CLRP, combined with the future horizon year traffic forecasts. In some instances, more than one Build scenario may be evaluated, especially in cases where several design alternatives were developed. Table 4 provides a summary of the scenarios evaluated under several recent key AWI transportation studies. Table 4. Scenarios included AWI Mobility Study
St. Elizabeths Department of Homeland Security Headquarters Final EIS 2035
New DHS W. access road to Firth Sterling Avenue only, and with other refinements and planned improvements from CLRP

South Capitol Street Final EIS Horizon Year 2030


Existing transportation network with refinements and planned improvements from CLRP

St. Elizabeths East Campus EA 2035


Existing transportation network with future East Campus development occurring around existing infrastructure

M Street SE-SW Transportation Planning Study 2035


Existing transportation network with refinements and planned improvements from CLRP

South Capitol Street Supplemental FEIS 2040


N/A selected alternative would revert back to Final EIS Preferred Alternative

(1) Barney Circle / Southeast Boulevard EA & (2) Penn Ave / Potomac Ave EA 2040
Existing transportation network with modified connections to 11th Street Bridges and I-695/SE Freeway

No-Build Conditions

C-30

South Capitol Street Final EIS Horizon Year 2030


Alt 1 6-lane urban boulevard with atgrade intersections, westside traffic oval, east-side traffic circle, modified diamond/partial cloverleaf interchange at I295, new center lane interchange ramps at MLK Ave / Suitland Pkwy (Preferred Alt) Alt 2 6-lane urban boulevard with an overpass at M St, west-side traffic oval, east-side traffic circle, diamond interchange at I295, new center lane interchange ramps at MLK Ave / Suitland Pkwy

St. Elizabeths Department of Homeland Security Headquarters Final EIS 2035


Alt 1 Modified diamond interchange at Malcolm X Ave with connection to new DHS W. access road, improvements to MLK Ave between DHS Gate 1 and Alabama Ave 5 lanes (Preferred Alt) Alt 2 Modified partial cloverleaf interchange at Malcolm X Ave with connection to new DHS W. access road, improvements to MLK Ave between DHS Gate 1 and Milwaukee Pl

St. Elizabeths East Campus EA 2035


Alt 1 Retains much of the existing street pattern: Sycamore Dr extended to 8th St, Dogwood Dr remains an oval, new 13th St connecting Pecan St with Congress Heights Metro, improved Pecan St Alt 2 Modifies the existing street pattern: Sycamore Dr extended to Dogwood Dr, Dogwood Dr oval reconfigured as continuation of Sycamore with Malcolm X Ave connection, new 13th St connecting Pecan St with Congress Heights Metro, improved Pecan St

M Street SE-SW Transportation Planning Study 2035


Alt 1 Exclusive Streetcar lanes on M St, bike lanes on parallel roads Alt 2 Streetcar on parallel roads, bike lanes and curbside parking on M St Alt 3 Shared streetcar on M St

South Capitol Street Supplemental FEIS 2040


Revised preferred alt 6-lane urban boulevard with atgrade intersections, eastside and west-side traffic ovals, modified diamond/partial cloverleaf interchange at I295, new tight urban diamond interchange rightside ramps at MLK Ave / Suitland Pkwy (Preferred Alt), revised ramp connections for I395/695 on/off ramps at north end of South Capitol Street

(1) Barney Circle / Southeast Boulevard EA & (2) Penn Ave / Potomac Ave EA 2040
(1) Full movements at reconfigured Barney Circle (1) Concept 4-lane SE Blvd reconfigured as localized portion of L St with median (1) Concept 4-lane SE Blvd offset from L St (1) Concept 2-lane SE Blvd offset from L St (1) Concept SE Blvd removed (2) Alt 1 Modified center crosswalk across Penn Ave (2) Alt 2 Modified T intersections at Penn / Potomac Aves (3) Alt 3 Signalized Oval

Build Conditions (alternatives)

South Capitol Gateway and Anacostia Access Since this was a conceptual planning study, a 2030 No Build scenario was not needed in this study. The 2030 Build condition consisted of a six-lane South Capitol Street corridor from I Street to Suitland Parkway. South Capitol Street was downgraded in classification from an urban highway to a principal arterial, which reduced the assumed travel speed of the roadway in the travel demand model. Multiple design options at several locations along South Capitol Street were evaluated outside the travel demand modeling exercise. Middle Anacostia River Crossings Transportation Study The 2030 No Build traffic conditions for this study consisted of the existing transportation network combined with 2030 traffic volume projections. Refinements were made to the existing roadway network in the MWCOG transportation network to ensure linkages to major roadways in the Middle Anacostia study area. The 2030 Build condition included the missing connections at several key locations within the study area, and full movements at major interchanges. In addition to the 11th Street Bridge improvements, several smaller AWI projects identified in this study have now progressed on to individual detailed NEPA studies, including Barney Circle, Southeast Boulevard, and the Pennsylvania Avenue / Potomac Avenue Intersection. Kenilworth Avenue Corridor Transportation Study The 2030 No Build traffic conditions for this study consisted of the existing transportation network combined with 2030 traffic volume projections. Refinements were made to the existing roadway network in the MWCOG transportation
C-31

network to ensure linkages from arterials to Kenilworth Avenue. Three Build conditions were analyzed with varying designs: (1) an eight-lane urban boulevard, (2) a four-lane or six-lane limited-access roadway flanked by access roads, (3) a combination of an at-grade four-lane roadway between Pennsylvania Avenue and East Capitol Street and a depressed six-lane roadway flanked by at-grade access roads from East Capitol Street to the DC/Maryland border. 11th Street Bridges Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) The 2030 No Build traffic conditions for this study consisted of the existing transportation network combined with 2030 traffic volume projections. Refinements were made to the existing roadway network in the MWCOG transportation network to ensure linkages to roadways in Historic Anacostia, and Capitol Hill. The Build condition was taken from the Middle Anacostia Crossing Transportation Study recommendations, which include full interchange connections on both sides of the bridges. As of the date this document update was written, the 11th Street Bridges have completed the first phase of construction and are advancing through Phase 2, which is anticipated to be completed by late 2015. South Capitol Street Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) The 2030 No Build traffic conditions for this study consisted of the existing transportation network combined with 2030 traffic volume projections. Refinements were made to the existing roadway network in the MWCOG transportation network to ensure linkages from arterials to South Capitol Street. The Build condition was taken from the South Capitol Street Gateway and Anacostia Access Study recommendations, which included a six-lane urban boulevard from I Street to Suitland Parkway. Two Build conditions were analyzed with varying designs: (1) an at-grade intersection at M Street, a traffic oval at Potomac Ave, a traffic circle at Suitland Parkway, a modified existing interchange at 1-295, (2) a grade-separated overpass at M Street, a traffic oval at Potomac Avenue, a traffic circle at Suitland Parkway, a diamond interchange at I-295, and a center-ramp interchange at Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue. Based on additional feedback from stakeholders, as well as more detailed design development, DDOT is currently revising the preferred alternative that was selected in the Final EIS, and performing a Supplemental FEIS to evaluate the impacts of the revised alternative for South Capitol Street. A Record of Decision on the revised alternative is anticipated in the summer of 2014, with construction slated to being early 2015. Section 4.3. Development of Traffic Forecasts Every roadway or transit link within a travel demand model is assigned a particular number of trips that are estimated to travel on it. A regional model utilizes inputs regarding the surrounding area and associated activities in order to establish the demand expected for a particular road or facility. Every land use, whether a shop, a home, or an office, produces a certain number of trips. Based on national and regional standards, each land use is assigned trip generation characteristics, including how many and what type of trips are made to and from that land use every day. If, for example, a given TAZ contains a school, a 10-story office building, and 100 homes, then the estimated daily trips associated with each of those land uses are coded into the model and reflected in the corresponding model output. Once the demand forecast model is run, the output provides the vehicular and transit demand forecasted to use the surrounding transportation facilities for a given TAZ or group of TAZs. Below is a detailed description of how that process works. The MWCOG travel model structure follows a defined process shown in Figure 14 to develop traffic forecasts. The model first uses demographic submodels to allocate the total number of households in a given zone among 64 crossclasses, defined as combination of four income levels, by four household size groupings, by four vehicle availability groups. The land use inputs to the model from the Cooperative Land Use Forecasting process results in TAZ-level households, population, group quarters population, and employment by four categories (office, retail, industrial and other). It is this information that is fed into the demographic submodels. The trip generation and distribution models simulate daily person trips corresponding to four trip purposes: HomeBased Work (HBW), Home-Based Shopping (HBS), Home-Based Other (HBO), and Non-Home Based (NHB). The trip generation model estimates the number of trips produced by and attracted to each traffic analysis zone, based on the
C-32

household, population, and employment data of the zone. The HBW trip rates reflect both motorized and nonmotorized modes (transit, automobile, bicycle, and pedestrian) of person travel. Trip rates associated with the remaining purposes reflect motorized (transit and automobile) person travel only. The non-motorized component of HBW trip-ends generated is subsequently extracted from the total trip-ends prior to trip distribution. The trip generation process yields productions and attractions, which are divided by the four income levels for the home-based purposes, and remains undivided for the NHB and truck-related purposes. The trip distribution model matches the trips produced in each zone with the zones to which they are attracted, and thus creates origin-destination pairs. This linkage is created using a standard gravity model formulation, so the origindestination pairs are based on gravitation attraction (the pull one zone may have on another from a travel perspective), and travel distance. The trip distribution process results in six daily trip tables that correspond to the basic motorized person and truck purposes. The mode choice model allocates the motorized person trips for each of the four purposes (HBW, HBS, HBO, NHB) among highway and transit modes (single-occupancy vehicle, high-occupancy vehicle, transit). A time-of-day model assigns daily vehicle trips among three time periods: AM peak period (6:00 AM 9:00 AM), PM peak period (4:00 PM 7:00 PM) and off-peak period (all remaining hours). The model consists of survey-based factors that are applied on the basis of purpose, mode, and trip orientation. The time-of-day model ultimately produces three total vehicle trip tables, one for each of the three time periods. The traffic assignment model consists of separate assignment executions for each of the three time periods. Thus, trips are now assigned paths, and the model determines the best path, in terms of time and distance, for each origindestination pair. The model also predicts factors that may trigger changes in travel behavior, such as traffic congestion or transit subsidies. Through an iterative process, a link-level method of successive averaging process is applied after each successive highway assignment process to ensure converging highway volumes and speeds. Network links are thus loaded with restrained speeds and traffic volumes. This information is then recycled back to the trip generation and trip distribution steps for several iterations. The final iteration produces link-level traffic forecasts for the following time periods: daily volumes, AM peak period volumes, PM peak period volumes, and off-peak volumes. Individual intersection turning movement volumes are developed as part of the post-processing routine, which is performed outside of the model.

C-33

Figure 14. Structure of the Version 2.3 Travel Demand Model (Source: MWCOG 2013)
C-34

Section 4.3.1 Modeling Examples Examples The following is an example of the MWCOG Modeling process as applied to a traffic analysis zone within the AWI study area. TAZ #366 and #367 are located on M Street SE between South Capitol Street and the 11th Street Bridges. This TAZ combination, formerly a single TAZ in previous modeling versions, is associated with development originally known as the Southeast Federal Center and the new USDOT Headquarters, which represents a significant growth in employment and mixed-use development. The 2040 forecasts capture this growth (i.e. for 2010, these TAZs had a population of 99 and 0, respectively). Table 5A illustrates the various land use characteristics associated with this area, as taken from the Round 8.2 Cooperative Land Use Forecasts.

Table 5A. Round 8.2 Cooperative Land Use Forecasts for TAZ #366 and #367 TAZ 366 367 Population 711 697 Households 711 697 TOTAL Employment 5,449 4792 Industrial 51 45 Retail 54 48 Office 4,337 3,814 Other 1,007 885

When processed through the MWCOG Version 2.3.52 Regional Travel Demand Model, the resulting trip information is:

Table 5B. Resulting Trips for TAZ #366 and #367


Person Trips Non-Home Based (Work) - NHW Non-Home Based (Other) - NHO

Trip Type Productions Attractions Productions Attractions

TAZ 366 366 367 367

Home-Based Work

Home-Based Shopping

Home-Based Other

Total Person Trips

683 7,109 670 6,252

519 187 510 175

647 2604 633 2373

463 3,129 464 2,751

482 815 477 739

2795 13,844 2753 12,291

Nearly 32,000 person trips are generated per day for this combination of TAZs, thus generating trips that travel throughout the regional network to and from this location. Approximately 26,000 daily trips are attracted to TAZ #366 and 367, which means that this many person-trips will arrive at the TAZs throughout the day, mostly for employment (Home-Based Work trips), while just 5,500 trips are produced by these combined zones. The total number of person-trips for this TAZ set is input into the trip distribution and traffic assignment modules of the MWCOG to determine the future traffic forecasts. The forecasts are spread across all highway links associated with trips to and from each TAZ. For these two TAZs, a centroid (trip-generating node near the middle of a zone) from each TAZ will generate vehicular trips, and via centroid connector links within the TAZ, will distribute vehicle trips to nearby adjacent streets - 1st Street SE, and M Street SE. Thus all vehicle trips in this zone traveling to and from the area and eventually access via 1st Street or M Street, in order to arrive at their final destination. For another example, TAZ #370 is located at the northwest corner of South Capitol Street and M Street SW. This TAZ has the following land use characteristics, as taken from the Round 8.2 Cooperative Land Use Forecasts.
C-35

Table 6A. Round 8.2 Cooperative Land Use Forecasts for TAZ #370 TAZ 370 Population 810 Households 188 TOTAL Employment 687 Industrial 66 Retail 77 Office 290 Other 254

This TAZ has a smaller population, fewer households, and lower employment forecasts than the previous TAZ examples. This TAZs demographic characteristics and resulting trip generation reflects the mostly lower-density residential nature of the zone. When processed through the MWCOG Version 2.3.52 Regional Travel Demand Model, the resulting trip information is: Table 6B. Resulting Trips for TAZ #370
Person Trips Non-Home Based (Work) - NHW Non-Home Based (Other) - NHO

Trip Type Productions Attractions

TAZ

Home-Based Work

Home-Based Shopping

Home-Based Other

Total Person Trips

370 370

259 896

232 215

530 980

104 401

232 417

1,356 2,910

Nearly 4,300 person trips are generated per day at TAZ #370, thus generating a notably smaller number of trips from this particular location than the previous example zones. Approximately 2,900 daily person-trips are attracted to TAZ #370, and 1,350 person trips are produced from this zone per day. Because this TAZ is mostly residential, it will produce and attract fewer trips than a zone with mostly employment characteristics. The resulting vehicle trips to and from this TAZ will travel on adjacent links to gain access to the area, such as L Street, M Street and South Capitol Street. This type of trip generation information is then combined for all TAZs in the District, and specifically in the AWI study area for this case, and can subsequently be used by DDOT to determine future infrastructure needs for the areas southeast and southwest of South Capitol Street, and for the planned development on the corresponding land area. Section 4.4 Review of SystemSystem-Wide Future Volumes This section presents the analysis of future daily traffic conditions, based on the various traffic forecasts that were available as of July 2013. Comparisons are made between the last iteration of the AWI Transportation Master Plan NoBuild Condition, assuming that no projects within the AWI Study, and the latest group of projects associated with the current AWI Transportation Master Plan (the Build Condition). As further discussed in Section 4.4.3, a map of the forecasts associated with the original Mobility Study 2030 No-Build Conditions (created in 2005, before any AWI construction was underway) is shown in Figure 15. Since that first forecast data was produced, additional projects and developments have been initiated, which is reflected in maps illustrating the updated 2040 traffic forecasts for the revised future AWI transportation network, as shown in Figures 16 and 17. Section 4.4.1 Source of Data One collective source of travel demand model baseline information for the system-wide 2040 Build Conditions traffic forecasting analysis was developed for this update to the Mobility Study. This model accounts for the output from previous major transportation studies completed and from current studies underway in the AWI Transportation Master Plan study area. Major projects that proposed significant infrastructure work were examined to assess the traffic impacts of various transportation improvement projects. A major change from earlier versions of the Mobility Study is
C-36

that all of the AWI projects currently included in the Transportation Master Plan are now programmed into the regional CLRP, and are thus accounted for in the most recent version of the MWCOG model. In the past, not every study performed included detailed travel demand forecasting that was tied back to the regional model, but instead was manually generated using the most recent forecast data as a baseline. Traffic data for the original Mobility Study from 2005 was previously obtained from three main projects, listed below: The South Capitol Street Corridor Study, led by Parsons Brinkerhoff. This project covered the South Capitol Street corridor from Anacostia to the SE/SW Freeway. The project entailed 2015 and 2030 No-Build and Build conditions. The Middle Anacostia Crossings (MAC) Study data was obtained from KCI Associates for the 2030 No-Build and Build Conditions. The river crossings that were analyzed included the 11th Street Bridges and the Sousa Bridge. The Kenilworth Avenue Corridor Study data was obtained from STV Inc. This project examined traffic flows under several different roadway configurations along Kenilworth Avenue from Eastern Avenue to the interchange with Pennsylvania Avenue. Their study analyzed 2030 No-Build and Build Conditions. Section 4.4. 4.4.2 Assumptions For performing comparative analyses of the traffic data from the three studies, it is important to understand the assumptions that each study used for travel demand modeling. All projects assumed that 2040 was the horizon year for future traffic analyses. The main factor is the order in which each study assumed that the other projects would be completed. The order impacted forecasted traffic flows. The studies assumed that the projects would be completed in the following sequence: the South Capitol Street corridor, the Middle Anacostia Crossings improvements, and then the Kenilworth Avenue projects. The forecasts for each study assumed complete build of the various elements of each previous study improvements. For example, the MAC study forecasts assumed that all of the 11th Street Bridges, Barney Circle and the Anacostia Freeway interchange with Pennsylvania Avenue would be complete. Consequently, the MAC study did not perform traffic forecasting when only one element was complete, but before the next element was under construction. Thus, any comparative analyses between the No-Build and Build forecast at one location should be performed with the caveat that other discrete locations have been reconfigured. Section 4.4.3 2030 NoNo-Build Condition Trends The original Mobility Study prepared in 2005 included a projection of traffic forecasts for the 2030 No-Build Condition as a baseline for comparing the effects and impacts of the AWI Transportation Master Plan. Since that time, several projects have been initiated or partially constructed, so there is no longer a true No-Build scenario for the AWI area. In fact, the 11th Street Bridges project has reached substantial completion for Phase 1 of construction and is slated to be completed by 2015. However, for purposes of comparing the future AWI Build Conditions against a constant from earlier AWI planning efforts, the 2030 No-Build from the 2005 efforts is used as a reference point. By not constructing the proposed improvements to the AWI transportation infrastructure under the 2030 No-Build, many of the same problems that are seen today (lack of accessibility, inadequate multi-modal options, limited movements at interchanges and intersections, and cut-through traffic on local streets) would continue to persist or become worse in the future. The unimproved roadway network problems, coupled with anticipated growth in traffic volumes, would result in reduced traffic operations: increased congestion, increased vehicular delays, reduced vehicle speeds, and increased vehicle-pedestrian conflicts. Future traffic volumes for the 11th Street Bridges were projected to increase over the next 20 years from approximately 93,000 to 127,000 vehicles per day by 2030, an increase of about 37 percent. With the existing freeway operating at poor levels of service prior to the 11th Street Bridges construction project, such an increase in traffic volumes would have only further deteriorated roadway operations on the 11th Street Bridges. Traffic volumes were

C-37

forecasted to decrease on the Sousa Bridge (Pennsylvania Avenue) from 93,000 to 87,000 vehicles per day, a decrease of about six percent, likely on account of that corridor exceeding capacity, with the bridge as a major chokepoint. Kenilworth Avenue and the entire I-295 / DC 295 corridor were projected have major increases in traffic volumes over the next 20 years, according to the traffic forecasts. Traffic volumes on Kenilworth Avenue from Eastern Avenue to Benning Road were projected to grow by 63 percent, from 92,000 to 150,000 vehicles per day by 2030. Traffic volumes on the section between East Capitol Street and Benning Road would have likely increased from 99,000 to 138,000 vehicles per day, a 39 percent increase. South of East Capitol Street, traffic volumes on Kenilworth Avenue would increase by 45 percent, from 77,000 to 112,000 vehicles per day by 2030. Examining the river crossings, the East Capitol Street Bridge volumes were forecasted to increase over the next 20 years from 60,000 to 69,000, a 15 percent decrease. Traffic on the Benning Road Bridge was projected to decrease by 20 percent, from 77,000 to 62,000 vehicles a day, mostly on account of reaching maximum capacity. If no significant transportation infrastructure improvements were made, the trend in traffic in the original year 2030 revealed that traffic volumes would still continue to increase on I-295 / DC 295 / Kenilworth Avenue, as well as on the 11th Street Bridges and Frederick Douglass Bridge. Although some traffic on the river crossings could potentially decrease, on account of congestion and over-capacity roadways, traffic would likely divert to East Capitol Street Bridge and the 11th Street Bridges. This would then in turn result in deterioration of traffic conditions not only on these river crossings, but also along adjacent arterials to these river crossings. Infrastructure improvements were shown to be required throughout the AWI study area so as to accommodate the anticipated traffic growth projected under the 2030 No-Build Conditions.

C-38

Figure 15. 2030 No-Build Average Daily Traffic Volumes from MWCOG Travel Demand Model (Source: Parsons Brinkerhoff 2007 AWI Transportation Mobility Study)

C-39

This page intentionally left blank

C-40

Section 4.4.4 2030 and 2040 Build Condition Trends In reviewing the 2030 and 2040 future traffic forecast trends, in is important to note that the projects such as South Capitol Street corridor improvements, or Pennsylvania Avenue corridor improvement, are not focused on increasing capacity of the network or the overall AWI transportation system, but are envisioned to improve pedestrian and cyclist connectivity/mobility, enhance the overall corridor streetscape, improve safety, and replace the structurally deficient/functionally infrastructure. Specifically, the downgrading of South Capitol Street from an urban highway, as it functioned back in 2005, to a grand urban boulevard as envisioned by 2020, has the potential to decrease free-flow travel speeds from what they would be in the future under a No-Build scenario. Forecasted volumes for the South Capitol Street corridor are projected to grow to 75,000 vehicles per day by 2040, which is a 27 percent increase from existing traffic volumes. One capacity change on this corridor will entail the provision of an additional lane on the Frederick Douglass Bridge to allow three lanes inbound and three lanes bound, as opposed to the asymmetric fivelane configuration that exists today. The 11th Street Bridges have been reconfigured by recent construction to now all one set of bridges to carry interstate traffic from I-295 / DC 295 to the Southeast-Southwest Freeway (I-695 and I-395 respectively), while a separate local bridge carries local traffic between Anacostia and the Navy Yard and surrounding residential neighborhoods to the north of the Southeast-Southwest Freeway. The second major component of the 11th Street Bridges project includes new connections to and from Anacostia Freeway (DC 295). This connection did not previously exist and has a major impact on the overall traffic flows. The new connections now separate local from interstate traffic as well as provide a new connection, all while taking advantage of the available roadway capacity on the surrounding network. Overall, the access into the Washington core should be improved by this project once it is fully constructed, and traffic on the adjacent bridges should be reduced. Once the bridges and interstate connections west of the Anacostia River are completed, volumes are projected to increase from approximately 127,000 in the original No-Build Condition to 149,000 vehicles per day in the 2040 Build Conditions, an increase of about 17 percent. The increase of traffic in this area is partly due to the shifting of traffic from I-295 via South Capitol Street onto the 11th Street Bridges. In addition, some traffic would shift from the Sousa Bridge (Pennsylvania Avenue) to the 11th Street Bridge, as traffic volume decreases from 87,000 in the 2030 No-Build to 74,000 vehicles per day in the Build Conditions a decrease of about 14 percent. The biggest impact is seen on the Southeast Freeway between the 11th Street Bridges and Barney Circle, as the daily traffic volumes are projected to decrease from 54,000 to 25,000. This is attributable to the completion of the 11th Street Bridges connections, as well as the downgrading of this section of the freeway system from a formerly obsolete interstate segment that was never completed to more localized boulevard, as envisioned by the Barney Circle / Southeast Boulevard project. The Kenilworth Avenue project would reconfigure the roadway interchanges from Eastern Avenue to the interchange with East Capitol without adding capacity. Two major arterials that cross Kenilworth Avenue are East Capitol Street and Benning Road. The changes associated with all projects in the AWI study area are likely to increase the traffic volumes on Kenilworth Avenue from Eastern Avenue to Benning Road from 150,000 to 176,000 vehicles per day between the No-Build and Build Conditions, a 17 percent increase. Traffic volumes on the section between East Capitol Street and Benning Road increase from 138,000 to 161,000 vehicles per day, by about 17 percent. Examining some of the other river crossings, the East Capitol Street Bridge volumes will decrease in the Build Conditions, from 69,000 to 63,000 per day, a nine percent decrease. Traffic on the Benning Road Bridge will likely decrease by eight percent, from 62,000 to 57,000 vehicles per day. A notable change between No-Build Conditions and Build Conditions is a decrease in cut-through traffic on more localized streets. For instance, Minnesota Avenue between Good Hope Road and Pennsylvania Avenue is expected to decrease from 12,500 to 8,700 vehicles per day, which is a 30 percent decrease. Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue north of Suitland Parkway could likewise be expected to decrease from 17,000 to 13,500 vehicles per day.

C-41

Fold-out maps on the following pages illustrate the latest projected traffic for average daily traffic and for peak hour conditions in the year 2040 (Figures 16 and 17, respectively).

C-42

Figure 16. 2040 Build Average Daily Traffic Volumes from MWCOG Travel Demand Model (Source: CH2M HILL)
C-43

Figure 17. 2040 Build Average AM (PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes from MWCOG Travel Demand Model (Source: CH2M HILL)
C-44

Section 4.5 Event Traffic (Washington National Ballpark and Proposed Prop osed DC United Soccer Stadium) In addition to understanding how new development and transportation improvements affect traffic and transit trips on a typical day, DDOT also focuses on how the transportation system will handle the number of automobiles and pedestrians that a particular event will attract. DDOTs previous planning efforts for the Washington Nationals Ballpark in the South Capitol Street corridor provides an example of how the department considers the effects of events, such as earlier studies of traffic and parking surrounding the Ballpark. In order to account for what happens during particular events, DDOT generally performs a specific study to understand what the implications of a noteworthy new traffic generator will be on traffic flow. In the case of the new major league ballpark, DDOT added an appendix to its Anacostia Access Study. The appendix of that document described specific assumptions about what could be expected during games, and analyzed the impacts on the surrounding traffic, as well as on the proposed infrastructure improvements. Similarly, for the proposed DC United Soccer stadium, DDOT has more recently initiated a new event traffic study for the areas anchored by the South Capitol Street and M Street SE-SW Corridors and surrounding vicinities within the AWI study area. This study will build upon the analysis performed in the M Street SE-SW Transportation Study and previous traffic impact studies for the ballpark, as well as assess the impacts of events being held simultaneously at these major traffic generators. Because several scenarios could be analyzed to determine the impacts of stadium and event traffic on the AWI study area, the first step is to choose the most relevant scenario. For the purposes of the event analysis for the ongoing study, a worst-case scenario is being derived for analysis, in order to understand impacts of background traffic interacting with event-related trips. Developing the most representative worst-case scenario entails consideration of the event traffic impacts during the afternoon and evening peak hours. This step layers the impacts upon the peakhour traffic volumes that had already been analyzed as part of other studies (such as the M Street SE-SW Transportation Planning Study). The result of this layering will likely demonstrate that weekday baseball and soccer games would be considered for the worst-case scenario because the weekday stadium event impacts are also likely to affect the evening peak hour. DDOT developed the traffic forecasts for this worst-case scenario, and will then determine the amount of congestion that would occur at intersections, the time it would take to clear vehicles at various intersections, and the most direct route to divert traffic so as to avoid congestion. After analyzing the worst-case scenario, DDOT will assess the future transportation improvements and travel demand strategies that could allow for traffic to flow more reasonably through the area during events. These findings will be predicated on the condition that traffic for the events will be managed by District officials in order to avoid the types of bottlenecks identified during the initial events held in the area. In that past, DDOT has taken the initiative in analyzing game day operations. The DC Sports and Entertainment Commission is responsible for proposing updated ballpark traffic management plans and a ballpark traffic operations plan in accordance with DDOT standards so as to better address event-specific traffic impacts, and to effectively manage game day operations. DDOT applies this procedure, an analysis outside the confines of the travel demand modeling activities, to eventspecific traffic. Thus, event-specific traffic analyses are performed as part of the operational analysis in their transportation studies. The determination of specific events to include in the operational analysis of a particular project is made by DDOT based on the anticipated impacts of such events. Section 4.6 Modeling Scenario Conclusions The Build conditions of each major planning study, with their complementary future traffic conditions, demonstrate that there will be shifts and changes in the Anacostia Waterfront-area transportation infrastructure over the next 30 years. In some places, traffic volumes increase slightly, and in others the traffic decreases slightly. Most of the
C-45

infrastructure improvements rationalize the transportation system, enabling regional connections that are now missing or by rebuilding the roadway to suit the scale of the area through which it runs. The aim of the improvements is to make the entire system more responsive to the range of users pedestrians, local drivers, regional drivers, cyclists rather than simply moving more cars through the system faster. Traffic patterns will be shifted, but they should not diminish the overall quality of the transportation network. Although traffic levels will change, the traffic modeling performed on each of the major planning studies demonstrates that the overall mobility and accessibility in the area will improve.

C-46

Section 5

Summary of Mobility Study Findings

This study was intended to make the federally mandated planning process clear and explain the logic behind the data used by DDOT and its partner agencies in the District and the Washington Metropolitan region. It is also intended to respond to community requests for DDOT to provide a better level of clarity and detail about its modeling process. The goal of this document is to assure the community that DDOTs planning has incorporated the proposed and planned developments in the AWI study area, and that transportation infrastructure improvements have been planned and designed for the anticipated growth. DDOT follows the federally mandated transportation planning process as outlined by the Transportation Planning Board. That process requires the use of the regional travel demand model and cooperative land use forecasts developed by MWCOG and officially adopted by the TPB. The TPB ensures that regional development and transportation infrastructure projects are approved through the official process, and that collectively these projects do not affect the air quality conformity of the region. The MWCOG travel demand model and cooperative land use forecasts are the backbone of this process. All jurisdictions in the Washington, DC metropolitan region contribute inputs to the cooperative land use forecasts, including data on future growth that is expected from commercial, industrial, recreation, and residential development. The DC OP has the major role of providing input to MWCOGs modeling and forecasting committees for the District of Columbia. DC OP tracks development in the city and provides this information to MWCOG on a regular basis, so that model updates will contain the latest information. During the evaluation of the travel demand forecast modeling processes explained in this report, the following factors were noted:

Although MWCOG and DC OP may discuss their development forecasts in different ways, they are, in fact, working in concert concerning the land use data that is the foundation for planning studies. DDOT used the MWCOG Models and cooperative land use forecasts in its transportation planning studies that make up the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative study area. DC OP has continued to provide updated information to MWCOG about what development is foreseen in the area over time.

The MWCOG Model is the foundation for determining future traffic volumes and future traffic impacts. As studies move from conceptual level to full design and implementation, DDOT updates future traffic volumes and future transportation impacts using the latest MWCOG Models and forecasts to ensure that anticipated development and infrastructure growth have been captured in its evaluation. In conclusion, a comprehensive look at the impacts affecting the District and the region has occurred, and continues to occur, even in local transportation studies, as per the use of the federally-mandated planning process and tools. DDOT has performed several runs of recent versions of the MWCOG TPB land use and transportation model with regard to environmental and transportation evaluations of projects and corridors within the AWI area. Within the past 18 months, DDOT has run the MWCOG TPB land use and transportation model to evaluate the following:

St. Elizabeths Department of Homeland Security Headquarters Consolidation Master Plan and EIS Malcolm X Avenue interchange improvement Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue improvements St. Elizabeths East Campus Infrastructure Study, Master Plan, and Transportation Network Environmental Assessment 13th Street Southeast Extension Pecan Street and Sycamore Street connections
C-47

South Capitol Street Corridor Final EIS and Supplemental EIS I-295 / Suitland Parkway interchange improvements Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue / Suitland Parkway interchange improvements I-395 / I-695 / South Capitol Street improvements Pecan Street and Sycamore Street connections M Street SE/SE Transportation Study Barney Circle / Southeast Boulevard EA Pennsylvania Avenue / Potomac Avenue EA

These studies encompass a large portion of the AWI study area and provide more complete and up-to-date insights into the future performance of the AWI transportation network. Not surprisingly, current estimates of 2030 and 2040 traffic volumes within the AWI study area are different from the estimates generated in the original 2005 AWI Mobility Study and the subsequent 2007-2008 update. In order to effectively capture the impacts of the entire AWI Transportation Master Plan, a comprehensive assessment of the traffic forecasts was performed by running the most recent MWCOG Travel Demand Forecast Model (Version 2.3.52 and Land Use Round 8.2). Based on a review of recent runs of the travel demand model for all of the current projects and studies programmed within the AWI area, a notable finding is that the proposed AWI transportation projects will provide for a substantial reduction in traffic along many of the local streets within the network, while at the same time, increasing traffic along major freeways and arterials. The magnitude of decreases in traffic on more localized roads, including Minnesota Avenue, Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue has changed significantly since the 2005 AWI Mobility Study. This is due to the combination of improvements aimed at redistributing commuter and through traffic from the local transportation network to the regional freeway system by completing strategic missing connections and ramp movements that were never built as a result of the unrealized/incomplete highway system within the District.

Conclusion
DDOT, the Office of Planning and MWCOG regularly and diligently contribute input to and provide improvements to the regions land use and transportation model so that it can accurately and realistically provide better forecasts upon which to base land use and transportation decisions regarding policy, facilities and services. The information available today suggests that future growth in the AWI area, for both households and businesses, will be robust. The AWI, begun more than 13 years ago, is producing real results in terms of directing renewed interest and investment into long-neglected neighborhoods. And DDOTs efforts to improve the transportation infrastructure in the AWI area is both a cause of and a response to increases in residential, employment and entertainment activities there. Results of running the regions land use and transportation model suggest that the AWI transportation infrastructure (both facilities and services) will perform better in the future as a result of the AWI transportation projects that have been completed or that are underway when compared to how the system would perform in the future had these improvements not been undertaken. DDOT has been involving, and will continue to energetically involve, the general public along with directly affected residents and businesses in the AWI neighborhoods where change is taking place. Change is an integral part of the life of cities and their neighborhoods. So, while change cannot be prevented, it can be planned and managed. DDOTs public outreach, education and involvement efforts are intended to enlist the knowledge, energy and commitment of residents and businesses to help ensure that DDOT manages projects (and the overall transportation network) in a way that best serves the interest of the public. This 2013 Update of the AWI Transportation Master Plan and Mobility Study is just one element of this effort to keep residents informed about and involved in the dynamic process of improving life and business within the District so that the Anacostia Waterfront and surrounding areas can become a more prosperous and sustainable community.

C-48

Estimating the transportation operational conditions for the future is an undertaking that necessarily involves leaps of logic and some amount of informed judgment based on the best information available at the time. DDOT has relied upon the best available information, proven models, and consistent assumptions to inform their decision making. This mobility study shows how DDOT, working with the District, MWCOG and DC OP, has comprehensively approached the issue of meeting future land uses and travel demand with suitable transportation infrastructure.

C-49

Section 6

References for the AWI Mobility Study

Arlington County, Virginia Planning website: www.co.arlington.va.us/Departments/CP11D/planning/data_maps/pirs/CPFIDPlanningDataandMapspir53.aspx#About _COOP_Process, accessed July 2005. DC Economic Partnership, DC development data, provided by Chad Shuskey, September 2013. DC Office of Planning, development database provided by Art Rodgers, April 2013. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG), website, www.mwcog.org, accessed July 2013. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG), Round 8.1 Cooperative Forecasting: Employment Forecasts to 2040 by Traffic Analysis Zone Publication Date: 7/31/2012 | Publication Number: 20128441 Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG), Round 8.1 Cooperative Forecasting: Population and Household Forecasts to 2040 by Traffic Analysis Zone Publication Date: 7/31/2012 | Publication Number: 20128443 Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG), 3722 TAZ Reference Maps for Cooperative Forecasts Publication Date: 12/17/2010 | Publication Number: 20108400 Milone, R., Humeida, H., Martchouk, M., Moran, M., & Seifu, M. (2012). Calibration Report for the TPB Travel Forecasting Model, Version 2.3, on the 3,722-Zone Area System (Final Report). Washington, D.C.: National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board. Retrieved from http://www.mwcog.org/transportation/activities/models/documentation.asp MWCOG, 2013, Calibration Report for the TPB Travel Forecasting Model, Version 2.3, on the 3,722-Zone Area System, Washington, D.C.: National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board. MWCOG, 2013, Users Guide for the TPB Travel Forecasting Model, Version 2.3, Build 38, on the 3,722-Zone Area System, Washington, D.C.: National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board. MWCOG, 2013, COGITPB Travel Forecasting Model Version 2..3 Users Guide MWCOG, 2013, COGIIPB Travel Forecasting Model Version 2.3 Calibration Report MWCOG, 2013, Growth Trends to 2040: Cooperative Forecasting in the Washington Region. MWCOG, September 10, 2003, Round 6.3 Cooperative Forecasting: Employment Forecasts to 2030 by Traffic Analysis Zone. MWCOG, April 1, 2002, A Citizens Guide to Transportation Decision Making in the Washington Metropolitan Region. Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development, website, DC Economic Development Map, www.dcbiz.dc.gov, accessed July 2013.

C-50

Swanson, J. (2012). Forecasting Future Travel Patterns. The Region, National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board, Annual Review of Transportation Issues in the Washington Metropolitan Region, 51, 915. Retrieved from http://www.mwcog.org/store/item.asp?PUBLICATION_ID=353 Washington DC Marketing Center, Development Activity 2003 Guide to Development in the District of Columbia, 2003. Washington DC Marketing Center, website, www.dcmarketingcenter.com, accessed July 2005.

C-51