1
10
2
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/1f1d893b1328f29ce62ebd5ff9601946.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=OrT3IzmnqfZwzVbHBcpFeL5t0FPI4yDdy9Y4egU3jYWFaThTlJJ4D7uRTX3O30WiJlhq0GwcuGxpcJqyCI0uCJEEU%7EltzKiJjJk432ft5QkCkcHRhwQLjNbyid5VhSCkdHICGk-ZA-YHmrWWm7nPxMvuKgLZUHRvJIJI5OIaQuAipZDTmujDNNlsXmcm6l72eORT9I4VuxpGh6P1JqHBIXaBlVkm-EseyoysImRI4dAnCzUTDCot75UtDFCI8pV2J4wNuT4%7EyEmbKnlsAx7b11bE-Acww96dNLsSv9prJkTBkdBQyQuqPRGTXe-QZxkhxtvJRzYWbpTipYiB33cnaA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
5d401e886e10e4c16f112c8e49fd51dc
PDF Text
Text
�J
J
!
fc
IfK\
\r
1
is!-
-
:
fc. »'-V> V
<w
J
: ')•.
,'•• --;,-
f • '•'
*:,
^ ";• t : ••<!
' ' i I'. ,. ;' i i
'li
v•
ft I
I
>.:$.
•X
'
)
J
•
'.»:;" '
.
1
...
wsv^ , K
'.'. ,,'•> ' '-, v
. ." ' j '
'•^'•'M^^^Vi.V^^
-'
II J
•r * '*•
�Watk inaton 6
HISTORIC AND MODERN
I .
�r
•
COVER: Key Bridge
INSIDE FRONT COVER: Typical Department of Highways' bridge identification
plaque.
FRONTISPIECE: The sweeping lines of the South Capitol Street Bridge as seen
from Anacostia.
:
~
•*•
-
1
-I
'-
~
�r
A PICTORIAL REPORT
ON
HIGHWAY BRIDGES AND STRUCTURES
IN
*
~~
THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Prepared for:
THE COMMISSIONERS OF THE
DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA
HON. SAMUEL SPENCER, President
HON. ROBERT E. MCLAUGHLIN
THOMAS A. LANE, Brig. Gen., U. S. Army
BY
THE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS
OFFICE OF PLANNING, DESIGN AND ENGINEERING
In Cooperation With:
THE BUREAU OF PUBLIC ROADS
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
»
Under the Direction of:
J. N. ROBERTSON
Director of Highways
MARCH 1, 1956
�THIS VOLUME IS DEDICATED
TO
HERBERT C. WHITEHURST
Director
Department of Highways, D. C.
1930 -1948
The memory of this Engineer's understanding and sympathy and his capacity
for deep friendship and warm relations with his staff remains undiminished.
Captain Herbert C. Whitehurst distinguished himself for almost a quarter of a century in the service of
the Government of the District of Columbia.
Born in Richmond, Va., September 20, 1886, he received his engineering education at Virginia Polytechnic Institute, where he graduated in 1906. Until World
War I, he worked as an engineer with private construction firms. During that war, he served in the
United States and abroad as a combat engineer. Subsequently, he continued to serve with the Corps of
Engineers and, for a time, headed the Construction
Division at Wilson Dam, Muscle Shoals, Alabama.
He was transferred to the Office of the Engineer
Commissioner of the District of Columbia in 1926.
Three years later, he resigned his commission, inteYiding to enter private industry. However, the District
Commissioners, who had made a • study of the Whitehurst Plan for better highway management in Washington, persuaded him to remain as Coordinator and
Chief Engineer. Later, the job was expanded and he
became the first Director of Highways.
Nor did he hesitate to undertake duties beyond the
limits of his office. In addition to serving as Director
of Highways Captain Whitehurst served as head of
the District Department of Civilian Defense and Commander of the City's Civil Defense Corps during
World War II.
Under the Captain's leadership, the mileage of paved
streets in Washington was nearly doubled from 550
miles in 1926 to nearly a 1,000 miles in 1948. He campaigned vigorously and successfully to establish the
District's Highway Fund as a separate budget account.
At the time of his death, the annual Highway Budget
approached $10,000,000.
Major improvement projects conceived under the
Captain's direction include the Scott Circle, Thomas
Circle, Dupont Circle, and Virginia Avenue underpasses, as well as the Sousa Bridge, the South Capitol
Street Bridge, the Calvert Street Bridge, and the new
Highway Bridge over the Potomac River at 14th Street,
and many others. Another was the K Street Elevated
Highway, which was officially dedicated in 1949 by
the District Commissioners as the "Whitehurst Freeway."
Captain Whitehurst's reputation in the engineering
profession was nationwide. He was President of the
American Road Builders' Association 1935-36, prior to
which he had been President of the Municipal Division
of that Association, then known as the City Officials
Division. He served as Treasurer of AREA from 1940
to the time of his death. He was also a member of
the American Society of Civil Engineers, the American
Association of State Highway Officials, the Association
of Highway Officials of the North Atlantic States,
the Highway Research Board, and the Washington
Board of Trade, among others.
There have been few men so generally respected as
was Captain Whitehurst. The fact that those who
knew him referred to him always as "The Captain"
was a tribute to his devotion to duty, his adherence to
high principles, his leadership, his ability to inspire
confidence, and his ability to get things done no matter
what the obstacles.
�I
r
CONTENTS
PAGE
Introduction
9
Planning, Design, and Engineering
11
GROUP I—PRINCIPAL HIGHWAY BRIDGES
Potomac River Crossings
Chain Bridge
Francis Scott Key Bridge
Highway Bridge
Arlington Memorial Bridge
14-18
19-23
24-30
31,32
Anacostia River Crossings
Preface
34
Anacostia Bridge—Eleventh Street, S. E
33,35,36
John Philip Sousa Bridge—Pennsylvania Avenue, S. E
36-39
Bennings Bridge
40-42
South Capitol Street Bridge
42,43
East Capitol Street Bridge
44,45
Highway Extensions Over Rock Creek Valley
Preface
William Howard Taft Bridge—Connecticut Avenue, N. W
Dumbarton Bridge—Q Street, N. W
Meigs Bridge—Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W
M Street, N. W
P Street, N. W
Massachusetts Avenue, N. W
Calvert Street, N. W
Connecticut Avenue, N. W. over Klingle Valley
Fourteenth Street, S. W., Tidal Basin Structures
Kutz Bridge—Independence Avenue, S. W
46
47, 48
49
50, 51
52
53
54, 55
55-57
58, 59
60, 61
62
GROUP II—SECONDARY HIGHWAY BRIDGES
-
Over Rock Creek
Military Road, N. W
Pierce Mill Road, N. W
Klingle Road, N. W
64
64
65, 66
Over Piney Branch
Linnean Hill, N. W
Sixteenth Street, N. W
67
68
Over Oxon Run
'
Atlantic Street
South Capitol Street
Wheeler Road
69
70
71
Over Watts Branch
Division Avenue
48th Place
71
72
�(CONTENTS—Continued)
GROUP III—RAILROAD CROSSINGS
Section 1—Viaducts
New York Avenue Extended
New York Avenue, N. E
T Street, N. E
Monroe Street, N. E
South Dakota Avenue, N. E
Queens Chapel Road, N. E
Benning Road, N. E
Taylor Street, N. E
Michigan Avenue, N. E
New Hampshire Avenue, N. E
Franklin Street, N. E
Ninth Street, N. E
74
75
76
76
77
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
Section 2—Underpasses
Rhode Island Avenue, N. E
Bladensburg Road, N. E
Florida Avenue, N. E
K Street, N. E
Eastern Avenue, N. E
Van Buren Street, N. W
Montana Avenue, N. E
Riggs Road, N. E
Delaware Avenue at First Street, S. W
Maine Avenue, S. W
Kansas Avenue, N. E
East Capitol Street
84
" 84
85
85
86
86
87
87
88
89
90
90
GROUP IV—GRADE SEPARATIONS
Scott Circle
Thomas Circle
Virginia Avenue and Twenty-third Street, N. W
Maine Avenue and Fourteenth Street, S. W
Independence Avenue over Park Drive, S. W
Portland Street over South Capitol Street
K Street N. W. over Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway
Dupont Circle
Whitehurst Freeway
Benning Road and Kenilworth Avenue Interchange
Kenilwortll Avenue and Deane Avenue Interchange
New York Avenue over South Dakota Avenue
Kenilworth Avenue over East Capitol Street
92
93
94
95, 96
97
98
99
100-102
103
104
105
106
106
GROUP V—CULVERTS
Southern Avenue at Watts Branch
Minnesota Avenue at Fort Dupont Park
Southern Avenue and East Capitol Street
East Beach Drive in Rock Creek Park
107
107
108
108
APPENDIX
Table of Clearances and Maximum Load Limits
™
109
�INTRODUCTION
This is the second report on Washington's
bridges. The purpose of the report is to illustrate the major bridges and highway structures located in the District of Columbia and
give the history of their development. Typical
examples of minor highway structures are also
depicted.
The report is directed to engineers, historians, and others who are interested in a factual and graphic record of the evolution of
bridge building to meet the continually expanding requirements of vehicular traffic in the
Nation's Capital.
A bridge may be defined broadly, in the parlance of engineers, as a structure providing
passage over a waterway, a valley, a road, or
other obstruction or interruption, without closing the way beneath.
It is more difficult to classify bridges than to
define them, however, simply because of the
number of bases which can be employed for
classification. For instance, they may be classified by their purpose or function, as aqueduct,
viaduct, highway, railway, or footbridge; by
their material, as timber, masonry, iron, steel
or reinforced concrete; by their type, as beam,
truss, arch, or suspension; by their interspan
relations, as simple, cantilever, or continuous;
by the relative position of the bridge floor, as
deck, through, or suspended; by the method of
joining members, as pin-connected, riveted, or
welded, or by the method of providing clearance for navigation, as fixed or movable.
The basis selected for classifying the various
structures covered in this report is their purpose or function.
Since the functional attributes of bridges
have been given precedence as a method of classification, the effect may be to understate the
significance of other attributes, which perhaps might serve as equally sound bases for
the presentation of this material. However,
detailed structural data are given in outline
form for each structure exhibited in this
report.
The first report, which was published in 1948,
contains a detailed history of the development
of some of the major crossings since the beginning of the nineteenth century. It also exhibits
sketches and photographs of bridges in the
District from the humble pile and trestle type,
common between 1800 and 1875, to the metal
deck and through truss structures, designed to
carry heavier interurban railroad loadings,
which were constructed widely during the last
quarter of the nineteenth century.
The historical information in its entirety has
been incorporated into the current report. The
rest of the material contained in the 1948
publication has been supplemented and revised.
First, illustrations and technical data are given
for highway bridges and structures which have
been constructed since 1948. Second, a new section, depicting typical culverts, has been
added. Third, a revised set of regulations governing the issuance of permits for moving special loads on highways and bridges, including a
revised table of loads and clearances, is shown
in the Appendix.
The city of Washington, like most of the
cities which were established along the eastern
seaboard during the 18th and 19th centuries,
was founded on the banks of a navigable river
to occupy the most advantageous site available
as a terminal and shipping point for goods
moving by ship, the fastest mode of transportation known in that era of impassable roads
and unfordable rivers.
With trade expansion and the spread of
colonization beyond the riparian margin however, there arose a steady demand for permanent roads and bridges to accommodate the
shift from waterborne to overland commerce.
At first, turnpike and ferry companies were
formed to pioneer in the development of this
new line of communication and, later, these
groups of private citizens also ventured into
the field of bridge-building to satisfy the growing need for highway crossings over the Potomac and Anacostia rivers.
The bridges were valuable as time and labor-saving devices in that tney obviated the
necessity of unloading goods and produce for
transfer by ferry and reloading on the opposite shore. More important, they were agents
which helped to bring about a more closely
knit physical, economic and social union between the agrarian settlements in Virginia
and Maryland and the mercantile centers of
Georgetown and Washington.
The bridges which exist today on these historic sites are major units of the District of
Columbia's highway system, essential not only
to the smooth functioning of the local economy,
but equally vital as links in the chain of national
routes which connect the vast production and
consumer areas located in the coastal states.
They serve hundreds of thousands of motorists
who travel each year to points of interest and
recreation areas along the Atlantic coast.
The order of presentation of the bridges
covered by this report is based solely on their
functional characteristics; it is not necessarily indicative of the importance, traffic-wise
or engineering-wise, of the individual bridges.
The first group covers the Potomac and Anacostia River crossings and the major bridges
that connect the business and government districts with the residential areas. It also covers
the major structures affording passage over or
through Rock Creek Park.
The second group consists of secondary
bridges over Rock Creek, Piney Branch, Oxon
Run, and Watts Branch.
The third is made up of highway facilities,
such as the viaduct and underpass, which permit the safe crossing of pedestrians and vehicles over and under railroad tracks.
The fourth includes structures which are designed to isolate two or more opposing flows of
traffic passing through a common intersection.
The fifth group consists of several culverts
which are typical of those constructed in the
District of Columbia.
�10
JOHN N. ROBERTSON
Director of Highways
SAMUEL R. HARRISON
Deputy Director of Highways
ft
GERARD I. SAWYER
Chief of the Office of Planinng,
Design and Engineering
�PLANNING, DESIGN, AND ENGINEERING
In preserving and augmenting the highway
system of the District of Columbia, one of the
principal functions of the Department of Highways is the construction of bridges and other
highway structures including tunnels, viaducts,
underpasses, overpasses, culverts, wharves, and
retaining walls.
For a number of years subsequent to 1892,
when a Bridge Division was first established,
the Engineer of Bridges himself carried the
entire burden of structural inspection, the
preparation of contract plans, and the supervision of bridge construction for the Government of the District of Columbia. By 1917,
however, the Bridge Division had acquired
three designers, who helped in supervising construction operations, and a maintenance unit
for the inspection and repair of existing highway structures. An Assistant Engineer of
Bridges and an engineer in charge of maintenance had also been added to the staff by that
time.
From 1917 to 1947, the Bridge Division expanded its staff from time to time to cope with
the increasing requirements for new construction caused by the heavy growth of traffic
during those decades. This very expansion,
however, resulted in an overload of work for
the Engineer of Bridges in that all of the personnel came directly under his supervision. To
lighten this Burden, the Bridge Division was
reorganized in 1947 and two separate sections
were created: the Bridge Design Section, under the supervision of a Bridge Design Engineer ; and the Bridge Construction Section, under the supervision of a Bridge Construction
Engineer.
Thereafter, however, the Bridge Division was
abolished under the District Commissioners'
Reorganization Order No. 53 of June 30, 1953.
At that time, the Bridge Construction Section
was given independent status as a division,
while the Bridge Design Section was placed
in the Division of Design and Engineering, a
unit of the Office of Planning, Design, and
Engineering.
An outline of this organization, similar to
those employed by many cities and states today,
may be seen on the accompanying chart.
The Chief of the Office of Planning, Design,
and Engineering now has the responsibility,
among others, of developing plans and designs
for the building of structural highway improvements. To discharge this responsibility,
he has three divisions under his direction. They
are the Planning Division, headed by a Chief
Planning Engineer; the Design and Engineering Division, headed by an Engineer of Design;
and the Office Engineering Division, headed by
an Office Engineer.
DIRECTOR OF HIGHWAYS
DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF HIGHWAYS
BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION
OFFICE OF PLANNING.
DIVISION
DESIGN AND ENGINEERING
PLANNING
DESIGN AND
OFFICE
DIVISION
ENGINEERING DIVISION
ENGINEER
Chart outlining the organizational framework set up withm the Department of Highways to plan, design, and construct bridges or other structural improvements. Not
included on the chart are five other divisions under the supervision of the Director
of Highways: the Trees and Landscaping Division, the Electrical Division, the Street
Division, the Mobile Equipment Division, and the Office of Business Management.
FORMER BRIDGE ENGINEERS
C. B. Hunt
W. J. Douglas
T. C. J. Bailey
D. V. McComb
C. R. Whyte
H. R. Howser
1892-1901
1901-1910
1910-1913
1913-1928
1928-1948
1948-1953
BRIDGE DESIGN SECTION 0
Listed at left are former Bridge Engineers and their periods of incumbency. Following
the retirement of Mr. H. E. Howser in April 1953, Mr. G. I. Sawyer acted as Engineer of Bridges until the Bridge Division was abolished in August 1953. At that time,
under the provisions of the District Commisioners' Reorganization Order No. 53, Mr.
Sawyer was assigned as Chief of the Office of Planning, Design and Engineering; the
Bridge Design Section was placed under the newly-created Division of Design and
Engineering in the Office of Planning, Design and Engineering, while the Bridge Design
Engineer; Mr. W. M. Omand, was elevated to head the Design and Engineering
Division; and the Bridge Construction Section, under the leadership of Mr. C. A.
Wilson, was given independent status as a division.
�r
•
TRAFFIC SURVEY
i
DESIGN
""**
—
V
it
CONSTRUCTION
~
�13
GROUP I
PRINCIPAL HIGHWAY BRIDGES
�POTOMAC RIVER CROSSING^
Chain Bridge
There has been a bridge standing on this
site since the end of the 18th century. The
first effort to span the Potomac river came
as a result of the political and economic freedom which followed the country's victorious
emergence from the struggle for independence.
England had released her hold on colonial commerce and shipping, and the spirit of trade
surged untrammeled through the land. With it
arose the need for roads and bridges to facilitate the overland movement of goods. The
Georgetown Bridge Company must have been
composed of alert and resourceful men, for they
were the first to feel the accelerated pulse of
expansion under the impetus of free enterprise, and to act accordingly, in December of
1791, by forming a corporation, under charter
of the Maryland Assembly, to erect a toll bridge.
The site which they selected for the river
crossing was located approximately three miles
above Georgetown and has been retained to
the present time as a link between Canal Road
and the Leesburg Turnpike. The incorporators
gave notice that books for receiving subscriptions would be opened July 1, 1795, for 400
shares at $200 per share. The Company also
informed prospective investors that Timothy
Palmer "an artist eminently distinguished"
had been retained as the designer of the
structure.
The timber bridge was opened to traffic in
the year 1797, and remained in service until
1804, when the first of a series of misfortunes
which was to threaten this slender life-line
of commerce overtook it. It collapsed under the
strain of an increasing traffic consisting largely
of droves of heavy, waterlogged cattle which,
in those days, were made to drink at Pimmett
Run before crossing to the auction pens on the
northern shore of the Potomac. Shortly thereafter, a new superstructure, again of wood,
was constructed to bridge the river at a point
37 feet above normal water level. Disaster
struck for a second time and the bridge was
destroyed by fire after having been in use for
only six months.
Whether or not the gentlemen of the Georgetown Bridge Company, daunted by these reverses, considered the merits of abandoning
the venture or filing a petition in bankruptcy
is unknown, for the record is not clear on this
point. 'For the next four years, there was no
attempt to replace the structure. By 1808
however, some courageous stockholder must
have succeeded in rallying the flagging spirits
of the corporation, for in that year, a new
bridge was erected, the first to bear the designation by which it has been known ever since.
It was a sturdy affair, designed by James Finley, Esq., a judge from Uniontown, Pa. Made
of heavy wooden members it was suspended
from huge chains anchored in the masonry of
high stone towers on each bank of the river
to gain the added strength needed to support
the 136-foot span
Although this design gave it an advantage
of suspension, presumably out of range of
the rampaging river, it still did not have
an even chance against the forces of nature.
Placed in service in 1810, the first "Chain
Bridge" lasted but two years before being
swept away in the flood waters that had engulfed its predecessors.
The incorporators gave up in despair and
a measure of control in the enterprise passed
from their hands into those of the Federal
Government when, in 1811, an Act of Congress
authorized the appropriation of the necessary
funds to rebuild a second chain-suspended
structure. Public ownership was assured in
1833, when a joint session of the Georgetown
Board of Aldermen and the Common Council
approved purchase of the bridge from the
original investors for the sum of $150,000 and
abolished all private rights to levy tolls. This
structure was seriously damaged by high waters
in 1852, and the following year all vestiges of
private and municipal control disappeared when
Congress appropriated $30,000 to restore it as
a single span over the channel only.
(Continued on page 18)
�''
"
.....
••*••'••• •?
•"..-•".••••>,'.
'"„ ______
I H m ' . ... ---. >.j Ill :" Hi •
. '.";. • • •
•
. .:"••• •
•
* -
.. ?
•••
- >' .
•
&ij&j* •
Is
:•
I '
I
CHAIN BRIDGE—1839
Reproduced from a sketch which appeared in Vol. VI of the Family Magazine.
I
I
I
I
I
I
\
\
I
1
I
r_,,: ^
�CHAIN BRIDGE DURING THE CIVIL WAR
A view taken by Brady, the famous Civil War Photographer, showing the Howe wooden
truss construction combined with the arch principle.
-
THE CHAIN BRIDGE OF THE IRON TRUSS PERIOD
Constructed by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Phoenix Bridge Co. in 1874.
Photo made during the floods of 1936.
�CHAIN BRIDGE—1948
Structural Data,
Location: Potomac River near D. C. line, N. W
Type: Continuous steel girders with suspended spans
Overall length: 135T2"
Width of roadway: 30'
Width of sidewalks: 5' each
Vertical river clearance: 46'
Design loadl H20
Special design load: none
Designers: Modjeski, Masters & Chase, Harrisburgh, Pa
Contractors: Tuller Construction Co.. Red Bank N .T
Built: 1938
Approximate cost: $393,000
�(Continued from page 14)
The years passed without having any more
serious effect on the structure than is to be
expected from normal wear and tear. Designed
to sustain a concentrated vehicular load of 6
tons it played its part well in the years which
witnessed the phenomenal growth of the country in the last decades of the 19th century.
The threatened break-down of this link in
an important artery between D C. and Virginia and the impending rupture in the travel
habits of thousands of motorists which it implied, brought a storm of protest from residents of the whole area. The commuters contended that complete shut-down was unnecessary until the act of crossing the bridge became, in itself, a matter of life and death.
The residents of Arlington fearful for their
water supply which came to them via the 8-inch
mains carried by the bridge, insisted that it
be closed. This drastic measure was resorted
to at midnight, July 12, 1927, when the Commissioners ordered the bridge closed to all except pedestrian traffic. The crumbling abutment was replaced at a cost of $39,205 with
concrete instead of stone, by hoisting the end
of the bridge on an A-frame to permit the new
work to go into place without dismantling any
part of the superstructure.
The first signs of eventual failure came in
the year 1910, when theVirginia abutment
showed some outward movement, and in 1926,
a thorough investigation revealed that a large
cavity in the foundation of the abutment had
been formed by the erosive action of the river
in flood. Although the examining engineers
were at variance concerning the seriousness
of the failure one of the officials declared that
"indications point to the fact that when failure
occurs, it will come without warning." "Chain
Bridge's" traditional enemy, the floods which
had raged in 1923 has scored another victory.
The restored structure was further damaged
by the flood of 1936 and was again repaired. But
the strain of 50 long and arduous years of service could no longer be eradicated with paint
and patches This recent ordeal had "robbed"
"Chain Bridge" of the last of its fading
strength. Furthermore, a new enemy had
joined forces with the hostile river—obsolescence. The twenty-foot roadway was no longer
adequate in the face of mounting traffic volumes and increasing loads, and a stronger and
wider bridge was needed to serve the increasing flows of motorcars.
On June 17, 1927, the Commissioners of the
District of Columbia issued orders designed
to protect the weakened structure from complete collapse. Vehicles were limited to a
loaded weight of 4 tons and to a maximum
speed of 8 miles per hour; a round-the-clock
watch was posted at each end; periodic inspections were ordered, and the Engineer of
Bridges was authorized by the Director of
Highways, who was acting on orders from the
Commissioners, to close the bridge to all traffic during periods of high water level—5 feet
or more over the normal level.
The superstructure was dismantled and replaced by steel cantilever girders resting on the
old stone piers of Potomac blue stone which
had remained firm through the years, but which
had to be raised approximately 5 feet for additional clearance. Approved by the Fine Arts
Commission, the new steel girder bridge designed by the firm of Modjeski, Masters and
Chase was constructed at a cost of $393,000
by the Tuller Construction Company under the
supervision of the Commissioners. It was completed in 1938 and opened to traffic in that
year with highway approaches redesigned to
provide a greater degree of access to the improved crossing.
For the next twenty-two years, the fortunes
of "Chain Bridge" ebbed and flowed like the
troubled waters that ran turbulently beneath
its short-lived spans. Finally, in 1874, the
plans for a substantial structure of eight iron
truss spans with timber floor, resting on cast
iron seats secured by stone copings, were approved by the Corps of Engineers. The Phoenix Bridge Company, under contract with the
War Department, threw a 1351-foot bridge
across the shallow gorge and "Chain Bridge"
achieved at last a relatively secure and permanent status.
�P'
. I a ,-...,.••.;:.. ,...,•:•••
______ : S _
"
' 11! I
|
|I " : I
-"'"";•.:
,
...... • ••• ,-..,..,;:..:. . . . : , ^
'31
-
11 m
THE FRANCIS SCOTT KEY BRIDGE—1948
Structural Data
Location: Potomac River at 34th Street, N. W.
Type: multiple span concrete arches
Overall length: 1791'6"
Width of roadway: 50'
Width of sidewalks: 8' each
Clearances: (a) river: vertical 72'—horizontal 208'
(b) highway: 14'3"
Design load: 150 pounds per sq. foot
Special design load: 75-ton streetcar
Designers: Corps of Engineers, U. S. A.
Contractors: day labor under supervision of Corps of Engineers, U. S. Army
Built: 1923
Approximate cost: $2,500,000
j
I
I I
•
i
j
�20
Francis Scott Key Bridge
The first bridge to span the Potomac River
at this site was called "The Aqueduct," and
in a report to the Secretary of War, dated
January 2, 1869, General Michler described it
in these words: "Upon the piers rests a wooden
superstructure consisting of the trunk of the
aqueduct and the tow-path . . . and above that
the bridge proper composed of the roadway,
footway, and parapets for the passage of persons, animals and vehicles."
This extraordinary structure was conceived
and erected by a group of enterprising Alexandrians who obtained a charter from Congress in 1830, for the purpose of constructing
an aqueduct to extend the Chesapeake and
Ohio Canal across the Potomac River. The
aqueduct, consisting of a large wooden trough
resting on stone piers, carried a branch of the
Canal which was divided at this point to allow
the other branch to flow into the river near
Rock Creek. The piers were constructed of
heavy blocks of gneiss, found on the banks of
the Potomac above the bridge, with icebreakers
of cut granite from the quarries of Sandy Bay,
Massachusetts. Major Turnbull of the U. S.
Topographical Engineers was in charge of the
construction.
The bridge across the river consisted of two
trusses of the Howe combination type, strengthened by arches of wood which were made to
abut against each other—an iron plate separating the ends—instead of being imbedded in
the stone piers. At the north end of the bridge,
a trestle carried the roadway over the canal
to connect with one of the streets of Georgetown. At the south end, another trestle connected with a causeway leading to the bridge.
Completed in 1843, the aqueduct was opened to
traffic but does not appear to have had the
success which the incorporators of the Alexandria Canal, Railroad and Bridge Company
had so enthusiastically predicted for their
project in 1830. The tolls charged may have
been too high or the merchants of Georgetown
may have boycotted the structure as it favored
the rival town of Alexandria. At any rate, the
timber construction soon began to rot and leak
and it had to be abandoned as a link in the
canal system for water-borne commerce which
extended from the eastern base of the Alleghenies across the valley of the Potomac.
When the Civil War broke out, the Government took possession of the bridge for military
use and it remained under federal control until
1866, when a new company leased it from the
original company for a period of 99 years. A
wagon bridge was erected on the old piers and
the company charged tolls which were so exorbitant as to keep the citizens of Georgetown and
Alexandria in a state of constant agitation for
the next thirty years. During this troubled
period, Congress was being constantly petitioned by the embittered residents of these two
communities for relief in the form of a new
bridge at the site known as the Three Sisters
Island or in freeing the Aqueduct Bridge by
Government purchase. Finally, in December
of 1885, the Riddleberger bill was passed, authorizing an appropriation of $125,000 for the
purchase of the bridge or, in the event of disagreement as to the terms of the proposed
sale, for the erection of another bridge at the
Three Sisters Island. The owners of the structure took their own good time in reaching the
decision to sell, which they did on December 21,
1886, on the eve of the expiration date of the
offer to purchase.
Work on the construction of a new bridge,
to rest on the old piers, was immediately
started under the supervision of Col. Peter
C. Haines of the Corps of Engineers. The contract was awarded to the Mt. Vernon Bridge
Company, which submitted a bid for $80,905
exclusive of the approaches on which the sum
of $50,000 was expended. Including the purchase price the total cost of the structure
amounted to $255,905, half of which was to be
paid by the District of Columbia.
�)
1
)
J
AN EARLY VIEW OF AQUEDUCT BRIDGE AND GEORGETOWN
�The new superstructure consisted of one
164-foot through truss span over the Canal,
one 122.5-foot iron trestle and nine deck truss
spans, each measuring 114 feet, with a timber
floor roadway 24 feet wide, flanked by walkways 3 feet wide. By this time, the Turnbull
substructure was beginning to show signs of
failure and the heavy floods of 1889 weakened
them so seriously, that three of the eight piers
had to be torn down and rebuilt between 1897
and 1907. Large cavities in the others were
filled with bags of concrete, and riprap was
piled around the foundations to protect them
as much as possible from excessive scour.
In February, 1916, the Senate Committee on
Interstate and Foreign Commerce reported in
favor of a bill, setting up the necessary legal
and financial machinery to dismantle the Aqueduct Bridge and build a new one at a cost not
exceeding one million dollars; the bill also
provided an additional $50,000 for the maintenance and repair of the old bridge until
completion of the new structure. This action
followed a report made by the District Engineer Officer, in which he declared the bridge
to be unworthy for public travel and recommended that not more than one streetcar be
permitted to cross the bridge at the same time,
that maximum loads be limited to 4 tons and
that the bridge be closed to all traffic during
periods of heavy ice movement.
The following entry dated Saturday, July
15, 1916, appears in the U. S. Engineers Office diary for "Key" Bridge: "Began survey in
connection with new bridge." It is the first of
many entries made by the officer-in-charge of
construction, reflecting the slow rise of the
massive structure from the muddy bottom of the
Potomac River to its completion almost seven
years later, when it was opened to traffic on
AQUEDUCT BRIDGE AT THE TURN OF THE CENTURY
A Metal Deck Truss Structure
•
�"KEY" BRIDGE FROM THE AIR
January 17, 1923. Shortages of material and
manpower, caused by the first World War, and
congressional reluctance to appropriate more
funds than were originally allocated for the
project, as prices rose to higher levels, combined to produce delays. It was finally completed, and the new magnificent structure,
which was placed in service on that winter's
day of 1923, was dedicated in honor of Francis
Scott Key, the author of the Star Spangled
Banner, whose home, Cumberland House, stood
until recently near the bridge which bears his
name.
The seven reinforced concrete, open spandrel, ribbed arch spans tower to a height of
72 feet at the center of the channel. The structure consists of solid concrete piers, resting on
footings founded on a rock bed approximately
25 feet beneath low water. A seventh span
at the Virginia end was constructed in 1939,
by the U. S. Public Roads Administration to
overpass one of the roadways in the newly
developed park system along the river. With
the exception of this portion, the entire structure was constructed under the supervision
of and from plans drawn by the Corps of
Engineers, at a cost of $2.5 millions. Containing approximately 68,000 cubic yards of concrete, it extends from Georgetown in the District of Columbia to Rosslyn, Virginia for an
overall distance of 1,791 feet and 6 inches. In
1949 the Department of Highways constructed
ramps between the Key Bridge and the Whitehurst Freeway, which was opened to traffic
October 8, 1949. The freeway is a four-lane, elevated structure extending along the line of
K Street between the bridge and 27th Street.
Operations are now underway to widen the
roadway of the Key Bridge from a width of
50 feet to a width of 66 feet.
�Long Bridge and, Highway Bridge
A matter of lopping four miles from the
itinerary of the Great Mail Route between the
North and the South decided Congress, in 1808,
to authorize the erection of a toll bridge over
the Potomac at the foot of 14th Street, near
its intersection with Maryland Avenue. The
Washington Bridge Company was formed under a charter, which authorized a capital stock
issue of $200,000 in shares at $100 par value
for public subscription. The return on the investment was to be assured by the revenue
from toll levies ranging from 3 cents per head
for sheep and swine, to 100 cents for stages
and coaches.
The attractive nature of this monopoly inspired several contractors from the city of
Alexandria to construct a similar facility, in
the form of a toll road, leading from that city
to the southern end of the bridge. The subsequent trail of mishaps, which reduced the efficiency of the bridge by forcing its closing for
extended periods, proved the facilities to be
rather risky for investment purposes. They
were never profitable.
A sudden shift in strategy and the resulting
change in theatre of operations saved the bridge
from complete destruction but the respite was
brief. An older, stronger and more unreasonable antagonist—the Potomac—rose in the
spring of 1831 and the superstructure was carried away by the flood. The fortunes of the incorporators of the Washington Bridge Company were swept away with the wreckage, and
by an Act of Congress, which was approved
July 14, 1832, the Federal Government purchased all remaining assets, including the franchise, for $47,000. Acquired in the public interest, the bridge was then made free.
Against the protests of the citizens of
Georgetown, who claimed that the piles, upon
which it rested, interfered with navigation to
and from their wharves by reducing the river
rate of out-flow by 30%, and caused heavy deposits of alluvia to obstruct the channel, the
bridge was rebuilt on the plan of the one originally erected by the Washington Bridge Company. It was completed in October of 1835, by
Stephen Clarke and Alanson Sumner of New
York, at a cost of $114,126, a figure which is
substantially lower than the sum of $200,000
which was appropriated for the work. By an
Act of Congress of March, 1839, the municipal
jurisdiction of the Corporation of the City of
Washington was extended over the Long
Bridge.
The first threat to endanger the structure of
timber trusses came with the military invasion of August 25, 1814, when British troops
set the Washington end afire to forestall a
surprise attack from the South during their
stay in the city, while the retreating American forces burned the Virginia end to prevent
Damaged repeatedly by ice, floods and river
pursuit. This appears to have been a purely
tactical course of action on the part of at- craft which, during storms, broke loose from
tacker and defender, designed to maintain the their moorings and smashed against the sustatus quo. They were evidently satisfied with perstructure, Long Bridge continued to serve
this arrangement, for the fires were extin- as an important—though, at times, somewhat
guished before they could spread to the long- rickety—link between the national capital and
timber bridge-work across the shoals, over Virginia. Over it fled the demoralized Union
which a stone causeway was later constructed. troops after the disaster of Bull Run. Over it
(Continued on page 27)
�,;,.. I ' • 1 ^ I
THE RAILROAD BRIDGE OVER WHICH PASSED MOST OF THE ME-N
AND MATERIAL OF THE UNION ARMIES
In this photograph, made by Brady, the movable span over the Washington Channel has been swung open to allow passage of high-masted, sailing
vessels. A similar draw span over the Virginia Channel of the Potomac is
faintly visible further along the tracks. Men posing in this picture were
either friends of the photographer or officials of the Government as they
appear consistently in other pictures made during this period by Brady.
�LONG BRIDGE AND WASHINGTON IN THE 1860's
This view of the double bridge taken by Brady from the southern bank of the Potomac
is particularly interesting because it shows the unfinished Washington monument in left
background of photograph. Work on the shaft was suspended during the War between
the States. The Capitol appears in the extreme right background. Except for a narrow
guarded walkway, the flooring on the bridge in the right foreground was removed during
the war to prevent infiltration and raids by the enemy.
�27
(Continued from page 24)
passed the baggage and supply trains to and
from the front in the Virginia campaigns. It
was supplemented, during the Civil War, by a
railroad bridge built under a federal charter
by the Washington, Alexandria and Georgetown Railroad Company at a point approximately 75 feet below and parallel with the
Long Bridge. When the Long Bridge failed
during these crucial years, the Government
took over the railroad structure as its only line
of communication and supply with its field
armies, and it has, since that time, been used
by various carriers as a connection between
the railroads operating to the north and to the
south of the Potomac.
The structure had fallen, by the time the war
ended, into a very insecure and dilapidated
state, and the citizens of Alexandria were clamoring for its restoration on a more substantial
basis.
According to a report made to the Hon.
0. H. Browning, Secretary of the Interior in
1868, a civil engineer named Silas Seymour
made a survey of the situation and recommended abandonment of the obsolete structure
for purposes of common travel in favor of a
new bridge at a point approximately 1000 feet
upstream. He described the old mile-long, timber structure as resting upon decayed crib and
pile foundations, protected and bolstered by
mounds of riprap stone and having draws of a
very "antiquated plan." In 1940, the old abutments were uncovered by excavations made in
the area, in connection with the construction of
the grade separation at 14th Street and Maine
Avenue, S. W.
In 1870, the Baltimore and Potomac Railroad Company assumed control of the bridge,
with the understanding that it would be maintained in the proper condition for railway and
ordinary travel. Construction of a new Howe
truss bridge began in that same year. The old
causeway on the flats was replaced by another,
1,960 feet in length, upheld by retaining walls
of solid masonry filled with earth and gravel.
From each shore to the causeway, the superstructure was of wood and iron resting on
stone piers. The draws over the channels were
of iron. The floods of 1877 and 1881 seriously
weakened this structure and it had to be rebuilt
again in 1884-1885. An Act of Congress, approved February 12, 1901, authorized a new
double track railroad bridge to be built and
paid for by the Baltimore and Potomac, or
Pennsylvania Railroad, and a new Highway
Bridge to be built and paid for, jointly, by the
District of Columbia and the federal government from plans to be approved by the Secretary of War.
By 1905 it became increasingly apparent that
the highway bridge would have to be separated
from the railroad bridge and the existing crossing on U. S. Route No. 1, referred to either
as the Fourteenth Street Bridge or the Highway Bridge, was erected 1,000 feet upstream
from the location of the old combined structure
and opened to traffic in December, 1906. The
bridge was constructed by the Pennsylvania
Bridge Company, at a cost of $1,389,702, from
plans drawn by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers.
The superstructure of this bridge consists
of eleven fixed through Pratt truss spans of
steel, each 216 feet long, and one through
truss movable, rim-bearing, swing span, 290
feet long. The spans derive support from stone
piers, timber piles and two masonry abutments.
The roadway surface provided by the bridge is
40 feet wide and is flanked by two sidewalks
each measuring 8 feet in width; the trusses are
not wide enough to allow the safe passage of
four lanes of vehicles. Limited to 35 tons with
the load moving in the center of the roadway,
the structure has an overall length of 2,234 feet
7 inches. The original steel buckle plate floor
was removed in 1928 and replaced by a 7 inch
creosoted laminated timber floor with sheet
asphalt cover, at a cost of $168,680. The Virginia end was redesigned by the Public Roads
Administration in 1930, when the development
of the Mount Vernon Boulevard necessitated
the removal of two spans in order to provide
space for clover-leaf turns to and from a lower
level roadway underpassing the bridge.
Nearly 50 years old, this structure has been
in need of replacement because of its physical
condition and lack of capacity to absorb increased loads of traffic. The need was recog-
�28
nized as pressing in 1943, when the Depart- for the two structures to $7,000,000. Construcment of Highways, together with the Public tion of the first of the two spans was started
Roads Administration, undertook extensive August 1, 1947, and it was opened to traffic
studies to determine the design of a new cross- May 9, 1950. The total cost of the first strucing. As a result of those studies, the construc- ture, which amounted to about $5,600,000 betion of two spans, each with a capacity of four cause of postwar rises in the prices of labor
lanes of traffic, to replace the old bridge, was and materials made it necessary to postpone
temporarily the construction of the second
recommended to the Congress in 1945.
span. The new structure is located between the
The 79th Congress enacted Public Law 516 Railroad Bridge and the old Highway Bridge.
on July 16, 1947, approving the construction of It presently serves District-bound traffic, while
two four-lane spans, but limiting expenditures the old one serves Virginia-bound traffic.
Another view of Old Long Bridge from a Brady plate dated 1860 showing timber trestle
structure over the Washington Channel and a section of the causeway over the shallows.
-
-
-
�«** • •J.--if-?-.-"fe
^ § ' ' • -•"J'-'fr
HIGHWAY BRIDGE—1948
The obsolete steel truss structure scheduled for early replacement.
Structural Data
Location: Potomac River at Fourteenth Street S W
Type: through steel truss with swing span
Overall length: 2234'7"
Width of roadway: 40'
Width of sidewalks: 8' each
Clearances: (a) river: vertical 21'2"—horizontal 96'
(b) highway: on bridge 17'9"—under bridge 9'9"
Design load: 100 pounds per square foot
Special design load: 15-ton roller
Designers: Corps of Engineers, U. S. Army
Contractors: Pennsylvania Bridge Co.
Built: 1904
Approximate cost: $1,389,702
I
�30
The new Highway Bridge span, for which structural data fa given
below, is shown above flanked on the left by the Railroad Bridge and
on the right by the old steel truss structure slated for demolitfon.
THE NEW HIGHWAY BRIDGE
Federal-Aid Project FI-UI S9(2)
Structural Data
Location: Potomac River at Fourteenth Street, S. W.
Type: continuous steel girder with double leaf bascule span
Overall length: approximately 2600'
—.
Width of roadway: 50' (4 traffic lanes)
i l i Width of sidewalks: 6' on each side
l
River clearances: (a) horizontal at bascule span: 105'
(b) vertical (closed span): 28'4" above mean low water
Design load: H20-S16
Special design load: 50-ton trailer (gross)
Consulting engineers: Howard, Needles, Tammen & Bergendoff, Kansas City, Mo.
Architects: Coolidge, Shepley, Bullfinch & Abbott, Boston, Mass.
Contractors: Merritt-Chapman & Scott Corp., New York City, (substructure only); Bethlehem Steel >
(steel superstructure); Zerkel Construction Company, Inc. (concrete slab superstructure);
Highway Construction Company (deck surfacing)
Date of completion: 1950
Approximate cost: $5,600,000
�I
I
31
"~
n
.
r
-
r
(I
' 1
r
ARLINGTON MEMORIAL BRIDGE
Spanning the Potomac River on a site first selected by President Andrew Jackson, this bridge, completed in 1932, is considered one of the outstanding structures
of its type in the world. This ia a view looking towarda Arlington.
Structural Data
Location: across the Potomac River, on a line joining the Lincoln Memorial with the Lee Mansion, Arlington, Va,
Type: multiple span concrete arches with double-leaf bascule span.
Special design load: 40-ton tank in curb lanes
Overall length: 2138' between terminal pylons
Architects: McKini, Mead & White, New York City
Width of roadway: 60'
Contractors: 40 contractors under supervision of Arlington Bridge Commission.
Width of sidewalks: 15' each
Built: 1932
Design load: H20
Approximate cost: $6,650,000
�. ; • .-•-.
gg
;,
.:• ** ' . *» :
A view of the Arlington Memorial Bridge showing the Washington
Monument and the Lincoln Memorial.
•
�THE ANACOSTIA BRIDGE—ELEVENTH STREET. S. E.—1948
Structural Data
Location: Eleventh Street, S. E., over the Anacostia River
Type: 3-hinge steel arch with bascule span
Overall length: 1000'
Width of roadway: 35'
Width of sidewalks: 6'6" each
Clearances: (a) river: 100' horizontal—23' vertical (closed draw)
(b) highway: 14'6" vertical
Design load: HIS
Special design load: 35-ton trailer (gross) in streetcar tracks
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division
Contractors: Pennsylvania Bridge Co,
Built: 1908
Approximate cost: $459,413
OS
�34
ANACOSTIA RIVER CROSSINGS
PREFACE
The bridges over the Eastern Branch of the
Potomac, the Anacostia River, have a long
and eventful background dating back to the
end of the Revolutionary period in American
History. They have played and are still playing an important part in the economic development of the eastern and southeastern sections
of the District of Columbia.
To judge from the numerous petitions with
which the inhabitants of the area, then known
as Uniontown, sought to influence Congress
into supporting various projects to bridge the
river, and in which the difficulties in reaching
the expanding markets of Alexandria and
Georgetown were recited vehemently and at
length, it appears that there was considerable
interest and feeling among the farmers and
landowners of that section of Maryland concerning the construction of a crossing over
the Anacostia River. It also appears that the
ferry which transferred men and produce from
one bank to the other did not render adequate
service especially in view of the high tolls
charged by the ferry company.
During the twenty-five year period extending roughly from 1795 to 1820, there were
three bridge companies chartered by the Maryland Legislature, with the approval of Congress, and formed under the guidance of plantation owners and influential men of that time,
to finance the construction of as many toll
bridges across the Eastern Branch. These
bridges were of the inexpensive wooden pileand-trestle type common in that era of plentiful timber and rare coin. The struggling young
republic could not afford to copy the elaborate
and graceful arched structures of masonry with
which the rulers of Europe sought to enhance
the prestige and perpetuate the glory of their
individual reigns.
The life-expectancy rate of the original tim-
ber bridges, already lowered by reasons of
their inadequate design, was reduced further
by the general practice of declaring excessive
dividends to the incorporators and diverting
all revenues from toll collections into a fictitious profit pool at the expense of maintenance and replacement or obsolescence funds.
The results of this short-sighted policy soon
became apparent in the poor condition of the
structures and, when pressed by public opinion
and charged with a degree of negligence that
endangered life and property, the owners would
plead poverty and slender return on the capital
investment. In some cases the owners would
sponsor a campaign designed to persuade the
community into purchasing the depreciated
bridge
There is documentary evidence that a definite shaping of public and official opinion, toward the middle of the 19th century, in favor
of freeing highway crossings on important
turnpikes was taking place. A petition signed
by leading citizens of Washington and adjoining counties in Maryland was read to Congress
on January 27, 1846, and recited that substantial benefits would accrue to the community at
large by making free the two bridges across
the Anacostia River, then known as the Navy
Yard and the Anacostia Bridges. The charges
were made by the petitioners that the tolls
were too high and acted in restraint of trade
and progress. The correctness of this point of
view was borne out by the rapid and extensive
development of communication and colonization which, in the latter half of the century,
reached into all parts of the U. S. .with the
advent of steam transportation, the erection of
durable metal bridges and free roads to abolish
the last remaining frontiers. This expansion
would undoubtedly have been retarded by any
attempt to continue the toll system.
�B • :
I
P
I
'
...
.... ,-;..;•" ,/rr •.*;: 1,
THE ANACOSTIA BRIDGE UNDER CONSTRUCTION IN llins
The iron deck truss bridge erected in 1875 is shown to the left of the present bridge
The Anacostia Bridge at llth Street, S.E.
The structure which stands at present on
the site of the original pile-and-trestle timber
bridge was constructed under the provisions
of an Act of Congress approved April 27, 1904,
by the Pennsylvania Bridge Company at a cost
of approximately $459,413, and completed in
1908.
each counterbalanced leaf of the bascule rotates by means of electrically driven machinery.
All bracing against tensile and compressive
stresses is below the floor. In 1930, the buckle
plate floor was replaced with a reinforced concrete pavement, and in 1943, the timber floor
on the draw span was replaced by a steel grid.
It is a steel girder arch deck bridge consisting of six 129-foot spans and a bascule
draw span with a clear opening of 103 feet.
The superstructure is supported by 6 concrete
piers on timber piles, which are carried down
to about 25 feet below the pier footings, and
by two U-shaped concrete abutments. Each
arch span comprises 6 plate girder arched ribs,
each having three hinges, one at the crown and
two at the springing line. The double leaf
bascule span, composed of two arch plate
girders, is operated on a trunnion about which
This 48-year-old bridge was constructed to
replace an earlier structure erected in 1875 by
the bridge-building firm of Clarke, Reeves and
Co., of Phoenixville, Pa. It was composed of 14
wrought iron deck truss spans of the type
known as the "Murphy-Whipple Truss" resting
upon piers and abutments of masonry. Including a 338 foot section of causeway, the bridge
measured 1700 feet and provided a 20-foot,
roadway in the clear, and a 5-foot sidewalk for
the passage of vehicles and pedestrians.
�THE ANACOSTIA BRIDGE AS A TIMBER PILE AND TRESTLE
STRUCTURE IN THE 1860's.
The John Philip Sousa Bridge
The extension of Pennsylvania Avenue over
the Anacostia River has been in existence since
1804, when the first bridge to stand at the site
of the ferry landing, which it superseded, was
constructed by the Eastern Branch Bridge
Company. Under charter of the Maryland
Legislature, granted in an Act approved December 24, 1795, the incorporators were authorized to float a capital stock issue of 225
shares, with a par value of $200, and to declare annual dividends from the toll collections
for a period of thirty years, after whichkthe
bridge would pass under Federal control. It
was proposed to erect a structure 20 feet wide
to extend from the foot of Kentucky Avenue
to the property of a person named Wigfield or
Wakefield, one of the directors of the company, across the river, and, for this reason,
the bridge was built on a diagonal angle. In
a letter written at Philadelphia and dated November 27, 1795, President Washington expressed unqualified approval of the project.
After a short ten-year period of service, the
bridge was fired on August 24, 1814, by American forces under the command of Captain
Creighton, a naval officer, and partially destroyed. It appears that this unfortunate measure, taken to prevent the bridge from falling
into hostile hands, was ill-advised for the British ignored the bridge and its immediate vicinity and chose Bladensburg Road as the invasion route into Washington.
Under the provisions of an Act of March 3,
1815, the sum of $20,500 was appropriated to
satisfy the claims of the Eastern Branch
Bridge Company against the Navy Department
and the bridge was restored to its original state.
In 1845, another accident befell it when the
sparks of a passing steamer ignited the wooden
superstructure and burned it to the water
line. It was never rebuilt as a timber structure.
During the ensuing years there was much
agitation by the residents of the southeast district of Washington and Maryland to replace
(Continued on page 39)
�THE JOHN PHILIP SOUSA BRIDGE
Structural Data,
Location: Pennsylvania Avenue, S. E., ovor the Anacostia River
Type: cantilever steel girder with suspended span
Overall length: 1666'
Width of roadway: 60'
Width of sidewalks: 6' each
Clearances: (a) river: 125' horizontal—36' vertical
(b) highway: 17' vertical
(c) railroad: 23' vertical
Design load: H20
Special design load: 45-ton trailer (gross) in curb lanes
Designers; Parsons, Klapp, Brinkerhoff & Douglas, N. Y. City
Contractors: Penker Construction Co.- Cincinnati Ohio
Built: 1940
Approximate cost: $1,851,526
CO
�38
.
:r:S?;J
^ •*•—••;• I —v
, _--";
:K
f
-- : .
;
; .
:
. . .
;,„
:—••;••- | | | ||
|
|
,,K
;;<rC:-
K
-
^ '•"-* • • ^ * - >
*
Above: Pennsylvania Avenue Bridge. The 1890 steel deck truss structure just before it
was replaced in 1939
Below: The John Philip Sousa Bridge from the air showing channelization in both
approaches.
,
fe
•••
9
i
'••
�(Continued from page 36)
the highway crossing at Pennsylvania Avenue
but their individual efforts met with little success. It was not until 1886, when the pressure
of a "bridge bloc" lobbying under the name of
the East Washington Citizens Association finally succeeded in obtaining an appropriation of
$110,000 which was carried in an Act approved
by Congress on February 23, 1887, that the
restoration of a highway crossing on this site
became a definite possibility.
The contract for the construction of a
wrought iron deck truss bridge was awarded
to the Groton Bridge and Manufacturing Company of Groton, N. Y., which submitted a low
bid of $105,000, implemented by the time limit
guarantee of August 1, 1888. The work began
immediately and was prosecuted vigorously under the able direction of Lt. Col. Hains, C.E.
The contractors were released from the timelimit clause when the Government entered into
litigation with the Baltimore & Potomac Railroad Company to determine the exact limits of
the Company's right-of-way on the northwestern bank of the Anacostia River. The dispute
ended with the railroad company in possession
of additional right-of-way for a proposed new
line, and the Government facing the added
expense of altering the design of the bridge
to include another Whipple truss span. The sum
of $60,000 was appropriated to make the
changes.
The structure which was completed and
opened to general traffic on August 25, 1890—
two years later than it should have under normal conditions—consisted of two 190-foot
through spans over the rails, and ten 112-fpot
spans resting on stone piers and abutments on
pile and grillage foundations. A low-level crossing, it supported a 24-foot roadway and two 4f oot walkways of oak balk and stringers at a
bare three feet above the highest freshet line.
Approximately 1,521 feet long, it still followed
the diagonal path of its predecessor across the
river. This iron bridge, typical of the hundreds of structures which were being constructed at the close of the 19th century by the
few large bridge companies that had survived
the stiff competition in this field, was principally designed for economic fabrication and
ease of erection. It lasted 50 years and finally
succumbed to the pressing requirements of
modern traffic volumes which it could no longer
meet.
An appropriation of $2,000,000 was authorized by Congress in the District of Columbia
Appropriation Act for the'fiscal year 1939 to
replace the obsolete bridge of 1890. Construction was begun in 1938 and progressed rapidly
so that by the following year, it was possible
to accommodate traffic on two completed lanes
while the old bridge was being dismantled. The
structure, completed in 1940, consists of nine
154-foot curved steel girder spans on concrete
piers and abutments faced with stone and
founded on piles and precast concrete in the
cellular approaches. There was no necessity for
a draw span due to the fact that the vertical
clearance measures 36 feet at mean low water
and provides more than the 31-foot headway
required by the U. S. District Engineer. There
are two 30-foot lanes separated by a 4-foot median strip, each capable of carrying a double
line of vehicles; the reinforced concrete, asphalt-surfaced roadway is flanked by 6-foot
sidewalks. Live loads are limited to 45 tons
with the trailer proceeding along the curb lanes.
This bridge was designed by the engineering
firm of Parsons, Klapp, Brinckerhoff & Douglas of New York, with McKimm, Mead &
White as consulting architects.
It was named the John Philip Sousa Bridge
in honor of the composer and bandmaster by
an act of Congress approved March 7, 1939.
�e* *•" *,;
I ,
v
->1
:
:
' •
;
BENNINGS BRIDGE
Structural Data
Location: Benning Road, N. E., over the Anacostia River
Type: steel beams encased in concrete on simple spans
Overall length: 586'
Width of roadway: 88'
Width of sidewalks: 8' each
Clearances: (a) river: 40' horizontal—19' vertical
(b) highway: 12' vertical (for park roads only)
Design load: H20
Special design load: 45-ton trailer (gross) in curb lanes
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division
Contractors: Kaufman Construction Co., Philadelphia, Pa.
Built: 1934
Approximate cost: $356,952
•,,,
•••••.
$'
V'*''
H>
4
* -
�BENNING'S ROAD BRIDGE—1892
The iron trestle structure replaced by the existing bridge.
The Penning Road Bridge
Originally called Swell's Bridge, this river
crossing of Benning Road over the Anacostia
River was built, for the first time around 1800,
by the Anacostia Bridge Company. The incorporators of this company held a charter from
the Maryland Legislature, which was approved
by that body in an act passed January 20, 1797,
authorizing a capital stock issue of $20,000 to
be expended in the construction of a bridge at
this site. Some of the most important members of the colonial gentry were principal stockholders in the bridge company. They owned
large tracts of land in the eastern section of
the area which was to be designated, two years
later, as the Federal District, and sought to
increase the value of their holdings by establishing a highway link across the river.
In 1814, the wooden superstructure was set
afire and destroyed by invading British troops
as they marched on the Capital. After the war,
the owners were reimbursed by the Government for their loss and rebuilt it, somewhat
sketchily, in 1820. The bridge and other assets of the company which might have retained
some value were auctioned off in 1823, and acquired by William Benning, who also had extensive land-holdings on the other side of the
Anacostia River. The timber structure, which
he rebuilt as a toll bridge in 1830, was severely
damaged ten years later during a flood and
repaired by his wife, who had become a widow
in the meantime. Presumably, this bridge was
kept in a satisfactory state of repair during
the period from 1840 to 1892, when the first
metal bridge was erected to replace the wooden
bridge. At any rate, there is no record of any
popular movement, during that time, which
�42
would certainly have existed to petition Congress for a serviceable bridge, had this facility
been left too long in a state of disrepair.
become obsolete and it was dismantled in 1934
upon completion of the bridge which stands
today.
The metal bridge which replaced the timThis structure consists of steel beams on conber bridge on this site was an iron trestle struc- crete piers and abutments resting on timber
ture, erected in 1892 by the Keystone Bridge piles, and is comprised of five 55-foot spans,
Company, at a cost of approximately $60,000, two of 55 feet 9 inches, and two of 77 feet
and consisted of 16 spans of 25 feet each and 6 inches for an overall length of 586 ft. It was
3 spans of 33 feet 4 inches each, on stone piers constructed by the Kaufman Construction Comand abutments. It was 500 feet long and pro- pany to provide two 32-foot roadways and a
vided passage for vehicles and pedestrians on 24-foot right-of-way for streetcars. The streeta 24-foot roadway and 2 five-foot sidewalks. car tracks were dismantled in 1949 to provide
The inadequate roadway caused the facility to two 40-foot roadways with an 8-foot median.
SOUTH CAPITOL STREET BRIDGE
An air view of the newly constructed crossing of the Anacostia
River via South Capitol Street.
;
" •' • ••
'•
|
�1
SOUTH CAPITOL STREET BRIDGE
Structural Data
Location: South Capitol Street over the Anacostia River
Type: continuous steel girders with suspended spans and a swine SDan
Overall length: 3260'
Width of roadway: 2 lanes of 24' divided by a 4-foot median striD
Width of sidewalks: 6' each
River clearances: (a) horizontal: 150' on each side of pivot pier
(b) vertical with draw closed: 45'
Design load: H20—S16
Special design load: none
Designers: Modjeski & Masters, Harrisburg, Pa.
Contractors: (a) substructure: Dravo Corp., Pittsburgh, Pa.
(b) superstructure: American Bridge Co., Pittsburgh, Pa.
Date of completion: 1960
Approximate cost: $5,050,000
' • •
-U:'
...:•
1
1
1
)
1
)
1
.,. -i
|
'•
CO
�EAST CAPITOL STREET BRIDGE
.
Federal Aid Project U 42 (5) and (6)
A recent view, looking eastward, of the recently completed crossing of the Anacostia River
Structural Data
Location: Anacostia River at East Capitol Street
Overall Length: 1910'
Type: steel beam and girder simple spans
Width of roadways: two 37' roadways
Width of sidewalks: 6' each
River clearances: (a) horizontal 112'
(b) 17' 6" min. 26' max. at M.L.T.
Design load: H20-S-16
Designers: J. E. Greiner Company, Baltimore, Md.
Architects: James R. Edmunds Jr., Harbeson, Hough, Livingston, and Larsen
Contractors: Baltimore Contractors (substructure) and DeLuca Davis Construction
Company, Inc. (superstructure), Curtin and Johnson (deck surfacing)
Date of Completion: 1965
JL
,
�I
I
:
;"=„
";'
~" Si
-
" 1 1 I ,.,,..•:••
• • sagas
f
v-
^..Srfw^wf ^*' "}£*
**&** *? ™
JR VIEW SHOWING THE EAST CAPITOL
STREET BRIDGE AND ITS APPROACHES.
&^y**»K3:^j»««***l!^z:
�HIGHWAY EXTENSIONS OVER ROCK
CREEK VALLEY
PREFACE
Originating in the central section of southern
Maryland, Rock Creek meanders downward
through the District of Columbia to form a
valley whose tree-covered slopes vary in degree
of pitch from gentle declivity to steep escarpment. As the population rose to overflow beyond the limits of the old city laid out by
Pierre 1'Enfant, this gorge presented an obstacle to the development of the northwestern
portion of the District.
It was proposed at first to fill in the valley
by turning it into a dumping ground, and raising the floor to the level of Massachusetts
Avenue which was the first street to be extended over Rock Creek on an earth filled culvert. This plan was abandoned in favor of a
more aesthetically correct one which involved
the construction of bridges over the valley, as
new streets were laid out, to carry the increasing traffic generated by the development of
new residential areas.
The bridges erected for the purpose of extending the permanent street system, during
the last two decades of the 19th century, were
of the steel deck truss type commonly found
at that time in the majority of growing American cities. The Massachusetts Avenue culvert
with its 50-foot brick and concrete barrel arch
span and earth-fill roadway, the K Street
through plate girder bridge and the celebrated
Meigs bridge on Pennsylvania Avenue, whose
superstructure is supported on a single 198-foot
arch consisting of two cast iron water mains
4 feet in diameter, were the principal exceptions. The deck truss structures were erected
by some of the major steel bridge fabricating
companies of that era, such as the Edgemoor
Iron Company, the Youngstown Bridge Com-
pany and the Kellogg Bridge Company. The
cost of these bridges ranged from an estimated
$33,000 for the K Street span to $70,000 for
the Calvert Street Bridge.
The important function of carrying traffic
over Rock Creek valley was entrusted to these
structures and the valley was saved from destruction. In later years, the whole area bordering the creek was turned into an urban park
which offers recreational facilities such as
bridle-paths, picnic groves, etc., in a rustic
setting of unrivaled beauty. The creation of a
network of highways, to follow the erratic
course of Rock Creek and its tributaries
through this woodland, necessitated the construction of new highway bridges to replace
the old spans, in order that vehicles on the
Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway might have
sufficient vertical and horizontal clearances.
Increased traffic volumes, heavier vehicles, inadequate roadway widths, and wear and tear
combined to render the original structures
obsolete.
By this time, the various planning bodies,
professionally engaged in the improvement of
Washington on a scale commensurate with the
rank that the city holds as one of the world's
famous capitals, were prepared to pass upon
the suitability of plans for the replacement
structures. The results of this ability to combine future traffic requirements with a design
that has functional as well as architectural
excellence are illustrated on the following
pages. The high standards set by the William Howard Taft bridge, constructed a generation ago, were maintained in the highway
bridges that, today, span Rock Creek Park.
�•^M^-m^-'-fy-^ • ••
-V*^ V ^^pvjf-v ,.
THE WILLIAM HOWARD TAFT BRIDGE—1948
Structural Data
Location: Connecticut Avenue, N. W., over Rock Creek Park
Type: multiple span concrete arches
Overall length: 1341'
Width of roadway: 40'
Width of sidewalks: 5'6" each
Vertical hjghway clearance: 50'
Design load: H20
Special design load: 45-ton trailer (gross) in center lanes
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division
Architects: George S. Morrison, Edward P. Casey, Washington, D. C.
Contractors: Cranford Paving Co. and District Construction Co., Washington, D. C.
Built: 1907
Approximate cost: $846,331
s.— ^ «>« * 4i^
^^.^«
1y
�TAFT BRIDGE UNDER CONSTRUCTION
This picture taken in 1905 shows in dramatic contrast the difference in size and construction between the old and new structures. Thompson's Bridge in line with Behnont
Road is visible in center of the photograph as it underpasses one of the majestic arches
of the new bridge.
Tfee Tft72iam Howard Taft Bridge
This high-level concrete barrel arch structure first called the Million-Dollar Bridge, was
constructed to serve principally as a highway
bridge to carry Connecticut Avenue traffic over
Rock Creek Valley for a distance of 1341 feet.
It consists of seven full center arches with
two abutment spans of 82 feet each and five
middle arch spans of 150 feet each. There are
six full center spandrel arches above the five
main arches with 14-foot spans supported by
transverse piers 3 feet thick and extending the
full width of the bridge. The concrete, asphaltcovered roadway, which runs approximately
125 feet above the valley floor, is 40 feet wide,
having been increased from its original width
of 35 feet in 1936 by reduction of the width
of footways to 5^ feet, and is laid on a four
foot thick cushion of earth to absorb the sound
of passing vehicles.
The preparation of the materials entering
into the makeup of the structure excited some
interest among engineers and contractors at
the time of construction. This involved the
quarrying of granite like material, found in
deposits near the bridge site, which was
crushed, made into concrete and cast in the
forms designed for the external parts of the
structure. As a result of this prefabrication,
the ring stones, brackets, mouldings, railings
and several other units are all of precast concrete. There was no steel used as a reinforcing
agent in the concrete blocks. The four lions on
granite platforms at the terminals were executed by Roland Perry.
The Cranford Paving Company sunk the
foundations to bedrock in 1897, and the superstructure was later erected by the District Construction Company which brought the project
to completion in 1907, after long delays caused
by insufficient appropriations. The plans for
the $846,331 bridge were prepared by the D. C.
Bridge Division in consultation with George S.
Morrison, engineer, and Edward Pearce Casey,
architect. It replaced a low-level wrought iron
deck truss bridge erected in 1888, known as
Thompson's Bridge, which had spanned the
creek only.
�rJK>""
.
Dumbarton Bridge
Sometimes referred to as the "Buffalo
Bridge," this structure carries Q Street, N. W.
from Georgetown to Massachusetts Avenue
over Rock Creek and the low-level Rock Creek
and Potomac Parkway which runs parallel to
the watercourse. Built in 1914-1915 from a design by Glenn Brown, architect, to resemble a
Roman aqueduct, this remarkably handsome
structure turns gracefully on a 12-degree horizontal curve.
It consists of five full center reinforced concrete arch spans, the central span measuring
43 feet, with the flanking arches diminishing
to 42 feet and 41 feet respectively; each arch is
comprised of two ribs connected by concrete
screens. The cantilevered walks and solid balustrades of sandstone are supported by a series
of corbeled arches which emphasize the Roman
design.
The bridge is 261 feet long between abutments which are founded on rock, as are the
piers, and provides a divided roadway measuring 31'6" between curbs, and 2 sidewalks, each
7 feet wide. The bronze bisons, which are emplaced at the four corners of the bridge and
constitute the main decorative feature, were
designed by H. Phinister Proctor, New York
City sculptor.
This bridge of reinforced concrete faced with
sandstone was constructed from plans prepared
by the District of Columbia Division of Bridges
by the A. L. Guidone Company at a cost of
approximately $223,553.
DUMBARTON OR Q STREET BRIDGE, N. W.—1948
Structural Data
Location: Q Street, N. W., over Rock Creek
Type: multiple span concrete arches
Overall length: 342'
Center line radius: 474'
Width of roadway: 33'
Width of sidewalks: T each
Vertical highway clearance: 20'
Design load: 15.0 tons
Special design load: none
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division
Architect: Glenn Brown, Washington, D. C.
Contractors: A. L. Guidone & Co., New York City
Built: 1915
Approximate cost: $223,553
�PI ! I •
. .. :: '
v
I . - . • • . ' .•
'
' . "
'
;•'•.'•-•
1
»<
PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE BRIDGE N. W., OVER ROCK CREEK- -1955
(Meigs Bridge)
Structural Data,
Location: Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W., over Rock Creek
Type: single span concrete arch
Overall length: 276'
Width of roadway: BO'
Width of sidewalks: 10' each
Vertical highway clearance: 13 6
Design load: HT5
Special design load: 46-ton trailer (gross) in center lanes
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division
Contractors: Hardaway Contracting Co., Columbus, Georgia
Built: 1916
Approximate cost: $121,032
�4&p*
THE ORIGINAL PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE BRIDGE N. W., OVER ROCK CREEK
Designed and constructed by the Corps of Engineers; U.S.A., under the direction of
Colonel Meigs, C.E., the bridge arch pictured above in an original Brady photograph
made about 1860, featured fixed tubular ribs which served as an aqueduct. The iron
water mains, 4 feet in diameter, carried the bridge loads to the abutments. With the
exception of the tubes which still carry water, the bridge was torn down in 1916 and
rebuilt as a reinforced concrete arch to support heavier traffic loads. The mains are
concealed behind stone veneer in the present structure.
�52
•
•
••
•
j
• Bj
• ' . .
M STREET, N. W., OVER ROCK CEEEK—1948
Structured Data,
Location: M Street, N. W., over Rock Creek
Type: steel girders encased in concrete on simple spans
Overall length: 308'
Width of roadway: 40'
Width of sidewalks: 8' each
Vertical highway clearance: 15'
Design load: H20
•Special design load: 35-ton trailer (gross) in center lanei
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division
Contractors: Farris Engineering Co.. Pittsburgh, Pa.
Built: 1929
Approximate cost: $185.475
mi //
�53
-.
P STREET. V.W., OVER ROCK CREEK—1948
Federal Aid Project NRM 7
Structural Data
Location: P Street, N. W., over Rock Creek
Type: two-span concrete arch
Overall length: 336'
Width of roadway: 40'
Width of sidewalks: 6'6"
Vertical highway clearances: east curb 16'—west curb 20'
Design load: H20
.
Special design load: 35-ton trailer (gross) in center lanes
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division
Contractors: Pecora, Gaskill Co., Baltimore, Md.
Built: 1935
Approximate cost: $193,054
THE DECK TRUSS BRIDGE, ERECTED IN 1871, AS IT APPEARED IN 1911
Designed for street railway traffic, tracks were eliminated in the plan of the new bridge
�&*
4K-- :-iȣ|M*
'
• i1*k • -'.'!iP^^;*£'£ -i-SrfjJheittfiifclMfevi-fiv-'**!
H
!
m
a
iMi
MASSACHUSETTS AVENUE, N. W., OVER ROCK CREEK—1948
Structural Data
Location: Massachusetts Avenue, N. W., Over Rock Creek
Type: single span concrete arch
Overall length: 420'
Width of roadway: 50'
Width of sidewalks: 10'
Vertical highway clearance: 40'
Design load: H20
Special design load: 45-ton trailer (gross) in curb lanes
Designers: Harrington & Cortelyou, St. Louis, Mo.
Contractors: Potts & Callahan Contracting Co., Baltimore, Md.
Built: 1941
Approximate cost: $506,853
�55
MASSACHUSETTS AVENUE BRIDGES—THE OLD AND THE NEW—1941
The obsolete, low-level culvert with its dangerous blind curve in the immediate approach
to the tunnel being removed in the shadow of the new bridge.
r
V :;:
B
:
.
CALVERT STREET BRIDGE N. W. OVER ROCK CREEK—1911
The 1891 steel deck truss bridge reinforced by timber cribbing.
�.:,
"
s.
.,..-
THE CALVERT STREET BRIDGE—1948
The four»pylons, only two of which are visible in this photograph, symbolize the
principal media of travel: air, rail, water and highway.
Structural Data
Location: Calvert Street, N. W., over Rock Creek Va'ley
Type: multiple span concrete arches
Overall length: 825'
Width of roadway: 60'
Width of sidewalks: 12' each
Vertical highway clearance: 60'
Design load: H20
• '
Special design load: 45-ton trailer (gross) in center lanes
Designers: Modjeski, Masters & Chase, Harrisburg, Pa.
Architect: Paul P. Cret
Contractors: John W. Cowper Co., Inc., Buffalo, N. Y.
Built: 1935
Approximate cost: $964,705
�1
~~3 '-"1
. (
1 1 p
1
Iff • *
'-
;
;
•'-•
.,•'',
MOVING THE OLD CALVERT STREET BRIDGE TO MAKE ROOM FOR THE NEW
The project depicted in the two photographs on this page concerns the lateral displacement of 6 steel deck truss spans, assembled on steel towers, to temporary abutments and
piers. The rigid steel structure, weighing several thousands tons, was moved 80 feet
in 7 hours and 15 minutes. Motive power was furnished by horses, harnessed to capstans,
and transmitted to the bents which rested on rollers and rails. Two hours after completion of the job, all utility lines were hooked up and normal vehicular traffic resumed.
Air view shows the old site, directly in line with Calvert Street, cleared and vacated
and awaiting the start of construction on the new Calvert Street Bridge.
�Or
00
•
CONNECTICUT AVENUE BRIDGE OVER KLINGLE VALLEY—1891
Another of the typical steel deck truss structures erected during the latter part of the
Nineteenth Century. It was constructed for the Rock Creek Railway Company by the
Youngstown Bridge. Co. at a cost of $35,000 and acquired later by the Government of
the District of Columbia.
•
LJ
. .. „. -•*•>. . '.
* -•,. * •• -• .'wst-:;
�CONNECTICUT AVENUE BRIDGE OVER KLINGLE VALLEY—1948
Erection of this structure was carried on in three sections while streetcar and vehicular
traffic flowed over the bridge without interruption.
Structural Data
Location: Connecticut Avenue, N. W., over Klingle Valley
Type: 2-hinge steel arch
Overall length: 497'
Width of roadway: 60'
Width of sidewalks: 10' each
Vertical highway clearance: 50'
Design load: H20
Special design load: 45-ton trailer (gross) in center lanes
Designers: Modjeski, Masters & Chase, Harrisburg, Pa.
Architect: Paul P. Cret
Contractors: W. P. Thurstoji Co., Inc., Richmond, Va.
Built: 1931
Approximate cost: $458,951
�O5
O
LOW-LEVEL FOURTEENTH STREET BRIDGE
A unit in the network of highway facilities surrounding the grade separation
at 14th Street and Maine Avenue, in the north approaches of Highway Bridge.
Structural Data
Location: Fourteenth Street, S. W., over Tidal Basin
Type: steel beams on simple spans
Overall length: 229'
Width of roadway: 40' (divided by 2' median strip)
Width of sidewalk: 12' (west side only)
Design load: H20
Special design load: 45-ton trailer
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division
Contractor: Charles H. Tompkins, Washington, D. C.
Built: 1942
Approximate cost: $260,681
�.
-. •• ' „ . , .
!
:. •, ; .
mm
^ - vv
EARLY MASONRY STRUCTURE CARRYING FOURTEENTH STREET, S. W.,
OVER WASHINGTON CHANNEL
�to
KUTZ BRIDGE
Carrying Independence Avenue over the Tidal Basin, it is designed exclusively
for use bV light passenger, one-way traffic. Trucks are not allowed on this section
of West Potomac Park's highway system.
Federal Aid Project DA-WE 4-B
Structural Data
Location: Independence Avenue, S. W., over Tidal Basin
Type: continuous steel beams
Overall length: 840'
Width of roadway: 34'
Width of sidewalks: 6' each
Vertical river clearance: 7'
Design load: HIS
Special design load: none
Designers: Modjeski & Masters, Harrisburg, Pa.
Architect: Paul P. Cret
Contractors: Alexander & Repass and A. M. Cochran & Son, Des Moines, Iowa.
Built: 1943
Approximate Cost: $466,000
i
—'
:
.
.:,_• ik
' , » -fr-tim
,
I
:
'*
�63
GROUP II
SECONDARY HIGHWAY BRIDGES
�m mm
MILITARY ROAD N. W., OVER ROCK CREEK
This structure is scheduled for reconstruction as a high level crossing
Structural Data
Location: Military Road, N. W., over Rock Creek
Type: steel beams on simple spans
Overall length: 90'
Width of roadway: 38'
Width of sidewalks: 6' each
Design load: H15
Special design load: 25-ton trailer (gross) in center lane
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division
Contractor: L. B. Davidson, Washington, D. C.
Built: 1929
Approximate cost: $18,487
I
••: • > • • . •
. j < •»,;.",
•
i
ix
.
... - . -
..-.
....
... I
•
PIERCE MILL ROAD BRIDGE OVER ROCK CREEK
This bridge is inadequate for present day traffic loads and is scheduled for
replacement.
Structural Data
Location: Pierce Mill Road, N. W., over Rock Creek
Type: steel girders on simple spans
Overall length: 178'
Width of roadway: 29'
Width of sidewalks: none
Design load: 6-ton truck
Special design load: none
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division
Contractor: day labor
Built: 1894
Approximate cost: $5,000
.,., ..
:
...
:---
f
•
�65
'
;
'
.•'•'.-.',•'•
'-;
•
'
. m
BRIDGE AND GRADE SEPARATION STRUCTURES AT KLINGLE ROAD
Federal Aid Project S 44 (1) & (2)
Structural Data.
Location: Klingle Road, N. W., over Rock Creek and Beech Drive
Type: steel beams, umbrella type
Overall length: 400'
Width of roadway: two 2t' roadways divided by 6' median strip
Width of sidewalks: (a) south walk: 8'
(b) north walk: 3'
Vertical highway clearance: 18' (Beech Drive)
Design load: H20
Special design load: none
Designers: Clarke, Rapuano & Halloran, N. Y. City
Contractors: J. D. Hedin Construction Co., Washington, D. C
Built: 1947
Approximate cost: $506,000
'
*.*->
.X
:
-
�;CS S«;i: .'
i
;
r
• -::»?::^ I
. <?i-B
. tj^;'^^^^;^
**;!'"^^,
^^^
™^-w^.
>
-"•««.
V**v
'
:
"4i<.i
:
,^ HI ; .
II ,..;.;
C^r^-- v
v^^ (::^ : ''^^
r'^'f^J--:;'-'" S :*•"-£
VIEW OF KLINGLE ROAD
SHOWING CANTILEVERED CONSTRUCTION
i
i
l
^i":rS«?^l^^feSSl:$a^ '.
tf'.; \i& v &/*W~* 'i$$$' v*" V
^L:
�,
,
'
i i1
|
•
'
! 1
"
n H S ^ -'^ ^ - H
•
^
?r;";,.->/ ;tf^s| ^i'S^'l'
!
'< -
' ^^fefe^-^-'iaa^'v.'.*'
^•*S.%
' •- li:*i-"^-rt*' • i-f
»:.i *-:l!,;"SIii:",if,lt-W;-S i^. ' -S£L..* v*:~.JSSiA'?.'; jJ
'^^.^^"n
'
.^?i
,*,
'5^*~,CI^
LINNEAN HILL BRIDGE
inadequate design and capacity under present-day traffic pressures, this bridge
listed for replacement.
Structural Data
Location: 20th Street, N. W., over Piney Branch Road
Type: trusses, simple spans
Overall length: 300'
Width of roadway: 20'9"
Width of sidewalk: 2'
Vertical highway clearance: 35'
Design load: 6-ton truck
Special design load: none
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division
Contractors: Toledo Bridge Co., Toledo, Ohio
Built: 1900
Approximate cost: $10,566
1 ' -:--
'* m ::;1 'iSlg*; : • • ' :i§
I
;
. :•-
' 1 :.. ' •
I
�00
\
mK,
I'
;
^
; j:
\
;
V i
i i
V'v,
''
'„'-". •' "•
'
: v
~-; "
-''VI,. •
•
' "
',
I
j$L
SIXTEENTH STREET N. W. OVER PINEY BRANCH ROAD
Structural Data
Location: 16th Street, N. W., over Piney Branch Road
Type: single span concrete parabolic arch
Overall length: 272'
Width of roadway: 45'
Width of sidewalks: 8'8" each
Vertical highway clearance: 25'
Besign load: 200 pounds per square foot
Special design load: 35-ton trailer (gross) in center lanes
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division
Contractors: Pennsylvania Bridge Co., and Cranford Paving Co.
Built: 1907 (1st stage), 1910 (2nd stage)
Approximate cost: $135,000
�69
:i I
;
^
i gum - 1 «* MI <
- ">;-: '-.,
:-;
'-,;;.-; j
m 1
|
•• •
•;
The building of the Atlantic Street Bridge
over Oxon Run was the Department of Highway's first experience in the relatively new
field of prestressed concrete construction. It is
a single span structure with a composite concrete deck supported by nine prestressed concrete beams resting on concrete abutments.
Each beam measures approximately 77 feet in
length, three feet in width, and three feet and
three inches in depth
Architecturally, the bridge presents an attractive appearance, featuring non-corrosive
aluminum railings and fixtures. The outside
beams are covered with a granite aggregate
and the wing walls leading away from the span
are faced with stone.
The nine concrete beams were prestressed at
the construction site by the post-tensioning
method, meaning the prestressing cables were
tensioned after the concrete had hardened.
Forms to mold the beams were fabricated on
the casting bed and the prestressing cables
were placed in flexible sheaths running the full
length of the beams. After the concrete was
poured it was allowed to cure to a compressive
strength of 4,000 pounds per square inch.
:
*••
ATLANTIC STREET BRIDGE
Federal Aid Project S 66 (1)
Structural Dat,a
Location: Atlantic Street over Oxon Run
Type: Pre-stressed concrete simple span
Overall length: 112'
Width of roadway: 40'
Width of sidewalks: 6' each
Vertical clearance: 9 4 from stream bed
Design load: H20-S-16
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division
Contractors: Segreti Construction Company
Built: 1954
Approximate cost: S150,(KK}
Subsequently, tensioning was accomplished
with hydraulic jacks, which were clamped to
the cables at the ends of the beams. Each jack
was designed to tension the cables and to force
cone-shaped plugs into anchorage devices.
Pressure was applied to stretch the cables about
five inches, at which point the conical plugs
were forced into the anchoring device, wedging the cables firmly in place. The sheaths were
then pressure grouted to provide additional
anchorage for the cables. Lastly, cranes were
positioned at each end of the bridge and the
42-ton beams were lifted into place on the
abutments.
When a load is applied to a conventional
beam, compression stresses develop at the top
of the beam, while tension stresses develop at
the bottom, inducing a break or crack. In prestressed concrete design, steel cables are
stretched and concrete compressed at the bottom of the beam, prior to the application of a
load, thus employing the compressive strength
of the concrete throughout the beam cross section. Prestressing builds up a compressive
stress at the bottom of the beam counteracting
the tension stress due to loading.
�.
•
'"-'••"•"'•
fif! i | • Hill • 11-'^ H
i |
,_,,.
, .,..
_
.-.-;
^
'
.....ie*.
V
;
~~*>aef
—« i <•»»
'jrfKw* *" -""isT*e?• - *>^^-" " ^r*-*^ -'*
"
r"-*^ „>",.:-£
i^^9iN>? '•'"-• '•
SOUTH CAPITOL STREET BRIDGE OVER OXON
Federal Aid Project SN-FA 1 (B)
Structural Data
Location: South Capitol Street over Oxon Run
Type: steel beams on simple spans (fascia beams encased in
Overall length: 97'
Width of roadway: 44'
Width of sidewalks: 3' each
Design load: H20
Special design load: 45-ton trailer (gross) along curb lanes
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division
Contractors: Cayuga Construction Co., Baltimore Md.
Built: 1942
Approximate cost: $39,000
�71
WHEELER ROAD OVER OXON RUN
Federal Aid Project S 65 (2)
Structural Data
Type: Steel beams on simple span (fascia beams encased in concrete with aluminum
corrugation on outside)
Overall length: 108'
Width of roadway: 44'
Width of sidewalks: 6' each
•
:
• Hi 111
DIVISION AVENUE OVER WATTS BRANCH
Federal Aid Project S 46 (2)
Structural Data
Type: Steel beams on simple span (fascia beams encased in concrete)
Overall length: 70'
Width of roadway: 40'
Width of sidewalks: 5' each
Design load: H20-S-16
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division
Contractor: Alexander and Repass, Des Moines, Iowa
Built: 1951
Approximate cost: $107,000
• •. •; •
Pi -"/••
�72
•
8m 1 .,"..-':•
h ••"
^
.;.
SH
.
' I
';:""^:' '
I |l
.
l
' •"'" S !
-
.
48th PLACE OVER WATTS BRANCH
Structural Data
Type: simple span with steel beams
Overall length: 98'2"
Width of roadway: 30'
Width of sidewalks: 5' each
Vertical clearance: 8'
Design load: H20-S-16
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division
Contractors: M. Cain and Company
Built: 1954
Approximat^ cost: $59,000
�r
73
F
GROUP III
RAILROAD CROSSINGS
�1
NEW YORK AVENUE EXTENDED OVER THE PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD
Federal Aid Project SFG 53 (2)
Recently completed, the New York Avenue, N. E., railroad overpass links central
Washington with the Baltimore-Washington Parkway.
Structural Data
Type: continuous concrete rigid frames
Overall length: 856'
Width of roadway: two 26-foot roadways separated by 4-foot median
Width of sidewalks: 4%' each
Vertical clearance: P.R.K, 27'
Design load: H20-S-16
Built: 1954
Designers:' D. C. Bridge Division
Architects: Mills and Petticord
Contractors: Alexander and Repass, Des Homes, Iowa
Approximate cost: $843,000
V.
*
�~1
"1
NEW YORK AVENUE, N. E., OVER WASHINGTON TERMINAL, CO. YARDS
Structural Data
Type: steel girders on simple spans
Overall length: 570'
Width of roadway: 60'
Width of sidewalks: 13' each
Design load: H16
, ,
Special design load: none
Vertical RR clearance: 20' to 22'
Built: 1908
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division
Contractors: McMullen, McDermott & Hoffman
Approximate cost: $470,175
�T STREET N. E. OVER WASHINGTON TERMINAL CO. YARDS
Structural Data
Type: steel through trusses
Overall length: 875'
Width of roadway: 24'
Width of sidewalks: 6' each
Design load: HIS
Special design load: none
Vertical clearances: (a) roadway: 15'
(b) RR: 17'
Built: 1908
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division & B. & O. RR.
Contractors: American Bridge Co., Pittsburgh, Pa.
Approximate cost: $207,000
MONROE STREET N. E. OVER B. & O. RAILROAD
Structural Data
Type: steel beams (encased in concrete) on simple spans
Overall length: 153%'
Width of roadway: 50'
Width of sidewalks: 6%' each
Vertical RR clearance: 21'
Design load: H20
Special design load: 35-ton trailer (gross) in center of roadway
Built: 1930
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division
Contractors: Frank Carozza & Sons, Baltimore, Md.
Approximate cost: $57,795
�77
^m
-. I
,
;.-••: - - • •
v
I •. •• I
i
H
I .j. ,;,/•-'.=..:-.-
-- ,.,,--, -
.-•-•'""'.-'-
_
3
•••''"',•:'"
SOUTH DAKOTA AVENUE N. E. OVER THE B. & O. RAILROAD
Structural Data
Type: steel girders (encased in concrete) on simple spans
Overall length: 140'
Width of roadway: 27'
Width of sidwalks: 6' each
Vertical RR clearance: 30'
Design load: 12%-ton truck
Special design load: none
Built: 1920
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division
Contractors: Charles H. Tompkins Co., Washington, D. C.
Approximate cost: $39,921
j I '
'
X
'
§" ^'
QUEENS CHAPEL ROAD N. E. OVER B. & O. RAILROAD
Federal Aid Project FAGM 2-A
Structural Data
Type: steel beams on simple spans
Overall length: 240'4"
Width of roadway: 32'
Width of sidewalk: 4'
Vertical RR clearance: 22'
Design load: H20
Special design load: none
Built: 1932
Designers: B. & O. RR
^.
�I
78
81 !
11 _=_™. .
-• -
'
BENNING ROAD N. E. OVER KENILWORTH AVENUE AND THE
PENNSYLVANIA AND B. & O. RAILROADS
Structural Data
Type: steel girders on simple spans
Overall length: 1370'
Width of roadway: 24' on each section
Width of sidewalk: 6' (south section only)
Vertical clearances: (a) Kenilworth Avenue: 14'6"
(b) PRR: 24'
(c) B&O: 22'
Design load: H20 (westbound)— 12a/£-ton truck (eastbound)
Special design load: 45-ton trailer (gross) in center lane (westbound
only)
Built: (a) south section: 1919
(b) north section: 1937
Designers: D. G. Bridge Division
Contractors: (a) south section: Snare & Triest Co., New York City
(b) north section: Bahen & Wright Inc., Washington, D.C.
Approximate cost: (a) south section: $178,300
(b) north section: $171,000
�M .T
TAYLOR STREET N. E. OVER BROOKLAND AVENUE AND
THE B. & O. RAILROAD
Federal Aid Project F.A.6!.M, 66-A
Structural Data
Type: steel girders (encased in concrete) with cantilever spans
Overall length: 672'
Width of roadway: two 24-foot lanes
Width of sidewalks: 5' each
Vertical clearances: (a) Brookland Ave: 19'
(b) RR: 22'
Design load: H20
Special design load: 45-ton trailer (gross) in center of roadway
Built: 1940
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division
Contractor: Harry R. Dickens, Philadelphia, Pa.
Approximate cost: $210,701
'
CO
�oo
o
MICHIGAN AVENUE N. E. OVER B. & O. RAILROAD
Federal Aid Project WPGM 64-A
Structural Data
Type: steel beams on simple spans
Overall length: 1161'
Width of roadway: 40'
Width of sidewalks: 6' each
Vertical clearances: (a) RR: 22'
(b) vehicles: 18'
Design load: H20
Special design load: 45-ton trailer (gross) in curb lanes
Built: 1937
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division
Contractors: James Baird Co., Inc., Washington, D. C.
Approximate cost: $264,994
.
�NEW HAMPSHIRE AVENUE N. E. OVER B.
O. RAILROAD
Federal Aid Project NRS 3-A
Structural Data
Type: steel girders on simple spans
Overall length: 183'1"
Width of roadway: BO'
Width of sidewalks: 6' each
Vertical RR clearance: 21'5"
Design load: H20
Special design load: 45-ton trailer (gross) in curb lanes
Built: 1934
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division
Contractors: Arthur McMullen Co., Washington, D. C.
Approximate cost: $77,534
.
'""W*
il Hl
l
il
,.i-°'-.-•*,.. .
•• -
oo
�•"-sus.
-.
. "i'-'
00
m
to
<
FRANKLIN STREET N. E. OVER B. & O. RAILROAD
Structural Data
Type: through steel truss
Overall length: 800'
Width of roadway: 40'
Width of sidewalks: 6' each
Vertical RR clearance: 22'
Design load: H20
Special design load: 45-ton trailer (gross) in center lanes
Built: 1937
Designers: D. (J. Bridge Division
Contractors: Diamond Construction Co., Washington, D. C.
Approximate cost: $145,205
�OTNTH STREET N. E. OVER WASHINGTON TER MI NAL CO TRACKS
AND NEW YORK AVENUE
Structural Data
Type: steel girders on simple spans
Overall length: 732'7"
Width of roadways: (a) on structure: 44'
(b) on ramps: 24'
Width of sidewalks: <<<>> £ s^urtlTVLh side
Vertical clearances: $ &P& °gT «''' °n each side
Design load: H20 <W N' Y' AvenU6: 16'
Special design load: none
Built: 1941
Designers: B&O and PER Railroads
n
° r C t i 0 n C°" ^^phia. P a .
�84
RHODE ISLAND AVENUE N. E. UNDER B. & O. RAILROAD
Structural Data
Type: steel girders on steel columns
Overall length: 90'
Width of roadway: 52'
Width of sidewaljjs: 6'5" each
Vertical highway clearance: 13'10"
Built: 1906
Designers: Baltimore Division, B&O RR
BLADENSBURG ROAD N. E. UNDER PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD
Federal Aid Project FAGM 65-A
Structural Data
Type: through steel plate girder
Overall length: 110'
Width of roadway: 60'
Width of sidewalks: 5' each
Vertical highway clearance: 15'
Built: 1938
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division
Contractors: Diamond Construction Co., Washington, D. C.
Approximate cost: $76,384
�LJ
85
"
FLORIDA AVENUE N. E. UNDER WASHINGTON
TERMINAL COMPANY TRACKS
Structural Data
Type: steel girder on steel columns
Overall length: 87'
Width of roadways: 2 lanes of 19' each, 1 lane of 22'
Width of sidewalks: 7' each
Vertical highway clearance: 14'1"
Built: 1907
Contractors: McMullen, McDermott & Hoffman
Approximate cost: $78,039
;-
K STREET N. E. UNDER WASHINGTON TERMINAL CO. TRACKS
Structural Data
Type: steel girder on steel columns
Overall length: 83'3"
Width of roadway: 2 lanes of 14' each, 1 lane of 23'
Width of sidewalks: 12'6"
Vertical highway clearance: 14'2"
Built: 1907
Contractors: Youngstown Construction Co.
Approximate cost: $243,187
�EASTERN AVENUE N. E. UNDER PENNSYLVANIA AND
B. & (X RAILROAD
Federal Aid Project WPGM 63-A
Structural Data
Type: (twin bridges) steel girder encased in concrete
Overall length: 396'
Width of roadway: 40'
Width of sidewalks: 8' each
Vertical highway clearance: 14'4"
Built: 1936
*
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division
Contractors: Diamond Construction Co., Washington, D. C.
Approximate cost: $134,251
ri
11
-__
J I I
..:.„.,.,
I
VAN BUREN STREET, N. W. UNDER B. & O. RAILROAD
A grade separation typical of several such structures along right-of-way
of the B&O's Metropolitan Branch.
Structural Data
Type: steel girder encased in concrete on steel columns
Overall length: 60'
Width of roadway: 30'
Width of sidewalks: 8' each
Vertical highway clearance: 14'9"
Built: 1926
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division and B & O RR.
Contractors: Potomac Construction Co., Washington, D. C.
Approximate cost: $76,000
�r
87
MONTANA AVENUE N. E. UNDER B. & O. RAILROAD
Structural Data
Type: steel girder encased in concrete
Overall length: 74'8"
Width of roadway: 38'
Width of sidewalks: 6' each
Vertical highway clearance: 15'4"
Built: 1936
Designers: Baltimore Division, B&O RR.
.
•;
,.- , '~'-'"* P
> m
: i ,»:;.\
•
' ...-,
:
B j
•-• •
1
RIGGS ROAD N. E. UNDER B. & O. RAILROAD
Federal Aid Project FAGH 52(1)
Structural Data
Type: steel beam encased in concrete
Overall length: 64'
Width of roadway: two 22-foot lanes
Width of sidewalks: 6' each
Vertical highway clearance: 14'
Built: 1947
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division and B & O RR.
Contractors: Alexander & Repass, Des Moines, Iowa
Approximate cost: $175,000
�".-
DELAWARE AVENUE AT FIRST STREET, S. W., UNDER
THE PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD
Structural Data
Type: steel girders on steel columns
Overall length: 254'
Width of roadways: (a) First Street: 32'
(b) Delaware Ave.: 40'
Width of sidewalks: (a) First Street: 12' each
(b) Delaware Ave.: 15' each
Vertical highway clearances: (a) First Street: 16'1"
(b) Delaware Ave.: 15'9"
Built: 1906
Designers: PB&W RR (Md. Division)
i im
�MAINE AVENUE S. W. UNDER PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD BRIDGE
SERVING ALL RAILROADS TO THE SOUTH
Federal Aid Project FAGM 24-B (1)
Structural Data
Type: through plate girder
Overall length: 102'4"
Width of roadway: two 30-foot lanes
Width of sidewalks: south side 6'
Vertical highway clearance: 13'7"
Built: 1942
Designers:) D. C. Bridge Division and B & O RR.
Contractors: Leo Butler Co., Washington, D. C.
Approximate cost: $204,233
oo
Uo
�90
I
EAST CAPITOL STREET RAILROAD UNDERPASS
Federal Aid Project U-UG 42 (4)
Located just east of the East Capitol Street Bridge
over the Anacostia River, this nearly-completed segment of East Capitol Street underpasses 19 tracks of
the Pennsylvania and Baltimore & Ohio Railroads.
Structural Data
Type: continuous composite steel and concrete
Overall length: 525'
Width of roadway: two 25-foot roadways
Width of sidewalks: two 3-fpot sidewalks
Vertical clearance;" 14'6" minimum
Design load: Cooper E-72
Designers: J. E. Greiner Company, Baltimore, Md.
Architects: James R. Edmunds Jr., Harbeson, Hough,
Livingston, and Larsen
Contractors: A. S. Wikstrom, Inc., Skaneateles, N. Y.
Built: 1955
Approximate cost: $1,940,000
KANSAS AVENUE UNDER THE B&O RAILROAD
Federal Aid Project SG 33 (1)
Structural Data
Type: concrete encased steel beams
Overall length: 110'6"
Width of roadway: two 22' lanes
Width of sidewalks: 6' each
Vertical highway clearance: 14'
Built: 1952
Designers: B & O Railroad
Contractors: Whittington and Brown, Washington, D. C.
Approximate cost: $178,000
�91
GROUP IV
GRADE SEPARATIONS
�GRADE SEPARATION AT SCOTT CIRCLE—1BP6
Federal Aid Project FA 29-A
Structural Data,
Location: Sixteenth Street, N. W., under Massachusetts Avenue
Type: concrete closed frame
Overall length: 763'
Width of roadways: two 21-foot lanes separated by a center bearing wall
Width of sidewalks: 2'3" each
Vertical highway clearance: 14'
Design load: H20
Special design load: 45-ton trailer (gross) anywhere on spans
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division
Contractor: Cayuga Construction Co., New York City
Built: 1941
Approximate cost: $319,189
il ii § 111 «£,,;....
l i
�GRADE SEPARATION AT THOMAS CIRCLE—1948
Structural Data
Location: Massachusetts Avenue, N. W., under Fourteenth Street
Type: concrete closed frame
Overall length: 1008'
Width of roadways: two 21-foot lanes separated by center bearing wall
Width of sidewalks: 2'4" each
Vertical highway clearance: 13'6"
Design load: H20
Special design load: 40-ton electric railway car
Designers: Parsons, Klapp, Brinckerhoff & Douglas, New York City
Architects: McKim, Mead & White, New York City
Contractors: Stewart & Co., New York City
Built: 1939
Approximate cost: $484,800
�GRADE SEPARATION AT TWENTY-THIRD STREET AND
VIRGINIA AVENUE, N. W.—1948
Federal Aid Project AW-FA 38-A (1)
Structural Data
Location: Virginia Avenue, N. W., under Twenty-Third Street
Type: concrete girders on simple spans
Overall length: 673'
Width of roadways: (a) upper level: 56'
(b) lower level: two 21-foot lanes separated by center
bearing wall
Width of sidewalks: (a) on 23rd Street: 8' each
(b) on Virginia Avenue: 2'3" each
Vertical highway clearance: 14'
Design load: H20
Special design load: 45-ton trailer
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division
Contractors: Colmar Construction Co., Inc., New York City
Built: 1942
Approximate cost: $142,326
�n•
.;
; ;;.
•'.-:.-. -:•;.?
""*"
^
""•'•-' : ;. . - .,
',.
' ' ' "••-•' |
I
:
•IP
I
THE INTERSECTION AT FOURTEENTH STREET AND MAINE
AVENUE S. W. BEFORE IMPROVEMENT
en
�to
Oi
GRADE SEPARATION STRUCTURES AND CHANNELIZATION AT
FOURTEENTH STREET AND MAINE AVENUE, S. W.
Federal Aid Project DA-WR 1-A
Structural Data
Location: Fourteenth Street, S. W., over Maine Avenue
Type: continuous concrete girders anu concrete rigid irames
Overall length: 1573'
Width of roadway: 68' divided by 4' median strip
Width of connecting ramp: 24'
Width of sidewalks: none
Vertical highway clearance: 14'
Design load: H20
Special design load: 45-ton trailer (gross) in curb lanes
Architect: Paul P. Cret
Designers: Modjeski & Masters, Harrisburg, Pa.
Contractors: National Excavation & Structures Corp., New York City
Approximate cost: $1,302,341
�INDEPENDENCE AVENUE, S. W. OVER PARK DRIVE
Federal Aid Project DA-WR 4-B
Structural Data
Location: Independence Avenue, S. W., at Fifteenth Street
Type: concrete rigid frames
Overall length: 173'
Width of roadway: 34'
Width of sidewalk: 6' each
Vertical highway clearance: 12'6"
Design load: HIS (commercial traffic excluded)
Special design load: none
Designers: Modjeski & Masters, Harrisburg, Pa.
Architect: Paul P. Cret
Contractors: Alexander & Repass, Des Moines, Iowa
Built:. 1943
Approximate cost: contracted jointly with Independence Avenue Bridge over'
Tidal Basin for $824,700
'
rJJV-*,
�'- :
•• i
GRADE SEPARATION AT PORTLAND AND SOUTH CAPITOL STREETS
Federal Aid Project SN-AW-FA 31-B
Vertical grade separation at the entrance to Boiling Field, the construction of
which was recommended by the War Department to facilitate the movement of
military vehicles in and out of this important installation.
Structural Data
Location: Portland Street, S. E. over South Capitol Street
Type: steel "beams on simple spans (encased in concrete)
Overall length: 946'
Width of roadways: (a) upper level: 42'
(b) lower level: 46'
Width of sidewalks: (a) upper level: 5' each
(b) lower level: 3' each
Vertical highway clearance: 14'
Design load: H20
Special design load: 46-ton trailer (gross) in curb lanes
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division
Contractors: Cleverock, Inc., New York City
Built: 1943
Approximate cost: $186,700
.-«•
"V
�THE K STREET DUAL STRUCTURE OVER ROCK CREEK AND
POTOMAC PARKWAY
Structural Data
Location: K Street over Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway
Type: concrete rigid frames
Overall length: 497'
Width of roadways: (a) on structure: 47'
(b) at grade: 2 at 22'
Width of sidewalks: (a) on structure: 3' each
(b) at grade: 3' each
, ,
Vertical highway clearance: 12'6"
Design load: H20
Special design load: 45-ton trailer (gross) in center lanes
Designers: Harrington & Cortelyou, St. Louis, Mo.
Architect: Louis Justement, Washington, D. C.
Contractor: Vincent Schiavi, Baltimore, Md.
BuHt: 1940
Approximate cost: $239,800
- ::.
�B I
"'""
'
'•,'• *x»—^"^
A view of Dupont Circle before reconstruction showing streetcars moving on
parallel lines while proceeding in opposite directions on a one-way facility.
.
Streetcar lines are now located in tubes below the Circle. Subway loading
platforms are connected to the surface by stairwells.
. -*-a»
�. • •
" !
I 1W
!
,
DUPONT CIRCLE
Federal Aid Project F-SF 40 (4)
View tfrom the south showing the south portals ot the vehicular and transit
tubes under Dupont Circle in line with Connecticut Avenue.
Structural Data
Location: Connecticut Avenue, N. W., at Massachusetts Avenue
Type: concrete rigid frame and steel beams (encased in concrete) continuous
over 2 spans. Railway tunnel and subway station of steel bents encased
in concrete.
Overall length: 2562' (ramp-to-ramp)
Width of depressed roadway: 22'
Width of sidewalks: 3' each
Vertical clearances: (a) vehicular tunnel: 14'
(b) railway tunnel: 13'6"
Design load: H20
Special design load: 45-ton trailer (gross) anywhere on spans
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division
Contractors: John McShain, Inc., Philadelphia, Pa.
Date of completion: 1950 (estimated)
Approximate cost: $3,991.800
' '••••• .
:
.
�102
mU:-
>•-••-"
:-; • - - • • ' "'•
•
.-.;. „ -- . ..^U* 0
A view of the north portals connecting to the tubes under Dupont Circle
as seen looking southward along Connecticut Avenue.
in
-
�103
Btos
I:
'
WHITEHUEST FREEWAY—1955
Federal Aid Project FI-UI 34 (2)
Structural Data
Location: K Street, N. W., from 27th to 36th Streets
Type: steel beam and girder on steel columns
Overall length: 4190'
Width of Eoadways: two 22'9" roadways
Vertical clearance: highway: (a) on freeway 14'3"
(b) under freeway 22'
Design Load: H20
Special design load: none
Designers: Harrington and Cortelyou, St. Louis, Mo,
Contractor: Alexander and Repass, Des Moines, Iowa
Built: 1949
Approximate cost: $3,475,000
!
�BENNING EOAD AND KENILWORTH AVENUE INTERCHANGE
Federal Aid Project UI 45 (2)
Structural Data
Type: steel beams, simple spans
Overall length: 855'
Width of roadway: (a) depressed 33'
(b) south bridge 22'
(c) north bridge 2-16' roadways
Width of sidewalks: (a) depressed 3' and 2'
(b) south bridge varies
(c) north bridge varies
Vertical highway clearances: 14'6"
Design load: H20-S-16
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division
Contractors: J. D. Hedin Construction Company, Washington, D. C.
Date of completion: 1965
Approximate cost: $760,000
saw®. •••-.'•-.I
�r
106'
jiff
"IHr
NEW YORK AVENUE OVER SOUTH DAKOTA AVENUE
•&<
Federal Aid Project SF 53 (3)
Lying adjacent to the New York Avenue, N. E., overpass of the Pennsylvania Railroad,
this grade separation was constructed in conjunction with the overpass to serve as a
link between central Washington and the Baltimore-Washington Parkway.
Structural Data
Type: concrete rigid frame
Overall length: 230'
Width of roadway: two 26-foot roadways separated by 4-foot median
Width of sidewalks: 4%' each
Vertical clearance: South Dakota Avenue 14'
Design load: H20-S16-44
Built: 19 54
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division
Architects: Mills and Petticord
Contractors: Alexander and Repass, Des Moines, Iowa
Approximate cost: $182,000
._._
• .
KENILWORTH AVENUE OVER EAST CAPITOL STREET
Federal Aid Project U 42 (7)
Structural Data
Location: East Capitol Street and Kenilworth Avenue
Type: continuous stringer
Overall length: 215'
Width of roadway: varies from 44' to 50'
Width of sidewalks: 3' each
Vertical clearance: 14'6"
Design load: H20-S16
Designers: J. E. Greiner Company
Architects: James R. Edmunds Jr., Harbeson, Hough, Livingston, and Larsen
Contractors: Leo Butler Company
Built: 1955
Approximate cost: $1,100,000
• .
;»-'.-.
�I
f
107
GROUP V
CULVERTS
CULVERT AT SOUTHERN AVENUE AND WATTS BRANCH
Federal Aid Project SF 42 (12)
Structural Data
Location: on Southern Avenue near 63rd Street, N. E.
Type: box culvert
Overall length: 76'
Width of roadway: 48' plus 4' median
Width of sidewalks: 10' each
•
Vertical clearance: 10'
Design load: H-20
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division
Contractors: J. O. and C. M. Stuart
Built: 1953
Approximate cost: $57,600
!
:.
-
. , ,,,
,
,,»_
,
^;
f
J
' • • „ . . ' • :
^
^ ,
,
,
-
!
I! 11 i
;'
•
msdfr-.
CULVERT AT MINNESOTA AVENUE AND FORT DUPONT PARK
Structural Data
Type: box culvert
Overall length: 56'
Width of roadway: 40'
Width of sidewalks: one 12' the other 10'
Vertical clearance: 6'
Design load: H20-S-16
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division
Contractors: Vinton Construction Company
Built: 1953
Approximate cost: $26,600
�'.;,.;
. i i
•
raj
.
.-•
••• <.
CULVERT AT SOUTHERN AVENUE AND EAST CAPITOL STREET
Federal Aid Project SF 42 (12)
Structural Data
Location: on East Capitol Street and Southern Avenue
Type: box culvert
Overall length of barrel: 200'
Width of roadway: 130' diagonally across intersection
Vertical clearance: 7'
Design load: H-20
Designers: D. C. Bridge Division
Contractors: J. O. and C. M. Stuart
•
Built: 1953
Approximate cost: $65,600
AT EAST BEACH DRIVE IN ROCK CREEK PARK
Type: box culvert
Overall length: 60'
Width of roadway: 35'
Width of sidewalk: 9' shoulders
Vertical clearance: 4'2"
Design load: H20
Designers: D. C. Highway Department
Contractors: M. Cain, Inc.
Built: 1955
Approximate cost: $23,600
••'" -
�I
1
]
)
1
APPENDIX
TABLE OF LOADS AND CLEARANCES
Note: The following is a list of highway bridges, compiled by geographical sections
of the District of Columbia, over which carriers bearing loads in excess of Posted
Limit are allowed to cross under certain conditions by SPECIAL PERMIT only. The
loads indicated below must be mobile on multiple-wheeled trailers with a wheel-base
of 26 feet or more, and include the weight of the vehicle.
Name and Location of Bridge
Nominal & Posted
Load Limit
(No Permit Required)
In Tons
Maximum Load
Limit
(Permit Required)
In Tons
Vertical
Clearance
(Highway)
In Feet
Condition
Of Passage
Maximum Load
PLATFORM TRAILERS
NORTHEAST
Kenilworth Ave. over Watts Branch
25
Benning Rd. over Anacostia River
25
New Hampshire Ave. over B&O RR
25
Taylor St. over B&O RR and Brookland Ave.
25
Monroe St. over B&O RR
25
T Street over Washington Terminal Yards
15
Eastern Ave. under B&O RR
Minnesota Ave. over W,atts Branch
25
Michigan Ave. over B&O RR and Puerto Rico Ave.
25
Franklin St. over B&O RR
25
Deane Ave. over Watts Branch
25
Grant St. over Watts Branch
25
Benning Viaduct over B&O, PRR and Kenilworth Ave.
25
Benning Viaduct over B&O, PRR and Kenilworth Ave.
15
Gault St. over Watts Branch
15
New York Avenue over Washington Terminal Yards
20
Montana Ave. under B&O RR
Montana Ave. under PRR
Queens Chapel Rd. over B&O RR
25
Bladensburg Rd. under PRR
Ninth St. over Washington Terminal Yards & N.Y. Ave. 25
South Dakota Ave. over B&O RR
12.5
K Street under Washington Terminal Tracks
Florida Ave. under Washington Terminal Tracks
Rhode Island Ave. under Washington Terminal Tracks
Riggs Rd. under B&O RR
Eastern Ave. over B&O RR
25
New York Avenue over PRR
25
45
45
45
45
45
Westbound
Eastbound
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
30
25
25
45
45
45
New York Avenue over South Dakota Ave.
25
45
East Capitol St. over Anacostia River
25
45
Minnesota Ave. over East Capitol St.
25
45
35th Street over East Capitol St.
25
45
West approaches to East Capitol St. bridge
25
45
Kenilworth Ave. over Deane Ave.
25
Eastern Ave. over Kenilworth Ave.
45
25
45
Benning Road over Kenilworth Ave. depressed roadway 25
Division Ave. between Eads St. & Foote St.
25
45
Kansas Avenue under B&O RR
Other bridges in the northeast section not listed above carry vehicles up to 15 tons gross.
12'
19'
15'
14'4"
18'
19'
14'
15'4"
15'
15'
16'
14'2"
14'1"
14'9
14'
Along curb
Along curb
Along curb
Along center line
On inner streetcar rails
No load in excess of posted limit
See note below
In center of roadway
Along curb
In center of roadway
Along curb
In center of roadway
In center of roadway
No load in excess of posted limit
Along curb
In center of roadway
See note below
See note below
Along curb
See note below
Along curb
No load in excess of posted limit
See note below
See note below
See note below
See note below
In center of roadway
14' clearance
over service
roadway
Along curb
Along curb
14'
Along curb
Along curb
14'6"
Along curb
14'6"
Along curb
12'
Along curb
15'
14'6"
Along curb
Along curb
14'6"
In lane to right of center line
14'
o
CD
�SOUTHEAST
Alabama Ave. over Military Highway
Nichols Ave. over Military Highway
Portland St. over So. Capitol St.
Pennsylvania Ave. over Anacostia River (Sousa)
Eleventh St. over Anacostia River
25
25
25
25
25
45
45
45
45
25
Wheeler Rd. over Oxon Run
25
Atlantic St. over Oxon Run
25
So. Capitol St. over Oxon Run
25
So. Capitol St. at Southern Avenue
25
Nichols Ave. over B&O RR
25
New Jersey Ave. over PRR and Virginia Ave.
15
South Capitol St. over Anacostia
25
Other bridges in the southeast section not listed above carry vehicles up to
45
45
45
45
35
—
35
15 tons gross.
SOUTHWEST
20
Independence Ave. over Park Drive
—
Fourteenth St. over Potomac River (South bound)
25
Fourteenth St. over Potomac River (North bound)
25
Fourteenth St. over Maine Ave. and Hains Point Exit
25
Fourteenth St. Lower level over Tidal Basin
15
Maine Ave. under PRR
—•
Eleventh St. over PRR
15
Delaware Ave. under PRR
—•
First St. under PRR
—•
Other bridges in the* southwest section not listed above carry vehicles up to
14'9"
13'9"
14'
17'
14'6"
14'
12'6"
35 (on bridge) 17'9"
45
45
14'
45
12'
13'7"
45
15'9"
In center of roadway
In center of roadway
Along curb
Along curb
In center of roadway. Notify
watchman before entering
Along curb
In center of roadway
Along curb
Along curb
In center of roadway
No load in excess of posted limit
No truck traffic
In center of roadway
In center of roadway
Along curb
Along curb
See note below
In center of roadway
See note below
See note below
15 tons gross.
NORTHWEST
18'
Porter St. over Klingle Rd. and Beach Dr
25
35
Along curb
See note below
15'
Piney Branch Rd. under B&O RR
—
See note below
14'9"
Van Buren St. under B&O RR
—
See note below
14'4"
Cedar St. under B&O RR
—
See note below
15'
Aspen St. under B&O RR
—
25
In center of roadway
Chain Bridge over Potomac River
25
45
In center of roadway
Wisconsin Ave. over C&O Canal
25
45
40'
On inner streetcar rails
Key Bridge over Potomac River
25
45
14'
Along curb
Twenty-third St. over Virginia Ave.
25
35
In center of roadway
Military Rd. over Rock Creek
25
In center of roadway
35
25'
Sixteenth St. over Piney Branch Rd.
25
In center of roadway
45
50'
Connecticut Ave. over Klingle Rd.
25
50'
In center of roadway
45
Connecticut Ave. over Rock Creek (Taft Bridge)
25
60'
In center of roadway
45
Calvert St. over Rock Creek
25
45
16'
In center of roadway
P St. over Rock Crek
25
15'
In center of roadway
35
M St. over Rock Creek
25
12'6"
In center of roadway
45
K St. over Rock Creek
25
40'
Along curb
35
Massachusetts Ave. over Rock Creek
25
13'6"
45
On inner streetcar rails
Pennsylvania Ave. over Rock Creek
25
See note below
13'6"
45
Thomas Circle Underpass (Mass. Ave. under 14th St.)
—
See note below
14'
45
Scott Circle Underpass (16th St. under Mass. Ave.)
No load in excess of posted limit
Pierce Mill Rd. over Rock Creek
3
35'
No load in excess of posted limit
Twentieth St. over Piney Branch Road
3
20'
Along curb
45
Sixteenth St. over Military Rd.
25
22'
Whitehurst Freeway
25
13'
Dupont Circle
25
Other bridges in the northwest section not listed above carry vehicles up to 15 tons gross.
Note: Limits for loads moving on pavements at grade are set forth in Section 155, Article XVII, entitled 'Size, Weight, Loading, Inspection
and Construction", of the Traffic and Motor Vehicle Regulations for the District of Columbia appended hereto.
)
I
)
�AN EXTRACT
of
THE MOTOR VEHICLE AND TRAFFIC CODE
for
THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
As Amended May 1, 1953
ARTICLE XVII
Size, Weight, Loading, Inspection, and Construction
A. It shall be unlawful for any person to drive or move
or for the owner to cause or knowingly permit to be
driven or moved on any highway or street any
vehicle or vehicles of a size or weight exceeding the
limitations stated in this Article or otherwise in
violation of this Article.
B. The provisions of this Article governing size,
weight, and load shall not apply to fire apparatus,
or to a vehicle operated under the terms of a special
permit issued as herein provided.
SECTION 153
Width, Height and Length
(a) Width—The total outside width of any vehicle or
the load thereon shall not exceed 6 feet, except that
vehicles equipped with pneumatic tires and registered
in the District of Columbia before January 1, 1932,
may have an over-all width at rear tires not exceeding
106 inches, but in no case shall the width of body,
inclusive of load, exceed 8 feet.
No passenger-type vehicle shall be operated on any
street or highway with any load carried therein extending beyond the line of the fenders on the left side of
such vehicle nor extending more than 6 inches beyond
the line of the fenders on the right side thereof.
(b) Height—No vehicle, including any load thereon,
shall exceed a height of 12 feet, 6 inches.
(c) Length—No single vehicle, other than a streetcar, including any load thereon, shall have an over-all
length, inclusive of front and rear bumpers, in excess
of 35 feet.
No combination of vehicles coupled together shall consist of more than two units and no such combination of
vehicles shall exceed a total length of 50 feet, subject
to the following exceptions: said length limitation shall
not apply to vehicles operated in the daytime when
transporting poles, pipe, machinery, or other objects
of a structural nature which cannot readily be dismembered, nor to such vehicles transporting such
objects operated at nighttime by a public utility when
required for emergency repair of public service facilities or properties or when operated under special permit as provided in Section 155 (e), but in respect to
such night transportation, every such vehicle and the
load thereon shall be equipped with a sufficient number
of clearance lamps on both sides and marker lamps
upon the extreme ends of any projecting load to clearly
mark the dimensions of such load.
The load upon any vehicle operated alone or the load
upon the front vehicle of a combination of vehicles
shall not extend more than 3 feet beyond the foremost
part of the vehicle, and the load upon any vehicle operated alone or the load upon the rear vehicle of a combination of vehicles shall not extend more than 6 feet
beyond the rear of the bed or body of such vehicle.
(d) Spilling load—No vehicle other than a streetcar
shall be driven or moved on any street or highway
unless such vehicle is so constructed or loaded as to
prevent any of its load from dropping, sifting, leaking,
or otherwise escaping therefrom, except that sand may
be dropped for the purpose of securing traction, or
water or other substance may be sprinkled on the roadway in cleaning or maintaining such roadway.
(e) Unnecessary noise—No vehicle shall be operated
or used in such a manner as to cause unnecessary or
disturbing noise.
(f) Loads to be firmly attached—No person shall
operate on any highway any vehicles with any load
unless said load and any covering thereon is securely
fastened so as to prevent said covering or load from
becoming loose, detached, or in any manner a hazard
to other users of the highway.
(g) Tailgates—No vehicle shall be parked unattended
nor left standing upon the streets of the District, except while actually being loaded or unloaded, unless the
tailgate shall be closed; Provided, however, that this
section shall not apply to vehicles so loaded that a
portion of the load extends upon and is supported by
the tailgate.
SECTION 154
Towing
(a) When one vehicle is towing another the drawbar or other connection shall be of sufficient strength to
pull all weight towed thereby and said drawbar or
other connection shall not exceed 15 feet from one
vehicle to the other except the connection between any
two vehicles transporting poles, pipes, machinery, or
other objects of structural nature which cannot readily
be dismembered; provided, however, that where chain,
rope or cable is used as the connection between the front
and rear vehicle, with no rigid coupling, there shall
be a driver for 'both the front and rear cars, except
where the rear car is being towed by a crane or where
the rear car is lashed to the front car.
(b) When one vehicle is towing another and the
connection consists of a chain, rope, or cable, there
shall be displayed upon such connection a white flag or
cloth not less than 12 inches square.
(c) Trailer Couplings and Safety Chains:
1. Trailer and semitrailer hitches and couplings shall be of such design and strength
values as to conform to the requirements of
these regulations.
2. Safety chains shall be used on all trailers
and trailer combinations when operated on
the streets and highways of the District, in
addition to the hitch bar, and connected to
the tractor vehicle and the drawn vehicle
and of sufficient strength to hold the trailer
on a hill if the hitching bar becomes disconnected.
�SECTION 155
Wheel and Axle Loads—Gross Weights
(a) Permissible Loads—The gross weight imposed
upon the highway exerted through the wheels on any
one axle of a vehicle shall not exceed 22,000 pounds;
provided, that when the wheels attached to said axle
are equipped with solid rubber or cushion tires, the
gross weight on any one axle shall not exceed 16,000
pounds.
(b) For the purposes of this section, an axle load
shall be defined as the total load imposed upon the highway through all wheels whose centers are included
within two parallel transverse vertical planes not more
than 40 inches apart.
(c) No group of axles shall carry a load in pounds in
excess of the value given in the following table corresponding to the distance in feet between the extreme
axles of the group, measured longitudinally to the
nearest foot; provided, however, that the following table
is not applicable to bridges. (See Article XVIII.)
Distance in
feet between
the extremes
of any group
of axles
Maximum load
in pounds
carried on
any group
of axles
Distance in
feet between
the extremes
of any group
of axles
Maximum load
in pounds
carried on
any group
of axles
48,990
49,720
50,450
6
51,180
7
51,920
8
52,650
9
53,490
10
54,330
11
55,160
12
55,980
13
56,800
14
57,610
15
58,420
16
59,220
17
60,010
18
60,800
19
61,590
20
62,360
21
63,130
22
63,890
23
64,650
24
65,400
(d) Inspection—Any police officer having reason to
believe that the weight of a vehicle and load is unlawful
is authorized to require the driver to stop and submit
to a weighing of the same by means of either portable
or stationary scales and may require that such vehicle
be driven to the nearest public scales.
Whenever an officer upon weighing a vehicle and
load, as above provided, determines that the weight is
unlawful, such officer may require the driver to stop
the vehicle in a suitable place and remain standing
until such portion of the load is removed as may be
necessary to reduce the gross weight of such vehicle
to such limit as permitted under these regulations. All
material so unloaded shall be cared for by the owner or
operator of such vehicle at the risk of such owner or
operator.
4
5
38,000
38,000
38,000
38,000
38,000
38,000
38,000
38,730
39,460
40,200
40,930
41,666
42,390
43,130
43,860
44,590
45,320
46,060
46,790
47,520
48,250
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
(e) Special Permits—The Director of Highways may
in his discretion, upon application in writing and good
cause being shown therefor, issue a special permit in
writing authorizing the applicant to operate or move
a vehicle or combination of vehicles of a size or weight
of vehicle or load exceeding the maximum specified in
these regulations, or otherwise not in conformity with
the provisions of these regulations. The application for
any such permit shall specifically describe the vehicle or
vehicles and load to be operated or moved and the particular streets or highways for which permit to operate
is requested, and whether such permit is requested for
a single trip or for continuous operation.
(f) Special permits issued under the provisions of
paragraph (e) of this section by the Director of Highways, may establish seasonal or other limitations within
which the vehicles described may be operated on the
streets or highways indicated, or otherwise to limit or
prescribe conditions of operation of such vehicle or
vehicles, when necessary to assure against undue damage to the road foundations, surfaces, or other structures, and may require such undertaking or other security as may be deemed necessary to compensate for any
injury to any roadway or road structure. Every such
permit shall be carried in the vehicle or combination of
vehicles to which it refers and .shall be open to inspection by any police officer a"nd no'person shall violate any
of the terms or conditions of such special permit.
(g) Damage to streets or highways, or highway
structures—Any person driving any vehicle, object or
contrivance upon any street or highway or highway
structure shall be liable for all damage which said
street or highway or structure may sustain as a result
of any illegal operation, driving, or moving of such
vehicle, object, or contrivance, or as a result of operating, driving, or moving any vehicle, object, or contrivance weighing in excess of the maximum weight in
these regulations but authorized by a special permit
issued as provided in this article. Whenever such driver
is not the owner of such vehicle, object, or contrivance,
but is so operating, driving, or moving the same with
the express or implied permission of said owner, then
said owner and driver shall be jointly and severally
liable for any such damage
ARTICLE XVIII
Bridge Regulations
SECTION 156
Vehicles Crossing Bridges
(a) No vehicle, the weight of which, including its
load, exceeds the load limit for which any bridge is
posted, shall cross the 'bridge so posted without written
permission of the Director of Highways.
Self-propelled motor cranes may be granted annual
permits listing the bridges over which such vehicles
may not pass. Such permits shall be carried in the
vehicle at all times. The crossing of any bridge listed
on the permit for such vehicle shall be sufficient cause
for revocation of said permit.
(b) No street railway car, the weight of which, including its load, exceeds 64,000 pounds, shall move on
or across any bridge. No street railway car on any
bridge shall pass two or more cars coupled together
either of which latter cars, with its load, weighs more
than 50,000 pounds.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Pictorial report on highway bridges and structures in the District of Columbia
Subject
The topic of the resource
Bridges--Washington (D.C.)
Bridges
Description
An account of the resource
Cover title: Washington's bridges.
Added title page title: Washington's bridges : Historic and modern.
First ed. published in 1948 by the Highway Dept.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District of Columbia. Department of Highways. Office of Planning, Design and Engineering
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
March 1, 1956
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
United States. Department of Commerce. Bureau of Public Roads
J.N. Robertson, director of highways
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Public domain
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Documents
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/896bc01a37fba6dc2721ff7b6a9c87aa.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=VXGDYlAJ8X-H%7EhPcGCgQLRqpn-guBKTegWiXSYbcjyxDzwU95iHyaafCmkyqzP5e-chPCDaotps%7E5Blgvtarz9OsizoIZiJ%7E4kxZO%7EmNRK7vVXC5neEA%7E6E3nPswbAhk9M8u%7EDqupCVUr0Off7Gwh5v7SU-r39oQvIgtvUqLY60TOrvX8gs35i6PaJx-5-pKQ0esJK3hJo9sRA8O6GgnFp1LYsbtuzrJKx7jZobejcUqcYw7d7YPyK3akbpZpZ7oRDXP2IdxYsExVOi%7Ef9xAS-ed04My5fYunHP0vyvXpr4d8gLn6qKGsfKrZUTJGI4O%7EAvRXOI-rbx6%7EEF1n7RK5Q__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
06ce2944d2e3622d2b365e9d3d49debf
PDF Text
Text
APPENDIX
THREE
SISTERS
BRIDGE
lhr loord ol Connl¡¡lortr¡
Dl¡trlct ol Cchnbl¡
I
�PuûlocRAPß oP åN ARTrsr's REIIDERTNG oF ttrE PRoPosBL tmßts
fl
T
EE
ffi
ä
ffi
¡l
¡i
E
a
BRr"æB
E
EÐ
E
E
As
sEBN FRc.r
Ë
ffiE vIRGrNra srDE
SF
Ên
E
ñ
EE
¡¡Ê E!-
(
n
â
a
¿z
;H
<-
NNq-
ÆÊ
--tI
m
srgtrRs
É
a
;..5-
á
=T
trE
4
tE=t
re
-t
t)
Fì
A
l,!
Ð
\t
Æ
xIE
E
¿t
IE
â
E
¿
EI
a
N
(¡
s
\
E
!
E
E
t-l
t\
l¡l
F
ffi
n
R
ã
2
�THREE SISTERS BR¡DCE
.
In conncctlon slth tbc co¡fcrcncc bctwcm confcree¡ of
th,e House
:*d Scn¡tc rclatiag to thc Fl¡ctl Yc¡r 1963 Dt¡trlct of Columbia Appropriation¡, the Prc¡ldcnt of tbc Boardof Gomrnls¡loncr¡, D. C.¡ on October 10,
1962, addrctrcd
I lottcr to Tbc Honor¡blc C¡rl Heydcn, Ch¡irm¡n, Committee
on Approprletioae, U. S. Scnatc, whcrcln hc ¡t¡tcd
thtt "beforc the Commiogioners procced wltb thc con¡tructlon of the Tbrcc Sl¡ter¡ Bridge, they will
give moat c¡rcful conrldcration to aay rccommGndation¡ pertaining thereto
that may aPPGar in tbc repott of the Nati'onal Cepitet Trrarportatlon Agoncy.rl
Att¡ched, ¡¡ t¡¡hlblt No. l, lr a copy of thc lcttcr. ltb rtudy is e regult of
tb¡t lcttcr.
Problem
To revlcw thc dccl¡ion to go ahead wlth thc Tbrce Sl¡tcr¡ Bridge in
the ligbt of the Natlon¡l Gapltal rrano¡nrt¡don Agcncy rclrort.
E
ù¡btt No. 2, attached to thi¡ rc¡nrt, le r rnop rhowing potomac
Rlvcr croaelnga ln tåe centrel aiea.
Hietory from P lan¡lnt Polnt of Vlew¡
Thc propo¡¡l to büild e highway brtdgc et thc
onc of long-rtendfng.
rvlth tbc proJoct,
lt
ltlt fa¡tr
frreo Si¡tcrs ¡ite is
whlle ln tt¡cU not Juotlflcation for proceeding
cttod to ¡bow rh¡t thc b¡¡lc conccpt ba¡ bccn rcpeatedly
acceptcd by rcrpon¡lblo lgcaclct.
�-zIn 1953, a report entitled rrHighway Tranaport¿tion ia the lllasbington
Metropolltan Area of Virgíniar il was prepared for the Virginia State Htghway
Comrniaaion by t/lfllbur Smith and Asaoclatea.(
l) Origin and deatination data
were analyzed and proJected to 1973. The conaultant evalr¡¿ted a ayatem of
expresawaye following alignrnente deacribed in tJre Comprehenaive Plan of
the Natlonal Gapltal pt¿nnlng Comrnisaion. Among other thlnga, the consultant
recommended a bridge acroaa the Potomac Rlver at the Tbree Sisters gite.
Incldent to the preparatlon of the MTS Plan of 1959, e:¡h¿ustive traffic
gtudleg were undertakeu and analyeea .l*"tu mad,e by ïrilbur Smtth a¡¡d As¡oci-
ater, witlr tJ¡e regult that tl¡e t"port(Z) reconrmended con¡truction of the Three
Siatere Bridge.
,Other etudiee reco¡runended additlonal brldgee in the central area in
addition to tJ¡e Tl¡eodore Rooaêvelt Bridge, wlthout epecifying locatior,. (3)
Thug, over a perlod of atmost ten yearo, coneultants making etudieo
for the State of Virginia, tåe Natlonal Capltat pþnaing Commiaslon, and for
the Board of Gomrnisalonera of tJ¡e Dietrict of Columbia, have repeatedly
recoÍurrended additional rlver croeelngg tn the central city area, and, apecif -
tcally in tJ¡e Three Sleters location.
(l) Hi
(zl
Trane
lvfass Trana
rt
tion in the ïV
rtation Surve
Area of Vir inla
r959
¡ by Modjeaki and
Mastcra, Eaglnccre, wlth Lloyd B. Reld, Traffic Gonrultaat, July, L952.
(3) R
on
D. C.
�-3Congrea a lonel Histo
rv:
Tbe eppropriatlon of Diatrict of Columbia funds for the
Tb,ree siste¡s
Brtdge ha¡ bcen favorably coasidered by the Gongreas on two occasiona.
I¡¡
thc budget for Flacal Ycar. 1962, the congreaa appropriated, funds
for fiaancing
tbc Dl¡trlct of columbl¡ ¡h¿re of the coat of conatruction plaas
for tåe propoeed
Tbreo Slster¡
Erldge. In ths budget for Fiscal year
1963, tbe Gongresa appro_
prleted Dlstrlct of colr¡¡rbta funds to ft¡¿¡ce the subatructr¡re
of
Three sl¡tero
Brldgc.
tJr,e
propoeed
Durrag the courso of ths congreeelonal hearinge on
tble latter ¡PPloprletlon, thc rubcommltteea of tJro Cougreaa e:chauetively
reviewcd tbc pror ¡ad coh¡ of thc proJect befqre recomûrending
appropriation of
fund¡ to plocccd çttb tbc cm¡tructlon.
Ia
I rc¡nrt o¡ trhc Fl¡c¡l lear
1963 budget of the
Dletrict of columbia
(Report No. 25{8} thc coafereee reported on tå,e Three Sisters
Brldge as
followg:
rrbc
corh¡r¡lttec of conforGnce la agreed. that construction
of thc Thrcc Sl¡tcr¡ Brtdge ¡hould procled ¿sge¡rring to the plan
¡ct forth l¡ tbc budgct t¡ the a*o,r¡l of $300,000 aa provided in
thc blll. fl
.
Ptaqltng Approvrl¡:
on
July 1961, the Natlonel Capttal pt¿nnlng Commiogion approved,,
ln prlnclplc, thc ellgarncot of thc 1brse sl¡terg Brldgc. (Ncpc pla¡
#104. l-5Iiï
¡¡d
13
Tbc Vlrglale Dc¡rrt¡¡rent of Htghwaya aad tbc Department of
Htgbwaye
rreffrc of tbc Dl¡trtct of columbü,a rcquoated,, and tbe u. s. Bureau of
tt oa Novembcr 3, r9ó0 thc NcPc approvcd
tJ¡e l9ó2 D.c. Budgct
cluded a roquctt for prcltrntaary cngùãcrbg monoy for tb,e Threã wbich in'
sleters
on octobcr 5, 1961, thc NCPG apprôved oe tgeg iapttal o"tùy Budger Bridge.
lncludcd a rcqr¡ctt for puttrl con¡tructloa of tJ¡c Ib¡ee Siatera Brld,ge which
-
.
�-4Publlc Roada agreed to add to
lbe Interstate Highway system of the Nation
the followlag route ro be deeignated FAI_Zó6:
.r'ron¡ the intersection witb
in
virginia acrosa the potomac '-AI_óóvia Arlingtou corrnty,
River
the Three
Bridge to a junction with FAI-66 in the Digtrict sigtere
of columbia
ln the vicinity of 3lst and K Streetg, N.,W,.,,
The Natlona I Capital Tranaporta tloa Agenc y
Report
only th¿t part of tbc NGTA roport whlch relatea
directly to the central
area brldgea wtll be referred to here. Under
tåe topic, r,Three Siaters Island
Brldger " wbrch begiao ¡rGar the bottorn of page
25 of,the NCTA report, tbe
Agcncy prcecntc narrative statemente, tables,
âDd a graph purporting to
qucctloa tbc accd for the Three slstera
Brldge. The followiug reflects the
polntr lncludcd ln t'bc le¡rort with referenco
to tbe Three sisterg Bridge. Eacb
potnt le aaelgncd a ¡umber and wtll be d.iscussed
aeparately later in thie report:
Potnt (ll'
The report lncludee the following aentence: rrstanding
alone, t¡e
oaly purpoce of Tbrce slgtere would be to
bríng trucke and additional
auto trafflc from Fairfax and Arlington counties
into downtown. For
tbat purpo¡e the bridge le not required. r
Potnt
(2)
Ths tablc on Page 26 of the NGTA roport indicatee
the number of
brtdgc räne¡ acroa! tbe potomac River which
\rere in place in 195? an¿
a ae¡raratc colurn¡ ¡hows tåe number of bridge
lanea undcr congtruction
or recentry op*"¿, rncruding the lvoodrow wueon
and cabia John
Bridger.
a
�,.5
potnt (3)
Thc A¡cncy proposcr hro
-
r¡ll tr¡n¡tt ltne¡ to Vlrginia¡
one of
wblch wor¡ld lGrvc thc Thrcc
Si¡tcr¡ Brldgc corrldor. Tl¡is is in
eontr¡rt to thc MTS Plan of
1959 whlch contompletcd cxpress bu¡
rcrvlcc in thi¡ corridor. lto Agcncy a¡rpercntly arrumeo that \ritbout rtll
tran¡lt, all of thc incrc¡¡cd trlpr frorn Vtrgtnia lnto the
Ill¡trlct of Golumbl¡ wor¡ld be handlcd by priv¡te l¡8¡scnger car8.
Tbto aetumptlon is ia oharp contragt to the MTS Pl¡n of 1959.
Ftgurc No. l4 t¡ includcd tn the top helf of Page 27 oî' the NCTA
point (4)
rcport. Tbir graph end a corrcctcd
greph
will
be includcd r¡¡der the
dlacu¡¡ion portlon of thto report ¡nd wlll dc¡l with the m¿ttcr of proJcqtcd Potom¡c
point (5)
Rlvcr trrfflc l¡ the ccntr¡l atea'
Thc bottom
h¡lf of Pagc 27 of, the NGTA rcport include¡
a table
rhowlng tot¡l Potom¿c Rlvcr vehiculrr croaaings in 1980, with a balance
bctwecn dcmand
ud capecity in fhc ccatrrl arca without tbe Three Siatera
Ertdgc. llbtr table wlll bc dlocu¡¡cd tn dctall later.
point (6)
Thc Agcncy arrumcc (Pege ZS) tb¡t the construction of the Three
Sl¡tcr¡ Brtdge would rrcreetc tr¡ffic prcssure th¡t would tcnd to force
co¡rtructlon of htgbwoya th¡t would otherwiec be un¡¡eceEoafy. "
point (?l
In order to ¡u¡t¡la tbe pocttion oPPotiag tbe Thrce Si¡tera Bridge,
¡omctblng had to bc donc wlth tbc truck
tr¡fflc in trhe Interstate
cotrldor. Thcrcforc, tàc Agency a¡lume¡ that thc Shirley
h¡vc caprclty ¡ufflclcat to h¿ndlo Routc 66 truck trafflc.
rr
Route 66
Highway
"will
�-6:
Diecuseion
Thc Phtlo¡opby of Fþaniug Urban Traneportatlon¡
The Year 2000 Plan
OnIy
¡
few weeks ago, the Precldent, ln a mernoraDdum to tåe heada
of Goveramont de¡rartrneats and ageacles aud to tJ¡c Dletrlct Comml¡¡ionorg
stetcd ia pert: rtThe corrld'or cltlee conce¡Ê recoruaondcd by thc Yeer
Pla¡, prcpared by the Natlo¡al Capltal pl¡nñi¡rg
ZOOO
Gom¡niaalon and thc National
Gapital Reglonrl Plaaning Councll tn 1961, ahall bc eupportcd by agcnciea of tåe
txecutlvc branch a¡ the b¡gic dcvelopment ocheme for thc Natlonal Crpltal
Rcglon.
il
He furüher etlprrlated that rrPla.ning to mcet fuh¡re tranr¡nrtation
requiremento for tbe rogion gh¿ll asaume tåe need for a sqs¡¡lin¡tcd r)¡rtem
includinq both efflclcnt htghway and mage tranclt f¡cllitle¡, and makins full
uce of tJ¡e advantages of each mode of traue portetlø,. r' (undcrltnlng rupplied)
The Prc¡ldeat rcqucetcd sach deparbncat and agency hcad cor¡cGrncd to give
full coneideratlon to tl¡eee pollclee in aU actlvitlca relating to thc plenntng
and dcvelo¡rmot of the N¡tfo',ql Capitel region, a¡d to work clorcly
wltt
tbe
planntng bodlea whlch h¿ve rea¡nnolbtlitleg for thc ¡or¡nd a¡d ordcrly dcvelopmc¡¡t of tbc entlre ar€a,.
The Proalde¡tra mêaoag€ to the congrorr on Fsbrrnty 28, t9ó1,
rcl¿tlve to thc Federel Pay-Aa-Tou-Go Highway Prograra, rtttcd ln prrt,
¡¡
followo:
�-7ttlt has alwaye atruck me ao ironic that ao many of our citizene -oo ingenioue in quickly devieing ways of endiag almoet every minor
lrrltant - - would eo readlly tolerate every mornlng and evening the
lncredlblc congcetion of our antlquated highwaye that takea a heavy
toll ln automotive costs and depreclation, to eay nothing of human
aervet and tempera. By f975 -- and tJ¡c Interatate Syatem ie required
by Congreea to heve enough lanes to move eafely all the vehiclee expected in l9?5 -- there wtll be an egtlmated two or three timee as many
vel¡lclea aa u8e thoae roada today. Even though aome expressways now
reem cxce¡slvely large, an emergency progra¡rr then wtll be too late -we mu¡t continue to build thoee hlghwayc now at a atcady rate aufficient
to ¡sauro completlon on achodule.rl
Oa
April 5, 1962, the Pregldent sent a message to the Congreae on
thc trenaportatlon cyetem of our Nation, wherein he stated, in part, ae followa:
"Higber incomes coupled wlth the lncreasing availability of the
automoblle have enabled more and more Amerlcan familiea, particularly younger oner witb chtldren, to aeek tJrelr own homee ln suburban
areaE. Stmultaneouoly, changes and lmprovements in freight transportatlon, made poaalble by tJre development of modern hlghwaye and the
trucklng induatry, heve reduced the dependence of manufacturers on
central-locatlon¡ near port facilitles or railroad terminala. The developmcnt of improved productlon techniqueg that requlre epacioua¡ otte-story
plant layoute have impelled many lndustrlea to move to the periphery of
urban areaa. At tJre game tlme the irnport¿nce of.the central city is increaalng for tr¡de, financial, governmental, and cultural activities.rl
rrOne
result of tbege changea ln locaülon patterns ha¡ been a change
in the ¡ntterne of urban travel. Formerly people traveled mainly along
hlgh denalty corrldors radiating to and from downtown. Today traffic
¡ratterne arc lncroaalngly dlverae. Added to traditional suburb-to-city
movements are large croaetown flows whlch c:datlng mass tranaportation
oyatemo are often not gearcd to handle. A1¡o, tbe l¡creaaing use of
automobile¡ to mect urban tranr¡rortatlon needc has reeulted in increag tng hlghway congê¡tlon, and tbls baa greetly lmpeded masg transportation
¡crvlce ualng those blghwaYe.rl
ttHighwayr are an inatrumcntal ¡nrt of any coordlnated urban trana portation program, aad mu¡t bc an lntegral part of aay comPreheneive
commu¡lty develo¡rmont P18n. rt
ilHlghway planniag ehould bc broadened to i¡clude adequate traffic
control oyetemr, parklng facllltlee, and clrcul¡tlon ayatema on city
�-8Etreets commensurate with the traffic forecagtg ueed to justify freeways and major arterial roadwaye. Proviaion for trangit a¡d highway
f¿cllltlc¡ ln the aame roadway, permiaelblc r¡nder preeent law and already tected ia geveral caoee, ahould be encouraged whenover more
effective tranaportatioa will result. Moreover, I bave requested the
Secretary of Comrnerce to conaider favorably the reservatioa of epecial
htghway l¿nea for buses during peak trafflc boure whenever comprehen¡lve trane¡rort¡tion plana indlcate rh¡t this ie desirabre.rt
Thc Metro
I
T
Tr¿na
tation Surve Plan of 1959 and the Natio¡ra I
Therc l¡.a ¡harp contraet i¡ the philooophy applted to the collectlon,
analylea and prcaeatetlon of d¡ta and find¡"gs tn the MTS Plan of 1959 and
in tbc NCTA report
oî,
L962. lbe Board of Comnis¡io¡era of tbe Dietrict of
Golumbl¡ fsel¡ that lt lr lmperatlve th¿t tht¡ dlstl¡ctlon be recognized early
in tho dlccu¡alon of thc NGTA report.
Baalcally, thc dl¡tlnctlon c¡¡ be aummarlzed succinctly. Oa t¡e one
hand thc MTS Pl¡a of 1959 wa¡ baaed on frequent and open dlgcuesion with all
agcaclcr and groupl lntorc¡ted ln tranopo/tation la tJre regibn. The resultant
plan rvat r€slxrn¡lve to thc clientelc
it would serve.
The NCTA plan was pre-
parod trnilaterally. It allegea (Gbapter IV) that 'rThe heart of the transportarion
ayotem
wtll
be a moder¡ tubway.
rr At tbe same tirne,
tb,e subway
syetem, even
by optlmlotlc ectlmates,
wlll not ¡ervo mor.e tåan 25 percent of tbe tripa in tl¡e
reglon. At flr¡t gleacc,
and on thc basls of information thug
far avaÍIable,
tl¡erc l¡ con¡ldcrablc qucctlon ao to the ability of the trans¡rortation eystem
propoccd by tbe NCTA to ¡erve the rem¡iutng ?5 percent of the tripe expected
ln tbe ar€a l¡ 1980. Tbere l¡ ¡ttacbcd aa E:rhibit No. Z-A a copy of an editorial
from tbe lVa¡hlngton Poot of Je¡uery 17, 1963 which reflectg conslderable
coacet¡ ovcr thc ra¡umptlone ueed by the NCTA in the preparation of its report.
�9
Pbllocophlcally, therc appears to be a di¡tinctlon ia the two
lte
NGTA plen ¡ppeart to rosolv€ questlonable ar€as
tcndlag
ro.t""," r
p1ana.
i¡ favor of translt
l¡8pcr needfor transit at the cxpenso of highway travolera.
Thl¡ sPPcars to bc cvldent l¡ conslderation of brldge requlremeate in the ce¡Srrl
¡sc¡. Sor¡ld lt rcault l¡
an inadequate bala¡cc. tbe area
wiil er¡ffer.
Tbls m¡tter w¡¡ dlacuseed ln otr¡dtes u¡dertalcen by Doctor Leon N. Moses
at Nortbwc¡ter¡ Unlverotay. (O) Hc ¡tatee thst tt lc not a queetloa aolely of
drlvlng thc prlvet€ cat or rlding a prescribed form of
transit.
Tbere ls a
thtrd part of tbc cquatlonr ar refloctcd by Doctor Mosesr roaearcb, namely,
that prcrlulGt wfU bc brought to bear to move tbe job elaowherc. A transportetlon eyrtær,aot rcb¡nnslve to the neede an¿ Aoåtree of our people could
rcrloualy lnflucnco
tJ¡a
futt¡rc of tho Natloare Capttal Region.
In tbè-¡Fcder¡l Ald Htghway Act of 1956, the Congreae etipul,ated that
thc geometrle¡ o"d so¡structlon ¡tandarde adoptcd for tJro I¡terstate System
¡h¡ll
bc adequrtc to accommodate the typeo and volume¡ of traffic forecast
for thc yoar l9?5. Drrtng appro:dmatêly the paat thl¡ty years, tåe Highway
Departmcnto have been collecting data wlth'referoace to actr¡¿l traffic voh¡rno!.
Inltlelly, thl¡ d¡t¡
1944r
rrao collccted on an lndlvldual proJect or higbway baeie. In
for tbc flr¡t tl¡¡c, d¡t8 was collected
camG ap¡nrcat
oe a reglonal baetg beêauso
it
be-
th¡t thc hlghway ayetem must bs treated ag a regloaal entlty.
lte provlalon, or lack oú provialon, for a facillty at one polnt, or the creatlo¡
(a)' Pagc l0 of a p¡por.e¡titlod rrUrba¡ Traaeportatlon Subsidioa a¡d the
Problcan¡ of lvf¡h¡rc Gcntral Cltlorrr by Doctor Leon N. Moeosr before the
L962 ¡a¡u¡l rncctlag of tbe Amerlcaa Soclety of Plan¡i¡g Offlclals.
�- ¡0-
of a facillty elaewbere cauaes aubat¿ntial adJuatment in trip habits. Accord-
tngly, data wa¡ flrat collected ln thls rogion, on a reglonal bael8, in
1948.
It waa updated ln f955 and partlally updated agaln l^ 1962. Ingofar as basic
d¿t¡ l¡ conc€rn€d vtttb referenco to trlper lt le roagonably oound.
All of tåe Highway Dopartments and tåe It. S. Bupeau of Public Roads
havc bec¡ wreetllng wttl¡ tJ¡e problem of forecaating
and
trlp requlrements for
bcyond. I¡ order to cope better witJr this problem,
trhe
l9?5
Dlstrlct of Columbla
Department of Hlghwayo and, Trafflc, the States of lvfarylaad and Virglnia, and
tbe U. S. Bureau of Publlc Roads cooperatlvely devcloped a ptogram during
the last few yeara lntende¿ to
"""tat
the Higbway Departments ln predlcting
futurc traffic volumes. The baelc progra¡n thus developedr.as modified by
certatn ¡h¡dle¡ apparently trndertaken by or for tho Agcocy, hae becn uaed by
tbe Natiônal Gapttal Traneportatlon Agency ln forecaetlng tran¡it
potnt of the aforementloned dlecugglon ls
tt¡la. fr,o Proglame
tripe.
The
developed by
the Hlghway Departrrreats for traffic forecastlng aro a tool to bc ueed as a
gorcral gulde. Il¡e Natloura hlgbway offlctale are not aatleflcd tbat results
of tb€ program thus far doveloped caa bc acceptod ae a¡¡ accurate mathematical
coacluclon. Almost all lteratlono carrled through tJt. computere require adJuctrncnte becauge th,e output from tJre com¡nrter lnvarlably producea traffic
volume¡ whlch are ¡rot roasonable. For exa¡¡,ple, tbe output may show an
e¡tlm¡ted volume tn
1980 whlch
ia lego th¿n the volr¡.m,e uslng thc corridor
today. Tblar therefore, g€Derally le cause for adJustment
based oa Judgment.
�-tlAnotber example of the influence of
th.e hr¡¡nan
factor ln eatimatiag
futurc traffic requlremente relatee to the eelcctiorr of mode of tranaport¡tloa.
To d¡to, tJrc body of knowledge and oxperioace wttb refore¡ce to predictlon¡
ln tho ¡elcctloa of mode of tranglt le very ltmtted.(5) In
tJ¡e cvent
thla rcglon
1¡ wtllt¡g to aaaume that some percentage of tJre trlpa doatl¡cd to the downtow¡
¡roa ln a peak hou¡ rrúght be m¿do by tranait, lt ahould bc recognlzcd by all
tbrt tbc arr tv€r lr
tåat
Juat
-- lt ig an asatunptlon.
A¡otb,or vcry Importaat area of guesa-work and opinlon rclatee to nondowntowa
ùrlpe.
'lVb,en
the NGTA prograît, wltb buflt-t¡r but yct r¡nk¡own
eaeumptlons wItJ¡ referenc. to *o¿"1 apllt, was
ru¡ throrgb thc computerr'tbe
reoults l¡öc¡ted tbat 16.7 to ?,3.8 percent of all non-dor¡mtown tripa would bc
mads by
tranatt. It
w¿a apparently declded by tho'NGTA
at¡ff tbat thc¡e Per-
ccntagcr .¡rcre too btgh, and rrcompeneatory factorgrr trer€ put lato tJrc eomputcr
ptogtam, lncludl¡g protracted transfer delaye up to 600 mlautca on a cert¿ln
body of non-downtown
trlpa.
Thts rrJudgmentrr corrcctloa wae applied to re¡ult¡
ptoducod by the same baslc curvet ueed in eatlmatlag translt trlpe to dowatow¡.
Tbc maan¡¿1 adJuetrrent h¿d tJre effect of tbrowlng certal¡ non-downtown orlented
trlpe o¡to
tJre btghway aa¿
tre.*ay ayetom. Naturally, thie adfuatmcnt ralrcr
ccrtaln queotlona. By what devlce or
on'
tåe baeis of wbat knowledge were tbc
wa¡
¡rcrceatag€r considered too htgb? Morc tmportantly, by wbat dcvlce
dctcrml¡cd that roughly
13 porceat of the aon-dowatown
epproprtate ftgurc to aeaign'to
tffi
orlentcd trip¡
lt
t¡ ¡n
translt? Is tJ¡ere any æcpcrlence cl¡cwhcrc ln
of tbe NcrA Rcport
�-tzthe Unltcd St¡teo that could tend to support such an aasumptioa under similar
clrcr¡n¡t¡ncce? Tbe NGTA plan ia ba¡ed ulroa ?, OO0 tranait trips in the A.M.
pcek hor¡r from
Sup¡nrc th¡t
Vlrglnia, crorrlag thc rivcr a¡d de¡tlned beyo¡d downtown.
thl. figurc turn¡
lcar. Tbcn, ouch trtpe
out to bc ¡omcthlag
would bc m¡dc by htgbway end frccwly. Accordlngly, thc cuppoeedly finite
flgurcr lncludcd ln thc NCTA rcport o¡ dcm¡ad ¡ad cepaclty of veblcular tripa
¡crora thc rlver dlrap¡rrr,
Mo¡t lmportqnt of tåc qucctlone ralsed by thc adjuatment of non-downtown
trlpr i¡ thc rcll¡blllty
trê
of thc forece¡t of tbc
trlpr to dowatown by tran¡it.
There
ôttscbcd E¡rhlblt¡ No. 3 aad No. 4 whtch råflcct prcdlcted trafflc volumeg in
thc vlclnlty of Key Brldgc. E¡hlblt No. 3 cbow¡ tbc adJurtcd volu¡ne aaaignmente
to Koy Brldgcr meJor roadt, frccwaye a¡d strcct¡
bibtt No.
l¡
thc Gcorgctourn area. Ex-
{ ¡how¡ ttc vchtcle eoalgnrncnto to thc ¡¡mc ayetem ao they appeared
dlrcct fro¡a thc conr¡nrtcr ll¡k ¡hta. A dl¡cu¡¡lo¡ tif ccverel of these ffgurea
wlll lndlcrtc wh¡t happcae bctwcen data produccd by thc computcr
a,,d manual
edþrtrrrcntr. For cranrplc, tåe prcdlcted volr¡nc oa tåe Potomac Rlver Freeway
¡bovc Kcy Brldgc war adþrtcd dowaw¿rd fro¡r ó,900 during the A. M. pcak hour
to 4r 700. The volumc for the ¡a,¡¡re tlme oa M Strcct waa adJu¡ted downward
from
2r 600
to
1r
500.
ltc
volumc on tbc Potomec Rlvcr Froeway waa adJuated,
dowaw¡rd from. 3, {00 to 2, ?00, No cxplanatlon
tht¡ trrfftc, and thcro
l¡
no
l¡
glven a¡ to wh¿t bappened to
þrttflcatlon æ to wby tbcrc should bc euch relative -
ly largc volumc¡ of tr¡fflc oa thc Potom¡c Rlvcr Frccwey ¡bovc Key Brldge
rucb rellttvcly emall voltunc¡ bclow Kcy Brtdgc. For
and
¡ rn¡ttcr of fact, tbe ad-
Jultcd volt¡Írc o¡ thc Potom¡c RlvcrFrccway bclow Kcy Brtdgo ¡pptoximatec
tbc potl bor¡r volulrc. rlrordy urlng thlr frccwry.
�- 13-
Tbe NCTA report doee not preeent d¿ta which invalldatea the need
for tåe Th¡ee Sigtere Bridge. Earlier in thia r€port (beginning on Pagc 4)
tthcrc
¡re llated seven pointe or statemente preaented in the NCTA report
wltb refgrcace to tåe Three Slstera Brldge. lbese pointa wlll ¡ow be diecu¡red ln tbc order llsted.
Modorn Freeway Plan¡lnq
POII{r I I ì
Tbo Tbree Sleterg Brldge doea not staad
"roo..
I¡
modera blgbwey
and frceway planntng' bridgee, even minor ono6, do not stand
alor¡e. th:y
are ryatematlcally planned a¡d achedr¡led as ¡nrta of htghway ryrtcmc. the
Tbrcc Sl¡tcr¡ Brldge ls ¡o oxcepS.oa. Tl¡e Tl¡,rce Sl¡tcr¡ Brldgc
l¡ a¡ ex-
rmplc'of raodcrn latcgratcd freeway a¡d brtdgc plaonlag ln tb¡t lt wil,t bc
cercfully laid out to ag.sure that the approaches v/ill be frsc-flowing ¡o tbat
ob¡tructlon! on the approachea to the maln rlver croaalag wlll not act to
crc¡tc atoppagea or del¡y on the rivcr croeelag. The brldgc l¡ not being
co¡¡tructcd ¡olely to bring truckr and addltional euto trafflc from Falrfax
r¡d Arltngton
Countfea lnto the dowatowa. A rcsent thrdy by thc
Di¡trlct of
Golurnbl¡ Dcpartrrent of Higbwaye and Trafflc, attachcd ao Exhtbtt No. 5,
¡bow¡ thc cle¡slflc¡tton of vchlclee by licensc platca oycr tbc Potomac River
brldgcr durlng cou¡t¡ mede ln August
o1,
1962. It
i¡ t¡tcrc¡tlng
to obrctvc
tbet eppro:dm¡tcly flfty percent of tås trafftc croaclag thc rlvcr brldgcr r,t
tù¡t tlmc borc Vtrgtale llcen¡c pletec. Thc othcr flfty perccnt lr dtvldcd
�l4thucly: Maryland,
12.5 perccnt;
12 percent;
Dietrtct of Golumbia,
trucb, 8 pcrcent¡
15
percont; others,
buoea, 1.5 pcrcent. Tbere is no reaaon
to ¡soumc th¡t thc famlly of vchlclc¡ u¡l¡g a brldgo at Thrce Siaters would
metcrl¡lly dcvhtc from tbl¡ com¡roeltion. Thc 12.5 percent grouped r¡¡der
trothGr!rr lneludc¡ .omG aew re¡ldcnts of the 8rc8, lomc
through tùc
tr¡ffic
paaaing
¡rcl, but, ¡¡rorc atgrtflc¡ntly, lt lncludc¡ thote touri¡tc vieitlng
th" .t"".(6)
Numbcr of Brldrc Lane¡
POINT (2I:
rrÉ'
Pol¡t
(21
rcfcrrcd to prcvloualy rclatc. to thG number of brtdge lanes ln
being or ru¡dcr con¡tructlon. ÌVhllc the t¡blc rcfcrrcd to ¡rcar the top of page
26
of,
thc NGTA rcpott
l¡ c¡¡entfafly corrcct,
a qucetlon ncccrsarily arises
e¡ to lta rlgalflcancc. For e¡amplc, tbc lYoodrow Wil¡on a¡d Cabin
John
Brtdgce, whcn ell nccc¡t¡ry parte of the Bcltway rrc la plôcor will aerve
dlffcrcnt fi¡nctlon from tbc brldgc¡ ln the cc¡tral ctty
arc¡.
¡
In addltion, all
forccaat¡ ¡how theac two pcrtphcral brldgea wlll be ovcrloadcd by t980.
Ma¡¡ Tra¡elt l¡ l¡ter¡tat e Route 6ó Corrldor
POINT (3}:
Thc
nqt
example of
to th: Iaet prragraph on Pagc 26 of thc NCTA r€port is an
extromc¡.
On thc one
ha¡d, the ¡¡rretlvc stetcmeat
(õl It l¡ e¡tl¡n¡tsd th¡t thc aumbar of tourl¡t¡
aaau¡nea
ta tbl¡ ¡tG. wlll lncreaEe from
ebout 15r000'000 today to 35r000'000 ln 1980. Erhfbtt No. ó ¡howo rhe past
rccord ¡¡d trcadr ln rnodc of lDtcr-ctty tr¡¡¡lt -- rlolG tb¡n 89% of auch
trlpr erc by prlvetc cer.
�I
-
th¿t
if
the two
I5-
rall rapld tranait linee are provided in Virginla, aa propoaed
by NGTA, about 28,000 peoplo would uee public tranraportation in the trorDlag peak hour. Thte total lacidentally lncludea 71000 trtpa crotalng thc rlvor
but not destined to the expan4ed downtown Sector
Zero. The cx¡raaded Sector
Zeto includes the downto\iln area bou¡ded by the Potomac Rlvcr on thc weot,
S
Street on the north' 4th Street, N. t. and S. E. on thc eaot, and tbe South-
saat and Soutbweet Freeways on the soutJ¡r plus the Naval lrVeapon¡ Pla¡t,
the Nevy A¡nex and tbe Pentagon. By the eame token, thc Agency apprently
aoaume¡ th¿t wtthout such
rall tranelt, no part of tbe lncre¿¡cd trlp load
would be handled by bueee. Ible ia coatrary to thc MTS Plan of 1959 and
coatrary to tbe planning whlch bas been dono to d¿te witb rcfsroncc to tranaportation la +hl¡ area.
Projscted Potomac River Hlshway Trafftc
POINT (4):
Flgure
14
of tåe NCTA reporü ie duplicatod as E:chibtt No.
NCTA rcport lncludes a dlagram whlch
lt identlfles
aE
?.
The
Flgure 14. Thi¡ dtagram
pur¡nrta to ehow the differonce ln probablo growtì of blghway traffic acroat
the Potomac River with the NCTA ayetem, and wlthout
it.
Speaklng
flrst of
thc NCTA ayetem, the result depictod by tho solld ltae ln thc ¿lagram would
be obtalned only
frc
lf
people ueed fixed
rall tran¡it ln tb,e numborr porh¡lated.
d¡¡hed llner wblcb la lntonded to ¡how rlver croaelng¡
lf tr¡¡alt i¡
not
�- 16-
irnproved, io without foundation. The MTS Pla¡ of 1959 contempl¡ted tbe
provlelon of express bua tranalt on I¡terstato Route 66. A chcck of tbe MTS
Plan lndcates that oxpreas bus eervlce, ev€n under NCTA aeeumptlono,
would handlc more th¿n two-thlrds as many peak hour tranelt
coateinpletcd by tJre
rall traneit
trlpr ar etc
ayeterrr.
Wtth referenco to Flgur e 14, we know of no mathema6c¡1, ¡tatietlcel,
or an¿lytical baels for drawlng tbe graph a¡ thc Agency h¡o donc. Inctead,
It i¡ far more practicable to draw a graph as propoaed by Exhtbtt No. g.
Under thie approach,
lt ls estimated that ths total ¡umbcr of vchrclo! croôo-
tng tbe Potomac Rlver la the peak hour b¡ f gg0 wor¡ld bc apprord,mately
25'000. Thte ftgure cloeely approxlmatos a corrected c¡tlm¡tc preoented
on
Page 18 of tbla report.
Demand and Ca
- - Potornac Rlver V ehlcular Gros¡
E
POINT (5):
Tbe table on the lower half of Page 27
of,
the NCTA report ls aa follows:
TOTAL POTOil4AC RIV ER VETTIGULAR CROSSINGS
Bridcee
Central Aroa. r .. . ,, .,
Key
Theodore Rooeevelt
Memorlal
l4th Street
llVeaterly . ............
Cabin John
Chatn
Southerly.....
lf,oodrow Wllaon
Peak Hour one dlrectlon
Demand
Capacltv
r,
2 l,500
zl,50o
7,000
ó,500
ó,900
4,500
1980
�_ a,
Thts table shows a balance between demand aad capacity for tüe brtdgea ln
area. It
the centr¿l
eho.rrs a pealchour
on the brldgee ln tbe central
flow of Zlr50O vehlclea in one direction
aroa. lbe total anrmber of lanes in oae dircction
now proPosed on the four bildgee la queotlon lg
thlrteen. Dlvldl¡g
13, tbe Ageocy would üLue aasign an average of
1r 650
21,500 by
vehlclea per lane per
hour for the thrrteen laaes. lp the eve¡rt trnro reverelble lane¡ arc placed oa
the old l4th Street Brldge, the average aaaigrement would be
1r 430
vchtclca
pcr lane. fre followlng dlacusaloa wlll lndlcate aqno of the pot¡ts in qucetloa:
Brldce Demand:
Flrgt of all, tåe preciaion of ZlrSOO A.M. peak hour veblcle trlpa ectoað the eentral brtdgee lu 1980 la queatlon¿ble. Thie sppearr to be tbe A. M.
peak hour volume baeed,rporr
aD,
average of thc so-ca1led, meprawlf and corrldor
land uce plane. f¡asmuch as the Prealdent dlrected the agenclc¡ of t¡e txccu-
tive Branch to eupport the corridor plan, thea th¡t coacept ¡bould al¡o be used
in cstlm¿ttug
tJre bighway
tr¡rflc requirements. O¡ thle basis,
the flgure would
be 22,9 00 i¡gtead, of,2l,5OO.
lte
NGTA
re¡nrt also mtnlmisee factora whlch draatlc¡lly affoct the
plcturc. For example, the NGTA hae baaed tt¡ e¡tlmatea for trensit
necdg on ths A.M. peak hor¡r. Howev€r, experlence h¡s dcmon¡trated tbat
highway
tbe peak hour for htghway trafflc la ln ths P. M. perlod. Recognluiag thie
fector would l¡crease tåe ftguro by about three ¡rcrcent, or approximately
700 vehlclea.
�-
t8-
Further allowancea muet be mede for truck traffic aince a truck,
in cffect, requirea two to four time6 aa û¡uch epace es a pasaenger car.
Uctng a factor of two for converting truck¡ to equlvalent numbers of ¡naaen-
gcr cars would lncrcagc the total by 800.
Experlence wlth the orlgln and deatinatloa data oy€r the yeare hae
¡hown that orlgln and de¡tlnatlon Eum¡narles do aot check actual volumee.
There la oomc allppagc.
lte
aame pattern haa applled ln thia metropolitan
reglon and ehowe that tl¡e nru¡rber of trlpr acroso the Potomac Rlver developed
by the O&D werc only 92 p"t""rr, of the trlpa actually taking place. Therefore,
thc avcrage dally trafftc computcd on the basls of tbe O&D d¿ta wae 8 percent
undcr actual daily
treffic.
Convcrting to a peak hour figure makes thig çor-
rcctlon approxlmately 4 percent or about l, 000 vehicle¡. Accumulating the
above corrections, we ftnd tbst we bave the followlng
total:
22r90O plua 700
plue 800 plue 1,000, or a total of 25,400. Thle Z5t4O0 comPsred to 21,500
amor¡nto to
25,4OO
a l8 pcrcent correction in ¿ crltlcal flgure. The aaaignment of
vehlclc¡ to tblrtecnbrldge lanes wor¡ld lmpooe e¡ avorage load of about
1,900 vehlcle¡ for evcry bridge
lane.
Should tJ¡e l4th Street Bridge be con-
vertcd to two reveroible lanes, the ayerage aaolgnment to every bridge lane
would bc ¡bout 1,700 vehlclea.
It lo tJ¡e practlce of the Highway Departments
acroas thc la¡d to derlgn urban freeway facllltie¡ on the basi¡ of 1,500
veblclea per lane pet hour.
(?)
On somo freewey
laae¡, under certain
(?) Tablc G- 2 cntltled rrla¡e Deelgn Capaclty for Urban Freewaye, il Page lZ5
of thc Pollcy on Artcrlal Hlghrr¡yq þ llrþr¡¿fgl8 by the American Aseoci¡tlon o
.
�t9-
conditiont, and with certain combination¡ of veblcleo, we do get higher
volumea. Howcver, 1r500 l¡ consldered a pr¡ctlcable figure for deeign
PurPooes, and for average condltlou on urb¡¡ freewaya. lvlth the expecta-
tlon that Intcrstate freeways approachlng tål¡ metropolttaa ¡rea wlll be
deeigned on tbe
ba¡l¡ of estlmatedvolume¡ of
lr5OO vchlclcs per lane per
hourr.lt follow¡ thattlre brtdges acroa¡ tbc Potom¡c Rlver, ¡nd tbe extenaions
of tbe frcewaya lnto and through thc mctro¡nlitan aro¡, should be deeigned in
the eame m8nncro All of ua ohould bc extremcly carcful to avold tåe poaei-
bility that brldgct rnBy constitutc a bottlcncck l¡ the freo flow of traffic.
It ¡hould bc rccogalzed, however, that Kcy Brldge a¡d Memorial
Bridgc are not to bc deslgned wtth full freeway approechea, and that changee
are ln the offlng witJ¡ reference to both of therc rlver croeainge.
Key Bridße and the Bffect on Geor Íeto\ßtn:
It la phyoically poeelble to provlde free-flowing ramp connectione
tween tho Potom¿c Rlvcr Freeway and Key
requircr maJor turgery on Key Brldgc
town end of that
or economic
be-
Brldge. However, to do ao
¿nd on tbe approachea on tbe George-
atructure. It lo not practlceble from elther an engineering
etandPotnt to provldc free-flowlng cona€ctlona meoting Interotate
otand¿rdr oYGt thle brldge.
Thc are¡ could not tolerate a inaJor dlaruptlon of tb,e ¡ervicc now
provlded by Koy
Brldge, Thc Board of Co¡aml¡¡loncrr ¡hould not cndorae a
propolal whlch would ent¡ll thc expcndlh¡re of ¡t lcart ¡¡ rnucb moDey for the
�-zo-
reco¡struction of Kcy Bridge as would be required for a n€w eight-lane bridge.Û*
In term¡ of oervice, the reconatruction and strengtJrening of Key Bridge would
rc¡ult la aa eotimated peak hour capaclty of about 51 000 vehlclea in onb dlrcction.
In conaldering a maJor capital improvement, bowever, cert¿ln te¡t¡ wlth
ree¡rcct to feaeibllity and practicability muat be applied. A¡ latcrstate crorelng
of tbe Potom¡c Rlver at ihe Key Brtdge alte lg not pràctlcable for thc followlng
rce¡ona!
(l)
The bridge should be widened to carry four lanea
Wbether
i¡
eacb direction.
lt la wldened or not, the euperatructure requirca
rèGon-
struction to carr)t Interstate loads aafely in all lanc¡;
l2l Reconctructlon,
ae required r¡¡der
(
l) above, would cre¡te
en tm-
poeaible sltu¡tlon ln handllng the approrlmately 65,000 vcbiclc¡
now using tJre bridge each workday;
(3) It would be lmpoeeible to provid€ neceasary deceleration
dletancea
on the ramps and free-flowing characterletlce without major and
obJectlonable surgery to the Georgetown o¡d of the brtdge¡ end,
(4) It would cost at leaat
ag much to do a reconstructlon Job on tbla
brldge to brlng lt aad tJ¡e end connectloag to Interstate standard¡
as lt would to build a new brldge at the Three Slatcra ¡itc.
tt-
The outside lanea of tbe preaent Key Bridge were aot deaigncd otructurally
to carry contemplated Interstate Htghwey truclc loads. Routing of the
I¡tcretate Htghway System ovet ihrs brldge would requirc ¡uch etructural
cepaclty and wldeolng. Suob work ls eatlmâ,ted to coet about S5.8 rnillion.
�-2LApplication of tbe above test produces the logical concluaion that
no co¡¡¡ection ehould be provided between Key Bridge and the propoocd
Potomac Rlver Freeway. Eli¡ai¡ation of the ramp connections betureen
fihs Frceway and Key Bridgo meaas
that, as a locat facility, Key Bridge
wot¡ld have a practicable capaclty of about Z.7OO vehiclea
l¡
i¡ tåe peak hour
eltd¡er direction.
By building a ne\r bridgo at Itree Sisters a',d revertlng Key Bridge
to a local facillty,
tb,e combined peak
hour capacity would be in tbc order
of 8r?00 vehlcles.**
Memorlal Brldce:
lbcre la ettacbed
ae Exhtbit No. 9 tho ptaa currontly beiag advaaced
by the Natlonal Park Servlce for tho treaüment of the Dlstrict of Co¡u¡bia approachea to tJ¡c Memorial
Brldge. At tJ¡e present time, Memortal Bridge
ic carrylng about 75r000 aad 80,000 vehiclea per day. Nearly two-t¡irds
of tbc trarrlc inbor¡¡d Passes between th,e Lincoln Memorial and tbe Reflcct-
lng
Pool.
Under the National Park Service Plan, tJris route
will bc elimlnatsd.
lllhen tJrl¡ is done, traffic service will be curtailed. Ir¡ tbe abge¡ce of epeciflc
knowlcdg€ coacerniag tJre Nation¿l Park Servlce plan for the conatruction of
roeds bot¡ north and eoutJ¡ of tJ¡e Reflectiug PooI, arrd tn tbe absence of
knowlcdgc ag to how htgbway traffic mlght be pcrrrrltted to operate on euch
road¡, it ie lmpoeetblc to make a proclae predictloa ac to thc volume of
trefflc that mlght
ñi-fÎËy
be baadled on Memorlal Bridge
ln a peak hour ia l9go.
Brtdge were wid,ened and strengthened aad rarnpa mooting l¡ter¡tatc
requlreacnts rrere built to co¡¡rect Key Bridge wlth the poto¡nac
Rlver
I'reoway, tbe reco¡structed Key_Bridge would bave a tot¿l capaclty of
5'000 vohlclc¡ tn tJ¡e drrectroa of the p*r. flow.
�-zzHowcvcr, on thc ba¡i¡ of the plan at b¡nd, wc c¡tirnatc tbrt thc m¡xt¡num
figurc whlch aefely can be aealgned to each le¡c o¡ Memorlal Brtdgc
¡
about 11200 per bour, not l,ó50 as araì¡med by NCTA.
Tlcrcfo¡o, caPactty of ceitrel brldgca c¡¡ rc¡roaebly bc ¡¡sumed
a¡ followr¡
l4th Street (4 lanea!
Mcmorial (3 lance)
lbcodoro Roo¡cvclt (3 lanco)
Kcy (3 lraea)
6, ooo
3,600
4,500
10T4L..........
2,7oo
¡6,900
In applytng tho ¡bove anelyoea wltb rerpcct to Mcmorlal ¡nd Key Bridgee
to the tot¡l ccntral rlvcr crooalng problcm, lt lr e¡tlmated that the deficiency
of rlvcr crorelng capaclty wlll bc
25.4OO
leeo lór800 or 8,600 vehiclee per
hour. I¡ thc evcnt lt lc ¡¡sumed thrt two rcvor¡lblc l¡nc¡ ¡rc consttucted
on tlbe old l{th Strcct Brldge picrc, a¡d IrZOO vchlcle¡ ere atrlgned to e¡ch
of the¡c two l¡nc¡ durtng the peek houro, tbir dlffcrencc becomca
61
200
vchlcler pcr bour. Thlt trefflc would logtcally urc thc Three Si¡tera Bridge.
Tr¡fflc Growth ¡¡d Eatlmatc¡:
Dlrlng approldmately the la¡t twcnty ycar., trherc has been an average
lncrc¡¡c tn trefftc
ecroe
t
the Potom¿c Rlvcr of 10r 000 vehicleo per day per
t¡c¡r. Tbl¡ prttcra rrrc¡¡. tå¡t tbcrc hr¡
whlch
beoa
lvct3g.. lppro:dnrrtcly orc-hdf l¡¡c t¡
r rtcrdy lncrc¡¡c l¡
ce,ch
the demand
dlrcctlon ¡rGt ycar.
�-23-
.
The Rail Transit Syetem in Vir cinia:
The entire
rail tranglt
eystem propoeed by the NGTA tn vtrgtnte
amounta to approximately twenty-nlne
mlles. Wltt thlc relatlvely extc¡¡lvc
ftxcd tranait eyatem, and agsu¡rrtag for the moment that tbc c¡tlrn¡tod number
of rlder¡ predicted by NGTA la reaeonå,bly correct, thc wbolc Vtrgtnte ryatcm
vould carry fewer trauait rlderg across brldgea th¿¡¡ ca¡ bc h¡¡dlcd on o¡c
frecway lanc servlng expre"" b.r".".(8)
Itle com¡nrloo¡ wor¡ld lndlc¡tc
ellmln¡tlon of a brldge at Three slster¡ to be moat quecüonable.
Lack of ¿dltern¿te Bridce Sitoe:
Various brldge eltea acrosa tbe Potom¿c Rlver betwcen Vlrginia and
tte Dlstrict of Columbla h¿ve been gh¡dled from tlrnc-to-tl¡rrc. Bcc¿use of
topographic coaditloas and the problems of provldlag adcquatc capaclty oa
the approacbes, no other slto compar€a ln quallty wtth thc propo¡ed T¡rcc
Sl¡tere Brldge
slt€. It makee aonae to provlde for such r brldgc and the
D€ccoaary aPProaches aad laterchangee on botå the Vtrglnta snd
X[¡trlct of
Golumbla ends of such a ¡tructure co¡lcurrently wttb tbc plannlag, dcatgutng
¡nd con¡tructlon of frceways tn the Dletrict of Colur¡bl¿ a¡d
t¡ Vlrglale.
fþrnctng Problema:
lVhtle tåe NCTA re¡rort appears to aup¡nrt tbe Potomac Rlver Frecwey,
the queotJ'on¡ which have bee¡ raleed wlth refer€ncG to tåe Threc Slaters Brtdge
dlrectly
a¡¡d
iõtTEffiñ
draattcally af:fect the adv¿ncement of the Potor¡¡ec Rlvcr Frecwly.
of New York Autåority, wlthout ustng a¡ eatlrc laac, alrcedy
la movl¡g tnthe order of,zsr000 to 301000 people ¡lcr bour ln bu¡c¡.
�-24The abtltty¡ or lack of
ablllty, to fln¿nce capital lmprovemente
gucb as a
frcernay or brldgc, ¡rG lmportant coaelderatlon¡ to thc Dietrlct of Columbia.
Thc 90-10 moncy h¡¡ nOthlng to do wlth detcrmialng.tbe nsedfor the proposed
bridgc end frceway. Ltkc the N¡tlon¡l l¡tcratate syrtcrn, tào nced existed be-
forc the ftnracfng utal Provldcd. Thc Fcderal fl¡¿¡clng mcroly provides tbe
Dl¡trlct of Columbts¡
8E
wcll as moet of thc otbcr Strtee, tbo whercwitbal
for golng ¡he¡d wltb the freeway syst€m.
ÌYhllc tomG
crltlcr rro
not concGraod witb flnancea, tbe Board of Com-
ml¡¡loacra of thc Dl¡trlct of Colunbta, thc Congreat, and tåc people of the
f,Xctrlct of Golumbla, h¡ve a toolronelbtltty to concern tåem¡clvca with this
lmportsnt aapect of htghway admtntotratlon. Wttb tbc othcr htghway requiremcnta of the E)lgtrlct of Golumbla whlcb muot be fln¡nced with 50-50 tñonGf
tbers
i¡
r
ao practlcablc probabtltty tbat tbe Potomac Rlver Frocway could be
fla¡nced wltb ¡uc'h funds. lVlthout a rlver croeeiag acceptable aa to geometric
¡¡¡d ¡tructus¡l requlremeúo, from ¿n l¡terstate ¡taudpotnt, there can be no
Potom¡c Rlvcr Frceway.
TAree Slsterg Brtdce and R elated Facilltieo
POINT I 6 I
U¡der Poi¡t
(61 thc Agency obJecte
to the Tbree Siaters Bridge becauge
It allegea that t'hc ¡tructure would rrcrcate trafflc p¡'êBaure that would tend to
force co¡ltluctlo¡ of hlghwaye th¿t would otherwiee be unn€cesEary.
brtdge docr not crc¡tG tbG trafflc, but rathcr, tt
way
n
The
l¡ ¡ part of t¡e ayetem of high-
fecllltlcr ¡ccdcd to lGly€ trafflc. A kcy ls¡uc tb¡t rnu¡t bc dl¡cusaed
�-25undGl
tllr
point ls tåo difforence between tb,e concept of ¡åo
highway plannera
thrt frccway! mu.t be properly integrated and continuoua
veraua tåe u¡explelncd concluglon by tbe NCTA'th¡t certain
freeways are runnecessary. f l
Dceltag rpeciflcally wttå tåc North Leg of tbe I¡¡er
r.oop, tåe NCTA report
does not co¡¡taln
rcll¡blc
Nortb Leg of tbc
r¡¡cr ræop aa a frecwar, ar propoecd by tåe NcrA,
data Juattfytng tte
poaltlon. r1¡e eli¡niaation of the
and the
¡ubltltutlon of ¡o¡rrcthlng whtcb the Agcncy doacrlber
ar aa recpreas etrcet
ryatcmrr or rrJualor frecw¡yrr appeare to be a
matter of oemantics.
i
O¡ Decc¡rbcr 3l , 1962, the NcrA tra¡¡mitted to thc
Boa¡d of Com¡nl¡¡lonetE, D.G., I copy of
by a coasultant
rffaahi¡gton,
" "t.ay(9)
D'c" contal¡l¡g cortaln rccotn¡n€ndatioa¡
of t'hc la¡cr roop.,
ltc
firm of
rvitå refcrenco to thc Nortb r,eg
congultaat appareaüy roco¡rur¡ends that oomewbat
tnote tha¡' onc-half of thls factlity ¡hould, be wh¿t he describer
¡s a ,,junior
frceway' rr Thl¡ part of hle propogod faciltty ie e¡seatially
a frecway with
ccrteln rcctrlcüona oa dimeasiono, aDd,, therefore, trafflc
aervice value.
ltc con¡ütt¿¡t recogalaee
that tJre rrJunlor freewey,, wblch be propogea would
äavc a ca¡nclty of about 3,ooo vehicles t¡the dlrectiouof
the pcakflow. From
appro:dmatcly 20tù and S Streets, N.Ty. to appro:d,matety
5tb aad S Streeto,
N''w',
thc cø¡ulta¡t ProPosGt a facillty which h,e identlfiea
as
Tht¡ would requlre addltlon¡l rtght-of-way a¡d wor¡ld produce
a
(e) rfAa Erproee
¡
,rboulovard.rf
facility
Street Syrtem for the North Corrldor of
pre¡rrrcd for thc NCTA by Bbfr ¡ad Stcl¡ Arroclrtct, thc I¡¡c¡ Loopr,
Pl¡¡¡cra, lffaehlng-
toa, D.C., Octobci, 1962.
�-26-
c¡tl¡r¡tcd to bc ¡blc to .oryG ¡bout
g00
2'4oo vcblcloe ln c¡ch dlrccdoa
thc peak
htr
con¡ldercd
t¡
vcblcler por laae per bour, or
ho¡r. Thcrcforc, tbo coaaultant
r feclllty whtch, on tbe basir
of
bl¡ c¡tlm¿tc¡, would bave a
tot¡l co¡t lec¡ thln thc co¡t of thc freeway, but, a¡ he poiatr out in hia
report,
¡uch
I fectltty wo¡ld not bG cllgtbte for Fedcral particl¡ntloa
on
¡
90-10 baais.
It vould, tbcrcforc, coct thc xllstrlct of colr¡r¡blr more.
rt l¡ ¡ot clc¡r wbcû,hcr tbe NGTA report of November lst accepts or
r€Joctr thc flndt¡gt tD tåo coa¡ult¡¡tfr re¡nrt. Apprrcntly, thc oaly reference
to tht¡ m¡ttcr
tr th¡t on e ¡nrt
of the pro¡rcrcd ,J.aror freewayrr the NcrA
ptopo.G. tvo lrnc¡ la c¡ch dlrectlon ratåcr thå¡¡ tbrcc,
ar pto¡rored by the
coa¡ult¡nt.
'
Truck Tr affic
POINT (?I:
ltc Agcacy rcpcrtcdly makGr p¡¡r€r aealgnrucato of traffic ilor¡t of
-corrldor¡'r wltåout treclng thc hlgbwey necd througb to e concluslon.
Tbis
appller to truck
tr¡fflc
on
trrfflc
l¡tcr¡t¡to
¡,bd
¡U othcr trafftc oa I¡terst¡te Route 66 and to au
Ror¡tc 95 nc¡r tbc Ìy¡¡hington, D. C.
-Mlryle¡d bouadary.
�-¿7Redr¡ccd and inadequate capacity on that
critical part of Interstate Route
6ó
bctwccn Four Milc Rr¡n and the epproachcr to the river bridgoo, and on that
P8r! of comblncd I-95 ¡¡d I-?0-S t¡ Northc¡¡t W¡rht¡gton, cauoer congeetion,
çhlch l¡ turn rcducc¡ ¡e¡umcd rpecdr of operrtlo¡¡ on tbc frceway. The re-
¡ult thcn lr th¡t thc cornputer, becar¡¡c of ¡ucb
trlpr to Sraa¡lt. Thlc l¡
an
arbltrary
rrl'rFutrr
factore, aaaigna the
arrd u¡related method of planning.
The creatlon of a highway ayate"m, ar thul propoacd by NCTA, witb
rcrtrlctiona on frcewayr approachlng the conttal clty, violate¡ frurdamental
prlnclplca of hlghwey planntag. Every trafflc lqrvcy i¡ tJ¡e United States
hag
dcmon¡tratcd agaia aad agaln that tbere ia e¡ lacrcaae tn ca¡ncity require-
mcnt¡, end not ¡ decreaac, et you approacb the core of metropolitan areaa.
rrBullt-ln[ congcotlon and the ¡aaumptlon of low deelgn rpccde ar propoeed by
NCTA wor¡ld mGeD ctop aad go trafflc GvGn o¡ ths
frcewayt. Thla ia not plari-
nlng for an cfflcleat blghway ayotem.
lbc
Frecway Procram Should Goatinue
lbe lX¡trlct of Columbla h¡s
bcen proceedlng wtth the devolopment of
frceweyrr lacludlng brtdger, ln accordaacc \rtth tbo Tra¡aportation plan for
thc N¡tlon¡l Cepttal Rcglon, pre¡nred by the Nation¡l Capital Planning Gom-
mlrrlo¡ ¡nd thc Natlon¡l
Capûtal Rcglonrl Plaanrng
Co,-"tl.
(2)
The Vtrgtnia
Dc¡nrtmcnt of Highweya al¡o b¡d bcen proceeding wtth planningr deeigning
e¡d coa¡tructlng
l¡tcr¡t¡tc
Routc 66 tn Arllngton ¡nd F¡lrfax Gor¡ntles in
¡ccord¡¡cc vlth tbl¡ ¡amc b¡rlc pl¡n.
�-¿8-
lbe Natio¡¡l Park Scrvlce h¿a r¡nder constructlon thc plrtrr¡y
tlrc Marylr¡d ¡bore of the Potomac Rlvcr betwccn
ùhc
on
C¡bln Job¡ Brldgc
r¡d tbc Dlrtrlct of Golumbia-lvfaryland bouadary. Tbc Dl¡trlct of Colr¡¡nbh
h¡¡ t¡¡dcr contrsct thc con¡tructlon of a maJor p¡rt
l¡
of tbc proporcd l¡torcbragc
tho vtclnlty of, 27tb and K Streets¡ N. Tll. It loglcrlly followr th¡t thc N¡tlon¡l
Prrk Scrvlcc, thc Boa¡d of Com¡nl¡¡loncrr of tbo Dl¡trlct of Golr¡¡ublr, rnd
t.bo
9t¡tc of Vtrgtnta¡ rhould coopcratlvcly rad aggrorrlvoly ¡dvr¡cc tbo¡c
proJoctr Loco¡.ary to
proporod Tbrcc
flll
tbc ¡epr ta tål¡ traporteat hlghwry
corrldo¡.
Tbc
gl¡tcrr $rtdgc tc r rlgalftceat put of tbl¡ corrlàor.
L¡ck of Flcxlblltty:
Tbo plra tocom¡n@dcd by tbo NGTA wlth rcfcrcncc to
trlpr rcro¡¡
tbc
Poþ¡n¡c Rlvor l¡ck¡ floxtblltty. Thc rpprront nort brl¡nc¡ bcturoo¡ ceprclty
¡¡¡d dom¡nd
l¡
qucrtloneblc from a tcch¡lcel rtradpolnt. It provldo. ao crpeclty
for cprallon, nor flcxlUlity to mcot r¡nforo¡cæ ó6t¡dr.
tho Nrtloarr Grpl-
t¡l hm prrvlourly bcca oxporcd to protrrctcd arguno¡t¡ wttb r¡for¡ncc
to tå¡
a..d for brldgo crp¡clty acrort thc Potomrc Rtvcr, aotrbly l,a tbr l{tb gtrcct
oosrldor. Tb¡
nocd for brldgo crprclty ta
tblr sorrldor rrw¡¡¡¡ô bottr for yctlt
wltb tbo blghwry proponcnt¡ rgrulng for two four-l¡¡r brldgrr ¡¡d tbo op¡nacatr
r,r¡ulag th¡t
I l¡¡¡or crprclty wrr ¡¡od¡d. fortu¡rtrly fol tbl rllr, for tbc
rtgntflorat volu¡n¡r of ¡ortå-routh trrfllo rlong tå¡ er¡tr¡¡ ¡rrbo¡rd
oú
tb¡
ttrtr¡r ¡¡d for tåc clty, thG btSbwry propo¡.¡t! vìo¡. Tb¡l¡ two
brtdgor rr. !oç orrryla¡ l¡ tb¡ ord¡r of 1201 000 v¡hlol¡¡ ¡rcb vorlrdry.
Ualtod
�_29-
Furtbermore, deopite a vaet backgrouad of data with reference to
tr¡fflc volumc¡, thc llighway Dopart¡aent¡
acroas the la¡d have repeatodly
becn too low ln thetr e¡tlmato¡ wltb rcrpcct to futurc forccaata. It ha¡ becn
rlmo¡t tm¡nrrtblo to d¡tc to ¡ccur¡tcly prcdlct tbc r¡tc ¡t which .Amerlc¡¡t
dc¡lro to buy rnd opcrrta motor vchiclcs. In rr¡¡n¡r¡rf¡ tottrô ?6 mtllion
vchlclo oçDGt. rad r¡tprorlmrtcly lf0 nlllloa llcca¡cd drlvcr¡ rrctnrt bc
wron¡.
rl
Thc Borrd of Gom¡rrlrrloncr¡r D. C. ¡hould not purh
uldc lightly tbo
t}oughtful ¡h¡dlc¡ ¡nd l¡verttgrtloar wblch h¡vc boo¡ an¡dc ovca. the yeara,
r¡ wcll t.
.ornG of thc
¡olld crtrbll¡hcd trcnd¡. I\¡rthcttnotG' ln ttc ab¡cncc
of conclu¡lvo cvldGncG conccral¡g rrrunptloan, nothodr, end otåcr relev¡nt
frctor¡,
tbc Boud of Gommtr¡loacrrr D. C. mu¡t bc rcluct¡¡t to ¡ccept at
frce valuc thc drtr prcecatod by tbc Nadonrl Cepttrl Tnnr¡rcrt¡tlon Agency.
In tbc
c¡..
of thc lbrcc Sl¡tcr¡ Brldgc, ttc Borrd of Corn¡ntarloners,
D.C. h¡,¡ l¡dlcrtcd
l¡
tho lntroûrctory prrt of tblr brochurc tb¡t ovct tbc ycarr
¡h¡dlc¡ nr¡do for thc N¡tlo¡¡l Gepttel Plrnafag Co¡r¡ml¡¡ion, thc St¡tc of Vlrgfnb ¡nd for tbc Eo¡rd of Gornrnlrlloncr¡, D.C. by orpcrt co¡¡ult¡nt¡ in
tr¡¡¡ttþrtrtlon pfrD¡¡þg h¡vc rocotürrcndcd tbc con¡tn¡ctlon of ea eddltional
ccntrrl ¡rcl brtdgc clthor rt thc ltrcc Slrtcrr rltc or lt .on¡G tltcrn¡te rite
l¡
tbc ccatrrl
ltc¡. lbo Bo¡rd oú Gorn¡¡l¡¡loacr¡ lr improrrcd
thrt ovor tpprorlnrrtcly
tlho
wlth thc f¡ct
pmt twonly ta¡t., tbc trrfflc volur¡cr in pcek
�-30-
bourr h¡vc incrc¡¡cd ¡t en svcrlgc ratc whlcb rcqulrc¡ the addido¡ of about
oDG-hdf frcc-flodng
hae¿g¡ggt¡
thc dircctlon of thc pcak flow.
SUMMARY
thc Board of Gommt¡rlo¡cr¡' D.C. hea carcfully
wetghed tbe proa end
-co¡. elth rcrpcct to thc fbrcc Sletcr¡ Erldgc. It rccognlcc¡ that tbe Gongrerr,
thc Eo¡rd, l¡d otborr wcac ¡¡kcd moac tåa¡ ¡ yGsr 8go to dcfcr ¡ dccicio¡ on
tbo brldgo t¡¡tll thc NCTA rc¡rort w¡¡
ev¡llablc. Tbl¡ b¡¡ bcen doae. but to
dltc, wc clD flad ¡o rolid date tn thc NGTA publlcetio¡¡r o¡¡ sbich to juctify
furtbcr dcforr¡l of tbe proJcct. O¡¡r ro¡¡one, ln rumrrr¡ary, er6 tåe¡e:
I
ll
Thc accd for ¡ddltto¡¡l brtdgc crprelty
l¡ clc¡r rnd þattfied
by cxperlencG.
l2l Tbcrc l¡
no other practical bridge aitc for a asw brtdge which
would glvc adcquatc ¡crvlce.
13) Tbc ¡nrrtblc convcrrion of Key Erldgc to ¡crvc tbc ¡ame ¡nrr-
Pofcf would bc too cortly ead dkrupttvc of v¡luc¡ ln George-
towa. For approdmately thc r¡mc cost, ¡ddltio¡¡l capacity
c¡¡ bc provlded ¡t Tbrec Sl¡tcr¡.
DECIS¡ON
In vlcs of tbc tbovcr'tbc Borrd of Gon¡¡tr¡loacra, D.C.
to prococd
rltb
tbo throc Sl¡tcr¡ Ertdgc.
h¡¡
decided
�f
c
.o
o
P
Y
t
Ostobcn 10, 1962
Hon. Carl Hayden
Chatrman, Commlttee on Approprtaüone,
U. S.
Senate
Washtngton, D. C.
Dear Senator Hayden:
tn connectlon wtth the conference now golng forward benreen
conferees of the Houee and Senate releüng to the rgoí oppi"prrittone
btll for the Dlstrlct of Columbtar thlg ts tó advlse you that before the
Commlssloners proceed wlth the constn¡cuon of thã fhree Stsierg
Bnldge, they wlll glve most carefut conglde¡:aüon to ôny rscomr"-ndatlons p€rtalnlng thereto that rnay appear tn the rsport oi the Nattonâl
Gapttal lranaportaüon Agency, whrch ra orpeatcd to ue ¿euverão
to the hegldent on Novembs f , 1962.
Wfth klndegt peraonal regarda, I am
Slncerely yor¡r8,
WALTER
N.
TOBRINER
PresldEnt, Board of Conmtsslonere, DC
EXHIBIT I
�-qlr
.-'-¿
.rt
.'t
t
.r¡
\\\
,
./ ."*
t
,a
./
.-$,
y'
)
ì
v
¿t
i.'tl
6EOEn ô
d:i
,!
I
o
KIY BR¡ D G E
t'¿sHt,tcTt
,,'^'
/.î
l
44-
l\\'
^
TH ro. ROOStvE LT
ø?
rc
¡
rt
PAß
EA I
N
ITlH. ST.
CH¿l .\.\'¿'¿
8Rt DGE
BRTDGE
P
ARLINGTON
VEM. BRIDGE
RTE STSTF:RS
BR¡ DGEI
(
ry
f.ß
t'
rtg¡hHa
I
t
I
a
t¿
,//
..,.7
lt
,^.,,
"n'//
t
.â\.rj's
ir
v
\
:/'
....Ð
I
(
\
POlomAc RtvEn cRosstNcs
CENT¡AI A߀A
f
I
\
'i
€91¡¡¡a.t
I
?
it
a
'!
.3
EXHrüf
2
�Prø tbs llash{ngtm
PosÈ, January
WIÎH
17,
FRIENÍDS
f963
LIKE
TIIESE
llaehlngtoa needa rapid EransÍt. Ttre queaÈÍon notr le wt¡ether ühe
systen cn" aurvfve the Naclonal Capltal Tranaport¡tl,on
Agencyt e peculLar statLeÈl.ce.
tdea
of q trarislÈ
Itre Agency le an fncorrlgible believer ln the hard ssll. IË 1¡
fncapable of lettlng a good caee speak for LËeelf. Every comparaÈtve "q¡rt
be eharpened to a euperlatlve, aÈ whatever cost to credLblllty. Ihe ¡fr
Èechni.cal appendlces Èo the Agencyre Nø\retrber report have at laat appearcd,
and ütrey are noÈ cechnLcal appendlceg aÈ aLl ln the engineerre uaô of thc
Ë€tE. Itrey are adverÈigeoente, wrl.Èten for la¡noen.
ù
the appendtceg make publlc eome of Èhe asaumptLons upon ntrfch the
Agency basa¡ lÈs reco@sndatlon for a blgger euhrey chan prevloraly planncd,
end fewer hlgþwaye. In the f¿cs of overwhelmLng hlecortcel evldenß. to
the contrary, tho Agency aaaunes thaÈ riefng incøe le\rele n111 not, ÈåDd
to dfniafah anbrray traf,ffc. the Agency assumes that parklug coets w1,11
rlae but tr¡na1È faras w111 not; and yet tl¡.oedien tranaÍt fare ln thl¡
corntry baa dot¡bled since 1950. brperlence Buggests that the aeceeclCy
of naklng ta¡ncfs¡s cuLe traffLc; the Agency asaunea ËhaÈ they do aoË.
No one really lcnsns Ëhat w111. happen wtren a new etrbway Le opened
tn an Ánarfcan iaotropollg that hae grorm up arorrnd the private ar¡tonoblle.
Ée best that englaeers can do fe Eo rnake guessêa, and very of,Èen onr gusrs
le ae good ao a¡rother. ftre Agencyt e onn conputaÈLons srrggest ühaÈ tÈs
chlcf targ€t, Ëhe 1959.tranoporÈatlon plan with lte Erch enaller ruhrey ond
Its rellencs upon erpreea buees, wot¡ld divert approrcfmaÈely the eaûs nüEbcr
of dqnrÈom cou¡tera to publlc Era¡rsiÈ. ForecasËe 1n thig untrled flsld
aro fuiherently loose and highly condltloual.
lhe root of Èhe Agencyr s e:<aggeratlono lles 1o a pollclcal nleJudgDÊnÈ.
Itre Agcncy fa convfnced that the clty w111 bulld uo subway at all unlcs¡
It becoros a weapon for ktlllng geveral LuoinenÈ hfghùay coneEructfon
And Èhat la wby Ehe Agency consLdera neceassry a forecaaû,
howwer rnrlnerable, that the automoblle trafffc lnüo downtorn llaablngton
st1l aetr¡ally declLne ao the cfÈy grow8.
proJecte.
A rapld tranelË Eyateû doea noË harre to pay off lÈa caplËal Lnnectto be economlcally Juettfted. It doee not harre to effsct an ¡baoluG¡
dccllne ln autøobile traffLc Eo beneflt lueasurably the clty and lÈa
c@¡Bero. By vaatly or¡erlaflatlng 1Ëe hopea and by bendlng lts arlthn¡Èlc
to lËs preconceptLone, Èhe Natlonal Capftal Transportaclon Agency t¡ obgsurlng Èh¡ sq¡nd and reagooabLe case for a rapid traneLt sygË€¡¡ Ëo se¡ìta
DaaË
lfarhfngÈon.
EXHIBIT Z-A
�t ¡¡altll
eae?agu.tæta
r¿t? Z/y/ 7 AtltMt@ ¿?ØJ /gü?
3-.ç? tltlg4ta a¿ gl/Eryrtgegv t?Ørul
ør?
JûP6 'Y
æ'
ø*
.,,*'Væ¿,,?
,!ø7tWøg.lw-gSr7waA2/r97¿/J
t ¡r¡r{n
'r/¿ZrY
lg
æ6/?glærnn
aVtl lYO /tarØ19 Sf
79?/ r/t/"gr?a/ 9/lAf/1&AV t3/7/tr OZlgrfUV
Ae/J//48779
æry
-4raê./
4t1
taøttãrrY apr'tc.7É/
Y77f -*æ/ag
.(t7- glætdry ?:tFZ
�CI-ASSIFICATION OF INBOUND VEHICLES
OVER THE POTOMAC RIVER BRIDGES
BY TYPE MlD STATE REGISTRATION
(Possørger con¡ mly orc clossificd by lota registro?íonl
AUGUST ¡962
o
EUSES
o
r5%
D.A
RUCI€
5O7o
VI RGINIA
æ4
ó
MARYLA
()
)
oe
,BUSES
I
OTHER S
DISTRICT
5
to
15
20
oFC
25
BIA
30
35
VOLUME OF MOTOR VE HICLES
TEN HOUR VOLUITE FROU 7:OO ÀÎf. TO 6:00
ONE SYMBOL'5,OOO VEHICLES
40
45
5()
p.t
EXHIBIT 5
�INTER.CÍTY TRAVEL 8Y MODE OF CARRIAGE
THE UNITED STATES
t940-
1970
t970
6%(AtRl
troo
1r'
6
:l
J
.rflfl,
too o
900
-rl
800
Ø
t¡¡
J
=
G
2%(BUS¡
,íl
lr
P
õ
=
3% ( RAIL!
I
700
,J4
,d)
600
l¡J
(,
z
l¡J
500
U'
@
É
J
f
2
z
.r
400
//
500
I/
89% (AUTO)
,'o
RAIL
AUTO
200
roo
o
l95O
¡945
Sources: l94O
A¡to - Arþ. Mfgrs. Assoc I U.S. Bureou of R¡blic Roods
Dolo
- Not'|. Assoa Motor Bus Operotors
Roil - Assoc. of Americon Roilroods
8us
Air
-
1955
1960
1965
1970
t958
Civil Aeronq¡tics Eoord
EXHIBIT ó
�POTOMAC RIVER TRAFFIC IN CENTRAT AREA
peo& åour vcåicles
proicctcd trcnd
30000
a
/
proioctod trond
20000
t0000
Ja'-
0
t950
I 960
r 970
I
9t0
Rcproduction Of Figure lâ, Pogc 27 NCTA Rcport
EXHIBIT 7
POTOMAC RIVER TRAFFIC IN CENTRAT AREA
peo& hour veåicles
30000
proicctod trond
/
,0000
t0000
/
I
0
1950
t960
¡970
teto
Fulure Noed Bosed Upon Hi¡loricol Trcnd
EXHIBIT 8
�coNsnlunox
At4
â
a
90
¿7æ
tØ
!
s
-t
o
t,
t
t
Poo¿
E€FLECTfNG
o
tvota,rJ
1
trlÞ(¡r€ Acl¡
,1to
a.æ
ÍrVA
atL
lærv,
(î
TtoAL Casr^,
ç
NEåOIIAI ITIDGE
I
EIrüÎ
I
I
PÊAX,
nOU¡ rnÀffic cÁP^cl7ret
AT
PT
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Three Sisters Bridge
Subject
The topic of the resource
Transportation--Washington (D.C.)--Planning
Bridges--Washington (D.C.)
Bridges
Description
An account of the resource
Appendix I.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District of Columbia. Board of Commissioners
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1963]
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Public domain
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Documents
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/49013d1b02c9436fc86075e4183f6861.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=nYjEnYTGhbQMKBOcK6oouzHHH-HE2Fqm6XhEUWGJSDXVbI-Qf7CyarJnv6b-Gk4hbJqbzBE6uCICAgVV3EluuWISuGuD8LeYuGu-Wb9-Tx5qz-AOgesYJ2QUsU8keDunNCd0ZyA8%7ExBswLHP5qh-RDs%7EoGj%7ETigYppbnu3Y%7ELcyvTFCARxJ3X9ZMnI-H2Gnp4SWHYKhdHsu3ahEwjwvfPrQKBrogKiS-PP%7Ezpzop77FZkI6HvDzLay-gYqWaSXFP4sivFvHJXU0vM8xQZpt3sdULEUgS3P0w5nJ7dZ3I-qJ5oUxbT51m4S4TIUHR1Z7CK9p0%7EO9hIV3id8eO6hvybQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
30db50a87b70f0dc9f22461197105078
PDF Text
Text
Toll Financing
for
Potomac River Crossings
Washington, D. C.
^^J/Ulllat <S>mltlt and <zpJ-*4#ciate*
165
CHURCH STREET
NEW HAVEN,
CONNECTICUT
-Jprit 1955
��Toll Financing
for
Potomac River Crossings
Washington, D. C.
L I B R A R Y
DEPT. c, HIGHWAYS & TRAFFIC
UIotKtwf
Of
COLJiUdlA
��Toll Financing
for
Potomac River Crossings
Washington, D. C.
265
NEW
CHURCH
HAVEN,
-Jpril
STREET
CONNECTICUT
1955
��HAilur
^S'mctli and
TRAFFIC
.
PARKING
~>$5Aociate5
.
TRANSIT
.
HIGHWAYS
265 C H U R C H
STREET
Yjew ^J4auen, C^onn.
April 18, 1955
Mr. J . N. Robertson, Director
Department of Highways
Washington, D. C .
Dear Mr. Robertson:
We are pleased to transmit to you and the sponsoring agencies our report on an engineering study to ascertain the feasibility of collecting tolls on Potomac River bridges within
the Washington Metropolitan Area. This study was undertaken in accord with Agreement
No. D.C.F.-A864, dated February 17th, 1955, entered into with the District of Columbia
Department of Highways.
Means of financing additional bridges and approach roads have been given much attention by Congress and other political jurisdictions for many years. The question of revenue
bond financing has often been raised. This report has been prepared with a view to exploring
the possibilities of toll financing and presenting data to guide legislative and administrative policies.
In developing the background for this report we have been able to use much of the
data which we collected and analyzed in our study of "Highway Transportation in the
Washington Metropolitan Area of Virginia," prepared for the Virginia Department of Highways in November, 1953, and our investigation of "Traffic and Capacity Needs for Potomac
River Crossings," completed for the National Capital Planning Commission earlier this year.
Data from these sources have been supplemented by traffic counts and other materials
furnished by the District Department of Highways, Fairfax County in Virginia, Montgomery and
Prince Georges Counties in Maryland, and the States of Virginia and Maryland.
The report reviews several different combinations of Potomac River bridge improvements
which might be considered for development as revenue bond projects. In each instance the
feasibility of toll financing has been investigated in terms of the lowest possible toll rate.
The results of these studies indicate that it would be possible to finance revenue bonds
from Potomac River bridge tolls in amounts sufficient to construct new bridges and access
roads and to improve existing crossings. Certain combinations of new bridges could be
financed with funds derived from toll schedules based on a ten cent passenger car rate
giving preferential treatment to commuters. Other bridge combinations might be financed
with revenues based on passenger car tolls ranging from ten cents to twenty-five cents.
Throughout the study our engineers have worked closely with the sponsoring agencies,
which include the District of Columbia Department of Highways, the National Capital Planning
Commission, the Maryland State Roads Commission, the Virginia Department of Highways,
and the Bureau of Public Roads. In addition to numerous individual contacts, all of these
organizations have been represented at three general conferences which were held to
organize the work and to review progress and findings as the study progressed.
It has been a great pleasure to have participated in developing the Information in this
report. We would like to again express our appreciation and thanks for the cooperation and
assistance which we have received.
Respectfully submitted,
WILBUR S. SMITH
��CONTENTS
Part I .
INTRODUCTION
Fourteenth Street Bridge (Highway Bridge)
Chain Bridge
Proposed
Proposed
Proposed
Proposed
Proposed
Roaches Run Bridge
Constitution Avenue Bridge
Three Sisters Bridge
Nebraska Avenue Bridge
Cabin John Bridge
PAGE
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
6
6
Part II.
T R A F F I C AND POPULATION
Traffic Studies
1. The Washington Metropolitan Area Transportation Study
2. Harland Bartholomew and Associates Study, 1952
3. Modjeski and Masters Study, 1952
4. Wilbur Smith and Associates Studies, 1953 and 1955
5. Traffic Counts and Classification Studies
6 Other Studies
Population Growth in the Washington Area
11
Traffic Growth in the Washington Area
Adjustment of 1948 Origin-Destination Data to 1953 and 1970
12
16
16
Part III.
8
8
8
8
9
T R A F F I C ASSIGNMENTS
Traffic on Bridges, 1960
1970 Traffic on Bridges
Part IV.
7
7
23
24
24
26
27
28
COST OF N E W BRIDGES AND IMPROVEMENTS
29
29
31
31
�Part V.
T O L L R A T E S AND POTENTIAL R E V E N U E S
PAGE
33
33
34
34
34
37
38
Part VI.
S C H E M E I — T H E O U T E R BRIDGES
•Rnth B r i d g e s
1 Oc T o l l
39
40
40
Schedule
43
43
45
Part VII.
S C H E M E I I — A L L POTOMAC R I V E R BRIDGES
.
.
Part VIII.
49
49
49
54
S C H E M E I I I — T H E C E N T R A L CROSSINGS
55
55
56
Part IX.
SCHEME I V — F R E E MEMORIAL BRIDGE
61
61
66
Part X.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
�FIGURES
PAGE
FIGURE
1
Location Map, Potomac River Bridges, Existing and
Proposed, Washington, D. C. Study Area
xiii
Population Distribution, Washington, D. C. Study Area,
1953-1970
13
Passenger Car Registration, Washington, D. C. Study Area,
1920-1970
14
4
Persons Per Passenger Car, 1915-1970
15
5
Highway Use Of Motor Fuel, 1925-1970
17
6
Traffic Growth, Potomac River Crossings, 1940-1970
18
7
Origin-Destination Zones, Washington, D. C. Study Area,
1953-1970
20
Major Directional Desire Lines of 1953 Traffic Across the
Potomac River, Washington, D. C
21
Major Directional Desire Lines of 1970 Traffic Across the
Potomac River, Washington, D. C
22
2
3
8
9
ix
�TABLES
PAGE
TABLE
I
Total Vehicular Traffic — Potomac River Bridges
9
II
Classification of Vehicles Crossing Potomac River
10
III
Population Trends — Washington Metropolitan Area
11
IV
Washington Metropolitan Area, Automobile Registration
and Ownership Ratio, 1953 and 1970
12
1954 Traffic Distribution, Potomac River Bridges
24
Traffic Use and Traffic Desires on Existing Bridges, 1954
25
Estimated Distribution of Traffic to Potomac River
Bridges— 1954 ADT
26
Estimated Distribution of Traffic to Potomac River
Bridges — 1960 ADT
27
Estimated Distribution of Traffic to Potomac River
Bridges — 1970 ADT
28
Estimated Construction Costs — New Potomac River
Bridges and Improvements
30
Operation and Maintenance of Potomac River Bridges
31
Annual Maintenance and Operation Costs for Potomac
River Toll Bridge Systems—1960
32
Potential Revenues, 1960 — Potomac River Toll Bridge
System, Tolls on All Crossings, All Vehicles Pay
35
Potential Revenues, 1960 — Potomac River Toll Bridge
System, Tolls on all Crossings, Government Vehicles
Free, All Others Pay
35
Potential Revenues, 1960 — Potomac River Toll Bridge
System, Tolls on All Crossings, Commuter Tickets,
Government Vehicles Free
36
Potential Revenues, 1960 — Potomac River Toll Bridge
System, Tolls on All Crossings, Monthly Commuter
Passes, Government Vehicles Free
37
Scheme I — Outer Bridges — First Year Traffic and
Revenues— 1960 (10c) Passenger Car Tolls)
41
Scheme I — Outer Bridges — Estimated Traffic and
Revenues—1970 (10c Passenger Car Tolls)
41
Scheme I — Outer Bridges — Traffic and Revenue
Summary
42
V
VI
VII
VIII
IX
X
XI
XII
XIII
XIV
XV
XVI
XVII
XVIII
XIX
XX
Scheme I — Outer Bridges — Feasibility of Toll
Financing
...
44
�TABLE
XXI
XXII
XXIII
XXIV
XXV
XXVI
XXVII
XXVIII
XXIX
XXX
PAGE
Scheme I-A — Jones Point Bridge — First Year Traffic
and Revenues —1960 (25c and 50c Passenger Car
Tolls)
45
Scheme I-A — Jones Point Bridge — Estimated Traffic
and Revenues— 1970 (25c Passenger Car Tolls)
46
Scheme I-A — Jones Point Bridge — Traffic and
Revenue Summary
47
Scheme I-A — Jones Point Bridge — Feasibility of Toll
Financing (25c Passenger Car Tolls)
48
Scheme I I — All Potomac River Bridges — First Year
Traffic and Revenues (1960)
50
Scheme I I — All Potomac River Bridges — Estimated
Traffic and Revenues — 1970
51
Scheme I I — All Potomac River Bridges — Traffic and
Revenue Summary (15c Basic Passenger Car Toll)
52
Scheme I I — All Potomac River Bridges — Feasibility
for Toll Financing by 15c Basic Passenger Car Toll
53
Scheme I I I — Central Crossings Only — First Year
Traffic and Revenues — 1960
56
Scheme I I I — Central Crossings Only, Estimated Traffic
and Revenues — 1970
57
XXXI
Scheme III — Central Crossings, Only, Traffic and
XXXII
Scheme III — Central Crossings Only, Feasibility of
Toll Financing
59
XXXIII
Scheme IV — Free Memorial Bridge — First Year
Traffic and Revenues — 1960
62
XXXIV
Scheme IV — Free Memorial Bridge — Estimated
Traffic and Revenues — 1970
63
XXXV
XXXVI
58
Scheme IV — Free Memorial Bridge — Traffic and
64
Scheme IV — Free Memorial Bridge — Feasibility of
...
65
�0
�LOCATION
MAP
POTOMAC RIVER
EXISTING
AND
W A S H I N G T O N , D. C ,
BRIDGES
P R O P O S E D
STUDY
AREA
FIGURE
I
��PART
I
Introduction
ON August 30, 1954, President Eisenhower signed a bill, H. R. 1980, authorizing
the construction of two Potomac River
bridges to serve the Washington area. One
of these bridges would be a four-lane crossing "at or near Jones Point, Virginia." The
other would be a six-lane facility extending
"from the vicinity of Constitution Avenue
in the District of Columbia to the Virginia
side" of the Potomac River. Congress has
not yet provided funds for construction of
the new bridges, however.
Planning and building new bridges in
Metropolitan Washington requires the cooperative effort of five principal governmental agencies. These are the Bureau of
Public Roads, which is directly concerned
in highway facilities at the Federal level;
the District of Columbia Department of
Highways and the National Capital Planning Commission, which are responsible
for location and design of new bridges in
the District of Columbia; and the Maryland
State Roads Commission and the Virginia
Department of Highways which are jointly
concerned with Potomac River bridge
crossings and their approaches in the urbanized areas just outside the District
limits.
Large public works in Washington are
usually financed by Congressional appropriations in the form of federal grants.
Since no appropriation has been made for
the construction of new Potomac River
crossings, the several highway planning
agencies have undertaken a joint investigation of alternate methods which might be
expected to provide the necessary funds.
At the state highway level many roads and
bridges are financed by borrowing against
future gas tax revenues and other sources
of highway income. In states where such
borrowing is not permitted or where debt
limitations prevent further use of the methods, a "pay as you go" policy may prevail.
Under the "pay as you go" plan, funds for
large projects must be accumulated from
regular highway resources until the amount
on hand will pay for the project. Neither
of these methods is capable of supporting
immediate construction of new Potomac
River bridges in the Washington area without seriously disrupting current highway
improvement programs.
Revenue bonds represent an alternate
method of fund raising that has been used
extensively tofinancenew bridge construction at many locations throughout the
United States. Revenues derived from the
tolls collected of bridge users are the sole
source of funds to pay for the facility. This
method of financing offers several unique
advantages where traffic volumes are large
enough to make it feasible. In the first
place, the method is popular with taxpayers
who do not benefit directly from the new
facility since bridge costs are charged only
to bridge users, and the bonds do not constitute an obligation against those who do
not use the facility. Furthermore, financing
�is achieved entirely outside the debt limitations which apply to state or municipal
highway agencies. Revenue bonds may
thus offer a source of funds for the immediate construction of needed facilities.
Francis Scott Key Bridge
24th Street Bridge (in the vicinity of
Constitution Avenue)
Memorial Bridge
14th Street Bridge
Roaches Run Bridge
Jones Point Bridge
Authorization for Study
"Sec. 2. Determine the potential traffic
and revenues from the various combinations of bridges and tolls through the year
1970.
The following study of possible revenue
bond financing of Potomac River bridges
has been made in conformance with an
agreement dated February 17, 1955, which
was approved by the Director of the District of Columbia Department of Highways
acting for the five participating agencies
noted above. The study explores the feasibility of revenue bondfinancingof a Potomac River Bridge System which would be
paid for from tolls collected on the bridges.
The agreement describes the work to be
done as follows:
"Sec. 3. Determine a toll schedule or
schedules which would allow the purchase
of tags providing special rate privileges for
commuters.
"Sec. 4. Prepare summary tabulations of
the costs of existing bridges, the estimated
costs of proposed bridges and the rate of
retirement of such costs through the collection of tolls.
"Sec. 5. Make recommendations em"Engineering Study to Ascertain Feasibility of Collecting Tolls to Cross bodying the Consultant's conclusions as to
Potomac River Bridges within Wash- the feasibility offinancingvarious Potomac
River bridges in the Washington Metropoliington Metropolitan Area:
tan Area by the collection of tolls."
"The Consultant shall:
Toll Bridge Systems
"Sec. 1. Study the establishment of
tolls on all of the Potomac River bridges,
including existing bridges and the various
combinations of all bridges which the Consultant considers are likely to be required
to meet traffic volumes projected to 1970
between the proposed Jones Point Bridge
and the proposed Cabin John Bridge. This
study shall include the following existing
and proposed bridges but shall not be limited thereto in the event the Consultant
justifies some other combination of bridges:
Recent studies have shown that the volume of traffic crossing the Potomac River
will soon require more bridge capacity than
will be provided by the proposed new
bridges at Jones Point and Constitution
Avenue. A number of supplementary
crossings have been proposed to supply the
additional bridge capacity. All of them are
related to long-range arterial highway plans
which have been developed by the several
1
Cabin John Bridge
Chain Bridge
Nebraska Avenue Bridge
1
2
"Traffic and Capacity Needs for Potomac River
Crossings," Wilbur Smith and Associates; a report
for the National Capital Planning Commission,
Washington, D C , 1955.
.
�highway planning agencies in the Washington Metropolitan Area.
An important feature of future traffic
plans for Washington is a series of circumferential highways which would complement radial arterials centered in Washington's business district and the governmental
center. Three of these circumferential highways have been planned—an "inner loop"
around the central business district, an "intermediate loop," and an "outer loop" just
beyond the present limits of urbanization.
Each of the proposed new bridges is related to one or another of the circumferential routes and would ultimately be incorporated in the basic traffic circulation
system of the urban community.
Future bridges must, of course, be located to supplement and relieve existing
bridges. In order to relieve the present facilities many of the new bridges would be
located so as to provide access to the same
areas served by the existing bridges. It
would not be possible, therefore, to achieve
efficient operation of a toll bridge system
unless some or all of the existing Potomac
River bridges were made a part of the toll
system.
As suggested in the agreement described
above, several combinations of bridges
have been studied for feasibility as revenue
bond projects. The following studies are
reported on here:
Scheme I—Outer Loop Bridges—Jones
Point and Cabin John Bridges have been
examined jointly and individually for their
toll bridge potential in Part V I of this report. The investigations include study of
rate structures and various combinations
of bridges and approach roads. The proposed facilities would eventually be incorporated into an outer loop highway extending entirely around the metropolitan area.
Scheme I I — All Potomac River Bridges
A basic system of eight bridges has been
examined for feasibility in Part V I I . These
include the Cabin John and Roaches Run
Bridges in addition to existing bridges and
the authorized structures at Jones Point
and Constitution Avenue. Alternate plans
for inclusion of supplementary bridges at
Three Sisters or Nebraska Avenue have
also been studied.
Scheme I I I — All Central Crossings —
Part V I I I is devoted to an examination of
the eight-bridge system described in Scheme
I I , but assumes that the Outer Loop Bridges
(Cabin John and Jones Point) would be
constructed from regular highway funds
and would be operated as free facilities.
The six central crossings would constitute
a toll bridge system serving central Washington and connecting to the inner and intermediate circumferentials.
Scheme I V — Memorial Bridge Free —
Part I X considers the feasibility of a toll
bridge system of five central crossings
which would permit the Memorial Bridge
and Outer Loop Bridges to operate free
and which would be financed from toll
revenues collected on the five remaining
bridges.
Each of the four toll-feasibility studies
has been developed in detail from data
which have been collected by the consultant and other agencies during the past few
years in the course of a wide variety of engineering studies. Traffic estimates are
based on a firm foundation of traffic history
in the Washington area.
Description of Potomac River Crossings
Present Potomac River crossing plans
contemplate the improvement of some ex-
�isting crossings as well as the development to bridge or approaches are contemplated
of new ones. (Figurel). Cost estimates for at the present time.
new bridges and improvements are develKey Bridge — The Francis Scott Key
oped in Part I V of this report. Following is
Bridge was built in 1924 to replace an
a brief description of each of the existing
older stucture originally built in 1888. Four
and proposed bridges.
lanes of traffic use the 50-foot pavement
Fourteenth Street Bridge {Highway in which a double streetcar track is laid.
Bridge) — The 14th Street Bridge consists The bridge connects to the George Washof two structures. The original structure, ington Memorial Parkway and the Lee
built in 1903 with a 40-foot pavement, was Highway in Virginia and to the Whitehurst
intended to accommodate two lanes of traf- Freeway and "M" Street on the District side
fic in each direction. A companion bridge, of the Potomac River. The bridge carried
built in 1950, has a 50-foot pavement and an average daily travel of 47,000 vehicles
was designed to carry four lanes of traffic in 1954. Bridge and approach roads are
one-way (northbound) from Virginia to saturated at hours of peak use.
Washington. The old bridge now carries
The capacity of the Key Bridge can be
one-way traffic, southbound, in three lanes. increased by eliminating the streetcar
Average traffic on both bridges was about tracks and by cantilevering the south side102,000 vehicles per day in 1954.
walk to provide for three moving traffic
Improvements planned for the 14th lanes in each direction. Much needs to be
Street location include the replacement of done to improve the bridge approaches.
the old span with a new four-lane bridge
to better accommodate traffic from WashChain Bridge — The Chain Bridge, first
ington to Virginia. Proposed improved con- constructed in 1797, was last rebuilt in
nectors on the Virginia side include re- 1938. The bridge has a two-lane, 30-foot
vised ramps and connections to accommo- pavement and was used by some 14,000
date movements now using the old bridge. vehicles per day in 1954. Sharp curvature
Improvements on the District side would on the Washington approach and restricted
include ramp connections to the proposed sight distance on the Virginia side limit
Southwest Freeway sufficient to develop the capacity of the bridge. Further developfull four-lane capacity on both inbound ment of Canal Road will improve the
and outbound bridges.
Washington approach, and intersection redesign at the Virginia terminus will also
Memorial Bridge — The Arlington Me- benefit bridge traffic. Present plans do not
morial Bridge, opened to traffic in 1932, contemplate major improvement of this
accommodates six lanes of traffic on a 60- crossing.
foot pavement. Traffic on the bridge averaged about 54,000 cars per day in 1954
Proposed Jones Point Bridge—An outer
(heavy trucks are not allowed on the circumferential route has been approved
bridge). The use of the bridge is limited by the District Department of Highways,
more by the capacity of the traffic circles the National Capital Planning Commission,
at each approach than by capacity of the and official highway and planning agencies
bridge itself. However, no improvements in Maryland and Virginia. A four-lane
4
�river crossing at Jones Point in Alexandria is a part of this circumferential.
The crossing site is located south of Alexandria's central business district where
approach roads will create minimum disturbance to existing developments. Several
miles of expressway-type approach roads
would be required to develop proper access to the crossing. In Virginia, the bridge
approaches would connect with the Mount
Vernon Memorial Highway, U.S. Route 1,
and the Shirley Highway. On the District
side of the river the bridge would connect
to Overlook Avenue.
Proposed Constitution Avenue Bridge—
Highway and planning agencies have
agreed that there is urgent need for an additional "central crossing" to supplement
existing bridges. Studies show that the
Roaches Run Bridge alone will not suffice.
A number of bridge sites have been studied,
including an " E " Street location, a 24th
Street bridge, and the Constitution Avenue
site, all in the same general vicinity. In
1954, Congress and the President authorized the construction of a bridge in the
vicinity of Constitution Avenue. The President made his approval for any structure
built on the site. Esthetic considerations
are of such importance, however, that
Proposed Roaches Run Bridge—The pro- thought and study are presently being given
posed Roaches Run Bridge would be lo- to the construction of a tunnel instead of a
cated about one-quarter mile downstream bridge at this location.
from the 14th Street Bridge and would reThe bridge structure proposed for the
lieve and supplement that facility. The Constitution Avenue site would be a sixbridge would provide an additional six lane facility providing traffic interchange
lanes across the Potomac River to the peri- with Arlington Boulevard and the George
phery of downtown Washington. Streets Washington Memorial Parkway in Virginia
and highways in the District are presently and making connection to Constitution
incapable of absorbing the additional traf- Avenue, the Inner Loop Expressway, and
fic that the bridge would carry, and it would " E " Street in the District.
be necessary to coordinate construction of
a Roaches Run Bridge with completion
of the Southwest Freeway and other acProposed Three Sisters Bridge—A Three
cess improvements on the Washington Sisters site has been suggested as an alterside of the river. Financing these improve- nate to the Constitution Avenue Bridge loments would be entirely apart from bridge cation. A crossing here would introduce
financing.
traffic into downtown Washington by way
On the Virginia side of the Potomac
River the Roaches Run Bridge would connect with the Mount Vernon Memorial
Highway which would be improved into
Alexandria. Direct interchange would also
be made with the Pentagon road network.
In Washington the most important bridge
approaches would consist of an elaborate
interchange with the Southwest Freeway.
of a section of the proposed Arizona Parkway and a portion of the proposed Whitehaven Parkway to Rock Creek Parkway
south of Massachusetts Avenue. The bridge
would provide direct access to all of Northwest Washington from Virginia. A six-lane
stucture at Three Sisters, with proper access, would provide the additional "central
crossing" capacity required.
�vard. On the Virginia side, the bridge
would interchange with an extension of the
George Washington Memorial Parkway
and would connect to Military Road. An
extension would eventually be made to
Yorktown Boulevard.
Necessary approaches on the Virginia
side of the river would consist of an immediate connection to the George Washington Memorial Parkway. Future access
(not a part of the cost estimates) would
include interchange with the Spout Run
Parkway and an expressway connection to
the proposed Outer Circumferential in the
Falls Church area. In the District, it would
be necessary to construct a section of the
Arizona Parkway and Whitehaven Parkway to tie in with the Rock Creek Parkway. Interchange would also be provided
with Canal Road.
Proposed Cabin John Bridge—The Cabin
John Bridge would form a link in the proposed Outer Circumferential Highway
planned to ring the metropolitan area. A
four-lane structure at this location would
supplement the Jones Point Bridge as a bypass facility for traffic having neither origin
nor destination in central Washington.
While there is now relatively little demand
for a bridge at this location, construction
of the bridge and Outer Circumferential
would immediately encourage development
of adjacent areas and would create additional crossing demands.
To make the bridge accessible to traffic,
a section of the Outer Circumferential
should be provided on the Virginia side of
the river, extending from the bridge to U.S.
Route 29 west of Falls Church, Virginia, a
distance of about seven miles. On the
Washington side the bridge should connect
to MacArthur Boulevard, with eventual extension around the outer limits of the urbanized area as the Outer Loop Circumferential is developed.
Proposed Nebraska Avenue Bridge—The
Nebraska Avenue Bridge would provide a
high-level crossing of the Potomac River
about a mile downstream from the Chain
Bridge. Although this structure has been
proposed to provide relief to existing
bridges, it would serve primarily as a bypass around the heavily urbanized section
of the metropolitan area and would not attract very much of the traffic generated in
central Washington.
An access road of high design standard
should be provided from the bridge to a
connection with Nebraska Avenue in the
District. Interchange should also be made
with Canal Road and MacArthur Boule-
6
�PART
II
Traffic and Population
Population growth and traffic trends in
the Washington Metropolitan Area have
been studied for many years. A great deal
of information has been compiled about
the area which is useful in projecting the
probable course of future developments.
Several of the more recent studies have
been briefly reviewed below.
from the records of taxi and trucking companies to complete the internal portion of
the survey.
An external origin-destination survey
was conducted concurrently with the internal survey to determine the travel patterns of people entering the study area from
points outside. Thirty-four interview stations were established on the cordon line
which delimits the survey area, situated so
Traffic Studies
as to intercept traffic on all important roads
1. The Washington Metropolitan Area and interstate trunk highways. The data
Transportation Study — The most com- collected from the internal and external
prehensive investigation of traffic patterns surveys included the basic facts on origin
in the Washington area was the Washing- and destination, supplemented by volume
ton Metropolitan Area Transportation counts and traffic classifications by type of
Study of 1948, developed under the joint vehicle, state of registration, and direction
auspices of the Maryland State Roads Com- of travel. Survey data were verified by commission, the Commonwealth of Virginia paring the number of trips reported at the
Department of Highways, the District of Potomac River screen line against actual
Columbia Department of Highways, and counts made on the river crossings. The
the U . S. Bureau of Public Roads. The data were available to the consultants in
study was initiated with a comprehensive the form of summarized tabulations of trips
home-interview type origin-destination sur- between the numerous zones within the survey which made use of established sam- vey area.
pling techniques, with certain modificaA final report entitled "A Recommended
tions, and was designed to obtain detailed Highway Improvement Program" was pubinformation on travel patterns in the met- lished in the fall of 1952. New Potomac
ropolitan area on an average weekday. River bridges and improvements to existFrom five percent of the dwelling units in ing bridges were among the highway imthe area, trained interviewers gathered in- provements recommended for the Washformation regarding trips made the day be- ington Metropolitan Area. Immediate need
fore the interview by members of each was found for a new central crossing ( " E "
household five years of age or over. A ten Street) and improvement of the Key Bridge
percent sample was also obtained directly and its approaches. A somewhat lower pri-
�ority was given to construction of a new
southbound structure at 14th Street. Recognition was also given in the report to an
eventual need for bridges at Cabin John
and in the vicinity of Alexandria (Shepherds Landing) as essential elements in an
outer circumferential highway which would
provide for the by-passing of the downtown
area, the distribution of traffic and the development of areas adjacent to the already
heavily populated districts of Metropolitan
Washington.
Jones Point and consideration for a Nebraska Avenue crossing which would provide bypass values for drivers wishing to
avoid downtown Washington.
2. Harland Bartholomew and Associates
Study, 1952—"A Report on Future Bridge
Crossings of the Potomac River, Washington, D. C." (June 1952) by Harland Bartholomew and Associates emphasized the
need for application of planning principles
to the location of future Potomac River
crossings, including the eventual construction of a system of radial expressways and
freeways in conjunction with inner, intermediate and outer circumferentials which
would intercept the radials to permit traffic to bypass congested areas and disperse
itself. The report recommended that the
" E " Street Bridge should not be constructed
and that improvement of a mass transportation system on a metropolitan basis
should be emphasized. Traffic analyses
were based on the comprehensive 1948
origin-destination data.
3. Modjeski and Masters Study, 1952 —
In July of 1952, Modjeski and Masters
with Lloyd B . Reid, Traffic Consultant,
submitted " A Report on Potomac River
Bridges, Washington, D. C." which analyzed the 1948 traffic survey in light of
more recent information and recommended
construction of a central river crossing at
" E " Street as a first priority with later construction of an Alexandria Crossing at
4. Wilbur Smith and Associates Studies,
1953 and 1955 — A report prepared by
Wilbur Smith and Associates for the Virginia State Highway Commission in November, 1953, entitled "Highway Transportation in the Washington Metropolitan
Area of Virginia," was based on a projection and re-analysis of the 1948 origindestination survey. Among the new facilities recommended in the study were four
Potomac River crossings, located at Hanes
Point (Roaches Run), Three Sisters, Jones
Point, and Cabin John. Emphasis was given
to the problems of accommodating traffic
to and from the bridges on the Virginia
approaches.
Just completed is another study by Wilbur Smith and Associates for the National
Capital Planning Commission, entitled
"Traffic and Capacity Needs for Potomac
River Crossings," which is devoted to further evaluation of these sites as traffic facilities and a plan for the coordination of
new bridges and bridge improvements with
the major arterial plan. Suggested priorities for new bridges have been closely related to new express highway construction
to assure sufficient approach road capacity
to accommodate vehicles which would use
the new structures.
5. Traffic Counts and Classification
Studies — Records of the District of Columbia Department of Highways which
were made available to the consultants provide a history of the annual traffic pattern
on the Potomac River crossings since 1940.
Total traffic using these crossings is shown
in Table I .
8
�Table I
TOTAL VEHICULAR TRAFFIC — POTOMAC RIVER BRIDGES
Year
1940
1941
1942
1943
1944
1945
1946
1947
1948
1949
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
Typical A verage
Daily Traffic
105,627
121,332
109,206
87,868
90,339
103,150
129,231
134,840
146,649
161,623
182,190
199,659
208,281
212,886
217,000
An eleven hour count and classification
study of trans-river traffic was also made
for the consultants by the District of Columbia Department of Highways in January, 1955. This classification study segregated U . S. Government vehicles from
others. It also determined the proportions
of passenger cars, trucks, and buses in the
daily trans-river traffic. Table I I shows the
composition of traffic at each bridge as determined by this count.
Table I I reveals that 4,080 of the 142,737 total Potomac River crossings (about
2.9 percent) were made by Government
vehicles. On the day of the count Government passenger cars constituted about 1.7
percent of all passenger cars, Government
trucks accounted for about 11.5 percent
of all trucks and 11.6 percent of all bus
crossings were made by Government buses.
Over 126,000 passenger cars were counted
during the 11-hour period, representing
over 88 percent of the vehicles using the
bridges during that time. Trucks accounted
for about 10 percent of the traffic and buses
Percent of
1940 ADT
100
115
103
83
86
98
122
128
139
153
172
189
197
202
205
made up 1.7 percent of bridge usage. The
composition of traffic using the Potomac
River bridges in January, 1955, was found
to agree very closely with similar data
gathered in 1948 and 1953.
6. Other Studies — Both the National
Capital Planning Commission and the District of Columbia Department of Highways
have made other reports on crossing problems. Among these are official statements
of the National Capital Planning Commission recommending against the " E " Street
Bridge (March 10,1954) and recommending construction of a Roaches Run crossing
(March 30, 1954). Numerous other reports have also been filed which, although
important, have less bearing upon the traffic aspects of the problem.
Other statistical data of much value in
these investigations consisted of population
statistics, traffic volume records, travel time
and distance information, and similar materials used in the projection and analysis
of future trends.
�Table II
CLASSIFICATION OF VEHICLES CROSSING POTOMAC RIVER
( 1 1 Hour Count, January 1 9 5 5 )
Bridge
Chain
Key
Memorial
Highway
TOTAL
Pass
Truck
Bus
Total
i
Government Vehicles
-\
Pass
Private Vehicles •
Bus
Total
Truck
*
Pass
All r ehicles
Truck
Bus
>
Total
29
34
2
65
8,657
846
47
9,550
8,686
880
49
9,615
186
240
81
507
25,756
4,562
436
30,754
25,942
4,802
517
31,261
1,040
297
104
1,441
37,347
118
677
38,142
38,387
415
781
39,583
898
1,080
89
2,067
52,109
7,152
950
60,211
53,007
8,232
1,039
62,278
2,153
1,651
276
4,080
123,869
12,678
2,110
138,657
126,022
14,329
2,386
142,737
�Population Growth in the Washington Area
ington area made in the offices of the NaDuring the past fifteen years metropoli- tional Capital Planning Commission.
tan Washington has expanded far beyond
Most of the population increase since
the limits of the District of Columbia. The 1940 has been in the Virginia and MaryWashington metropolitan area includes the land counties adjacent to the District.
District, portions of Montgomery and Population increased over 100 percent bePrince Georges counties in Maryland, por- tween 1940 and 1950 in Fairfax and Artions of Fairfax and Arlington counties, lington counties in Virginia and in Prince
and the independent cities of Falls Church Georges County in Maryland; Alexandria
and Alexandria in Virginia. In 1940 this increased during this period by over 84
area contained a population of less than percent and the District itself increased
one million persons (962,979); by 1950 by about 21 percent. It is expected that the
there were nearly one and one-half million population growth will continue in the
residents in the metropolitan area (1,464,- outlying areas — particularly in Fairfax
092), and unofficial estimates of popula- County and other areas in northern Virtion presently in the area approximate ginia. This expansion is expected to remain
1,800,000 persons. Table I I I illustrates the largely residential in character, following
population trends for the area and indicates the non-industrial pattern of development
that by 1970 about 910,000 people are ex- established in the past. Detailed estimates
pected to reside in the District with about of 1953 population distribution were made
2,200,000 persons expected for the met- by adjusting the 1950 census against
ropolitan area as a whole. These estimates an inventory of occupied dwelling units
are in accord with recent extensive studies throughout the area, records of new home
of future population trends for the Wash- construction and information concerning
Table III
POPULATION TRENDS—WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA
1940
1950
1953
1970
District of Columbia
Alexandria
Arlington County
Fairfax County*
Falls Church
Montgomery County*
Prince Georges County*
663,090
33,520
57,040
40,929
83,910
84,490
802,180
61,790
135,450
98,557
7,535
164,400
194,180
819,500
75,000
156,000
128,000
8,200
212,600
278,700
910,000**
103,000
165,000
293,000
9,000
304,000
416,000
Total Metropolitan Area
962,979
1,464,092
1,678,000
Area
2,200,000
* Populations shown for Fairfax County, Virginia, and Montgomery and Prince Georges Counties in Maryland
include only those portions within the revised metropolitan area cordon line shown in the drawing in Figure 7.
** The 1970 population for the District of Columbia has been revised upward from the value reported in our report
entitled "Highway Transportation in the Washington Metropolitan Area of Virginia" which was prepared for
the Virginia State Highway Commission in November, 1953. This revision is in accord with recent extensive
studies of future population trends made by the National Capital Planning Commission.
�the number of dwellings removed or destroyed since 1950. Estimates of future
population distribution were based on future land use studies made by the several
active planning agencies in the Washington area. These studies indicate the amount
and distribution of usable land still available in the area. Figure 2 illustrates our
estimates of 1953 and 1970 population
distribution in the Washington metropolitan area.
Motor Vehicle Ownership Trends
While the population of metropolitan
Washington has increased by about 87 percent since 1940 (based on unofficial estimates of present population) motor vehicle
registration has increased even more rapidly. Figure 3 illustrates the upward trends
in passenger car registration from 1920 to
1953, projected to 1970, for the District of
Columbia and its metropolitan area as well
as for the states of Maryland and Virginia.
Figure 4 illustrates the related trends for
these areas in the ratio of persons per passenger car from 1915 to 1953; it is evident
that the trend is toward fewer persons per
car despite population increases. Even
though recent suburban growth in the
Washington area is oriented strongly toward the use of the private automobile,
there is expected to be a limit to the number of automobiles which the area can
support.
As seen from Figure 4, California, the
state with the lowest ratio of persons per
car, has about 2.46 persons per car which
represents about 1.32 licensed drivers per
registered automobile; of the 75 percent of
the population in California over 16 years
of age, 72 percent are licensed to drive. It
is not reasonable to expect that there will
ever be an average of a vehicle for each
person over 16 years of age and, therefore,
California is probably approaching the
saturation point in automobile ownership.
Metropolitan Washington is not expected to experience the low ratio experienced in California; highly urbanized areas
do not generally support as large a proportion of vehicles to population as do less
urbanized locations. Passenger car registrations are expected to continue to increase
Table IV
WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA
AUTOMOBILE REGISTRATION & OWNERSHIP RATIO
1953 & 1970
Area
Year
Population
Automobile
Registration
Persons Per
Automobile
District of Columbia
1953
1970
819,500
910,000
176,200
276,000
4.65
3.30
Virginia Metropolitan Area
1953
1970
367,200
570,000
107,300
219,000
3.42
2.60
Maryland Metropolitan Area
1953
1970
491,300
720,000
145,300
277,000
3.38
2.60
TOTALS
1953
1970
1,678,000
2,200,000
428,800
772,000
3.91
2.85
�POPULATION
WASHINGTON.
DISTRIBUTION
D.C,
STUDY
AREA
1953 - 1970
WILBUR
SMITH
AND
ASSOCIATES
F I G U R E
2
�PASSENGER
CAR
REGISTRATION
WASHINGTON,D.C, STUDY
A R E A
1920 - 1 9 7 0
WILBUR
SMITH 8
ASSOCIATES
Fl GURE 3
�PERSONS
PER
1915
WILBUR
SMITH 8 A S S O C I A T E S
k
PASSENGER
CAR
-1970
FIGURE
4
�in the Washington area, at slackening rates,
until by 1970 there will be about 2.85
persons per car in the metropolitan area
or about 772,000 registered passenger
vehicles. Table I V indicates the probable
automobile ownership growth for the metropolitan area.
Traffic Growth in the Washington Area
of their 1940 levels. These annual crossings have increased every year since the
wartime low of 87,868 vehicles. About
220,000 vehicles now use the Potomac
River bridges on average days. Figure 6
indicates the upward trend in Potomac
River bridge crossings since 1940, and
projected to 1970 according to trends in
local development mentioned above. Estimated future travel volumes are based upon
the assumption that major highway and
bridge improvements of the type studied
herein will be in existence by 1960. It is
anticipated that with such improvements
about 267,000 vehicle crossings will be
made in 1960 and about 328,000 in 1970.
These estimates represent increases of
about 23 percent and about 51 percent,
respectively, over the 1954 traffic level.
The large increases in motor vehicle
registration in the states of Virginia and
Maryland and metropolitan Washington
are reflected in the continued growth in
traffic throughout these states and across
the Potomac River. Figure 5 shows the history of annual highway use of motor fuel
in Maryland, Virginia and the District of
Columbia from 1925 to 1953, projected
to 1970; the use of fuel is a broad measure
of the trend toward increased highway
Adjustment of 1948 Origin-Destination
travel. Traffic volume records obtained by
Data to 1953 and 1970
the Virginia State Highway Department
and the Maryland State Roads CommisAt the time of the 1948 origin-destinasion from automatic traffic recorders in- tion survey an arbitrary cordon line was
stalled at key locations on their primary drawn around the limits of the urbanized
systems of highways verify the continued area which made up metropolitan Washgrowth in traffic.
ington, D. C. The area within this cordon
was divided into a series of "sectors" and
The Virginia State Highway Department
has determined the approximate number the business and governmental functions
of vehicle miles of travel on the Virginia at the center designated sector "O." Other
primary highway system for each month of sectors formed pie-shaped segments radieach year since 1941. It has been discov- ating from sector "O." Each sector was
ered that the vehicle miles of travel have further subdivided into "districts," resultincreased every month every year since the ing in a total of 62 districts in the metrowar. The 1954 monthly increases over politan area. Districts were further divided
1953 varied from 1.51 percent in August into zones and sub-zones, but for most
analyses a breakdown by district affords
to 3.74 percent in January.
sufficient detail. Each district is relatively
Trans-river crossings of the Potomac
River have increased tremendously since homogeneous as to land use and average
the war years as indicated in Table I . Traf- income level of residents.
Because the Washington urban area exfic counts made in 1954 indicate typical
daily traffic volumes well over 200 percent panded very rapidly from 1948 to 1953,
16
�HIGHWAY
USE OF MOTOR
FUEL
1925 — 1 9 7 0
WILBUR
SMITH
a
ASSOCIATES
FIGURE 5
�TRAFFIC
GROWTH
POTOMAC RIVER CROSSINGS
1940 -
WILBUR
SMITH
8
ASSOCIATES
1970
FIGURE
6
�the 1948 cordon line can no longer be used
to define the urban limits. A new cordon
line has been established to define the 1953
urban area and an additional 31 districts
have been designated. Figure 7 indicates
the study area delimited by the new cordon
line and designates each district within this
area. The inset in Figure 7 indicates the
extent of the urbanized study area in relation to the whole of Fairfax, Montgomery
and Prince Georges Counties.
An inventory of occupied dwelling units
was made in each of the new districts in
1953. Occupancy in districts within the
1948 cordon was determined from records
of new home construction and information
concerning the number of dwellings removed or destroyed since the 1950 census.
Estimates of car ownership in each district
were based on proportionate increases of
1948 ownership to agree with 1953 car
registration data. The highest rates of car
ownership were attributed to the new districts since most of the recent growth has
taken place in areas that are not well served
by transit.
Travel between districts was adjusted
to the 1953 level on the basis of consistent
relationships developed from the 1948
data. Among other things, it was found
that the ratio of cars to people in a district
is a basic factor in auto travel. Other criteria are length of trip, type of land use by
which trips are generated (central business
district, industrial area, or residential
area), and the relative convenience of mass
transit. Adjusting for each of these factors,
the origin-destination pattern for cross-river
automobile travel was determined for 1953,
and the total cross-river movement thus derived was compared to the average daily
travel across the river in 1953. The derived
data were found to be about seven percent
short of actual river crossings. An adjustment factor was applied uniformly to the
origin-destination data and a corrected pattern developed.
Travel data for 1970 have been prepared
in the manner described above, based on
estimated population and car ownership
values for each district. Estimates of future
population distribution were based on future land-use studies made by the several
active planning agencies in the Washington
metropolitan area. These studies indicate
the amount and distribution of usable land
yet available in the area within the 1953
cordon. Future travel volumes between districts include evaluation of highway and
bridge improvements that are expected to
be in existence by that time.
Figure 8 has been prepared to show
graphically, by means of "desire lines," the
areas between which people traveled in
1953 and the relative amount of such travel
for all trips having origin and destination
on opposite sides of the Potomac River.
Figure 9 shows the pattern of trip desires
anticipated for trans-river travel by 1970.
19
�ORIGIN - DESTINATION-ZONES
WASHINGTON,
D.C.
1953 -
WILBUR
SMITH
AND
ASSOCIATES
STUDY
A R E A
1970
F I G U R E
7
�MAJOR DIRECTIONAL DESIRE LINES
OF 1953 TRAFFIC
ACROSS THE POTOMAC RIVER
WASHINGTON, D.C.
WILBUR
SMITH
AND
ASSOCIATES
F I G U R E
8
�MAJOR DIRECTIONAL DESIRE LINES
0FI970
TRAFFIC
ACROSS THE POTOMAC RIVER
WASHINGTON, D.C.
WILBUR
SMITH
AND
ASSOCIATES
FIGURE 9
�PART
III
Traffic Assignments
The vehicles which cross the Potomac
River have a wide variety of origins and
destinations, as shown in Figures 8 and 9.
The river crossing that a driver chooses is
closely related to the pattern of trip desires
shown on the drawing, but is modified by
topographical restrictions, political boundaries, and the location and capacity limitations of bridges and approach roads.
Choice of Route
The origin-destination survey of 1948
obtained a vast amount of detailed travel
information in the Washington area which
can be used as a guide in determining the
probable future patterns of travel. These
data have been analyzed to determine the
basic patterns of automobile and truck
travel across the Potomac River.
In general, traffic across the Potomac
River seeks the shortest and fastest route
between points of origin and destination as
determined by the location of highways and
bridges and the quality of travel afforded
on alternate routes. At hours when traffic
is relatively light on all routes, it is possible
for every driver to select the route he considers most direct. At peak hours, however,
the shortest route may not be the fastest
due to congestion, and a less direct route
might be found to afford considerable time
advantage.
Many of the tangible and intangible factors which cause a driver to select a certain
route can be interpreted in terms of travel
time. If a time saving may be gained by
proper choice of route, drivers in general
will choose the route having the most time
advantage. Although many other factors
tend to modify the importance of time saving and may reverse it if monetary considerations such as toll charges are involved, the time measure is a valuable indication of route preference in urban areas.
In the case of the Washington study, a time
ratio measure was developed from 1947
origin-destination data, bridge-use data, and
travel-time information and has yielded
satisfactory results.
Average travel time studies for all of
the principal highways and streets in the
Washington metropolitan area have been
developed by the District of Columbia Department of Highways. From these data it
is possible to compute the average length
of time that would be consumed in traveling between most points in the metropolitan
area. Comparison of the travel times required by alternate routes will reveal the
route which requires the least time for
travel and which is therefore likely to be
the route selected for use.
Drivers are not usually aware of the precise time savings that a particular route
affords over other possible choices. Therefore, it is not possible to assign all traffic
between common points to the shortest
route indicated by the time-ratio. If travel
times are equal by the principal routes, any
23
�one route will generate about as much of
the movement as will the others. If a route
has a slight time advantage over others it
will tend to attract a slightly higher proportion of travel. If the time advantage is
rather large most vehicles will use the
shorter route. Empirical studies of such
conditions indicate that a route which requires only 80 percent as much travel time
as the most attractive alternate will be used
by between 80 percent and 90 percent of
the drivers performing the trip, all other
conditions being equal.
daily trans-river traffic and about 39 percent of the traffic at peak hours use the
Highway Bridge. The Memorial and Chain
Bridges carry about 25 percent and six
percent of the total daily crossings and
greater proportions of peak hour traffic
(31 percent and 11 percent, respectively).
Travel on the Key Bridge amounts to 22
percent of the average daily volume and
accounts for 19 percent of peak hour
bridge use.
Effects of Capacity Limitations
Traffic engineers and road designers
must give consideration to the amount of
Table V indicates the average daily vol- traffic that can be handled on the roads
ume of travel on each of the Potomac River and bridges for which they are responsible.
bridges in 1954. These average daily traf- Two measures of highway capacity are in
fic ( A D T ) volumes are based on bridge common use, both based on volumes of
counts taken at different times during the passenger cars per lane. "Practical" capayear which have been reduced to average city refers to a condition of use under which
values on the basis of continuous traffic vehicles are able to keep moving with overcounts made at selected locations in the all speed curtailed somewhat below the
Washington area. The ADT values are es- levels attained at lower volumes. "Possible"
pecially useful in developing the relative capacity represents complete saturation
traffic demand on the several Potomac which involves considerable delay and conRiver bridges.
gestion. These capacity criteria are usually
It can be seen that almost half of the expressed in terms of vehicles per lane in
1954 Use of Existing Bridges
Table V
1954 TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION
POTOMAC RIVER BRIDGES
bridge
Highway (14th St. Br.) .
Memorial
Key
Chain
TOTAL
2
2
Daily Traffic
(Vehicles)
Percent of
Crossings
102,000
54,000
47,000
14,000
47.0
24.9
21.7
6.4
5,400
4,230
2,660
1,660
38.7
30.3
19.1
11.9
5,350
4,420
2,670
1,490
38.4
31.7
19.2
10.7
217,000
100.0
13,950
100.0
13,930
100.0
Inbound Peak Hour
Vehicles
Percent
Outbound Peak Hour
Vehicles
Percent
"Traffic and Capacity Needs for Potomac River Crossings," Wilbur Smith and Associates; a report for the National Capital Planning Commission, Washington, D . C , 1955.
�the direction of heaviest travel at peak
hours and vary considerably according to
road width and alinement and the influence
of traffic regulating devices such as stop
signs and traffic signals. Since peak-hour
traffic generally represents a rather uniform
proportion of the average daily traffic,
peak-hour capacities are frequently stated
in terms of average daily traffic. Daily capacity values are used here in evaluating
bridge capacity limitations.
The trans-river traffic volumes for 1953,
which were derived by methods described
in Part I I , have been assigned to most
likely routes across the Potomac on the
basis of relative time saving, and the results expanded to 1954 A D T levels. These
assignments have resulted in theoretical
traffic volumes on the Highway and Memorial Bridges which exceed the actual use
of the bridges (Table V I ) . Since actual
use of these bridges is considerably greater
than the practical capacities computed for
them, it is clear that some vehicles have
been discouraged from using these bridges
and have sought other less direct routes.
Most of these re-oriented drivers have
chosen to use the Key Bridge, where actual
use is about 50 percent greater than the
use assigned by the time-ratio technique.
The principal deficiency of the time-ratio
method is its inability to distinguish capacity limitations. The time-ratio as used
above is based on average conditions, while
the capacity deficiency occurs at peak
hours. A peak hour time-ratio might be
applied to correct this deficiency were
it not for the fact that volumes of traffic
diverted from the Memorial and Highway
Bridges have loaded the Key Bridge beyond
its practical capacity, too, as shown in
Table V I .
In order to fit traffic assignments to
bridge capacity limitations, a method of
successive approximations has been applied
to the trip assignments determined by the
time-ratio method. It is known that as volumes approach capacity limits delay is
created rather suddenly. Under these conditions, some drivers seek the next most
attractive route. As the alternate route
reaches saturation, drivers again seek another route, but probably not the same
drivers, since a third alternate may be very
much less attractive to the drivers first diverted. This procedure appears to have
Table VI
TRAFFIC USE AND TRAFFIC DESIRES ON EXISTING BRIDGES
1954
Practical
Capacity*
Bridge
Highway Bridge (14th St. Br.)
Memorial
Key
Chain
...
1954 ADT
on Bridges
Percent of
Crossings
Time-Ratio
Assignment
Percent of
Crossings
90,000
50,000
43,000
12,000
102,000
54,000
47,000
14,000
47.5
24.2
22.4
5.9
105,700
66,800
31,000
13,500
48.7
30.8
14.3
6.2
217,000
100.0
217,000
100.0
TOTAL
* Capacities are based on the relation of existing peak hour directional volumes to total daily traffic and to theoretical lane capacities.
25
�progressed to a point of almost uniform
bridge saturation at peak hours on the
Potomac River bridges.
In deriving the origins and destinations
of traffic using the Potomac River bridges
at the 1954 level, assignments based on
time-ratio desires have been adjusted by
diverting overloads to the most likely alternate bridge, and, in turn, diverting overloads from that bridge to another alternate.
In developing assignments to new bridges
not yet built, the same technique may be
applied to the adjustment of trip patterns
derived from the time-ratio study.
bridge into the Washington highway
system.
The quality of travel on the approach
roads will have a great deal to do with the
attractive power of the bridges in diverting
and generating new travel. Travel time on
these approach facilities has been computed at rates similar to time required on
existing routes of similar high design
standards.
Applying the techniques of time-ratio trip
assignment, modified by capacity limitations as described above, an estimate has
been prepared to show how traffic would
have used the proposed Potomac River
crossings if they had been available in
1954. Three separate studies have been
made, as shown in Table V I I . In all studies,
the Jones Point, Roaches Run, Constitution Avenue, and Cabin John Bridges have
been assumed to exist. In addition, two alternate plans for central crossings have
been examined, the first of which envisions
Assignments to Proposed Facilities—1960
Six proposed Potomac river bridges
have been selected for study and analysis,
as described in Part I of this report. (See
Figure 1.) Each bridge location incorporates sections of access highway which are
required to properly integrate the new
Table VII
ESTIMATED DISTRIBUTION OF TRAFFIC TO POTOMAC RIVER BRIDGES
1954 ADT
Practical
Capacity
New Bridget at Jones Point, R oaches Run,
Cabin John, and:
1
Bridge
(Vehicles
per day)
Constitution
Ave.
Constitution &
Three Sisters
Constitution &
Nebraska Ave.
Jones Point
Roaches Run
Highway (14th St.)
Memorial
Constitution Ave
Francis Scott Key
Three Sisters
Nebraska Ave.
Chain
Cabin John
50,000
75,000
100,000
60,000
75,000
75,000
75,000
75,000
20,000
50,000
10,200
23,400
. 54,000
40,200
48,000
29,500
10,200
23,000
52,000
36,000
40,000
20,000
26,600
10,200
23,400
54,000
37,000
43,000
22,300
26
7,200
2,000
217,000
TOTAL
9,700
2,000
20,000
5,100
2,000
217,000
217,000
�another crossing at Three Sisters, while the all be initiated not later than 1960. The
second proposes a supplementary bridge at Cabin John Bridge might be deferred beNebraska Avenue.
yond that date.
The traffic volumes shown on each of
If an acceptable plan of revenue bond
the three schemes indicate the approximate financing were developed, it is reasonable
distribution of traffic, assuming that pro- to expect that a recommended program of
posed access roads would be a part of each new bridges and highway improvements
scheme.
would be complete and ready for operation
by 1960. A pattern of traffic distribution
has been devised (Table V I I I ) for the year
Traffic on Bridges, 1960
1960.
Recent studies prepared for the National
It should be noted that the traffic figures
Capital Planning Commission indicate that developed here are based on projections of
all of the improvements proposed for exist- present river crossing patterns and volumes
ing bridges should be undertaken immedi- and do not take into account additional
ately and that the Jones Point, Roaches traffic that new facilities such as those proRun and one of the central crossings should posed would be expected to generate.
Table VIII
ESTIMATED DISTRIBUTION OF TRAFFIC TO POTOMAC RIVER BRIDGES
1960 ADT
Practical
New Bridges at Jones Point, 1loaches Run,
Capacity
Cabin John, and:
(Vehicles
"
Bridge
per day)
Constitution
Ave.
Constitution &
Jones Point
50,000
16,000
16,000
16,000
Roaches Run
75,000
31,000
30,700
31,000
100,000
65,500
63,000
65,000
Memorial
60,000
44,000
40,000
40,500
Constitution Ave
75,000
57,500
49,000
52,300
Francis Scott Key
75,000
36,500
23,500
26,500
Three Sisters
75,000
Nebraska Ave
75,000
Chain
20,000
12,000
8,500
6,400
Cabin John
50,000
4,500
4,500
4,500
267,000
267,000
267,000
Highway (14th St.)
TOTAL
27
Three Sisters
Constitution &
Nebraska Ave.
31,800
24,800
\
�1970 Traffic on Bridges
Part I I of this report. The bridge crossings
that traffic would use were again deterTrip desires of the populace expected mined by the time-ratio method already
to reside in the Washington area by 1970 described and the potential use of each fawere estimated in the manner described in cility thus established (Table I X ) .
Table IX
ESTIMATED DISTRIBUTION OF TRAFFIC TO POTOMAC RIVER BRIDGES
1970 ADT
Practical
Capacity
New Bridge.s at Jones Point, 1
loaches Run,
Cabin John, and:
Constitution &
Nebraska Ave.
Bridge
( Vehicles
per day)
Constitution
Ave.
Constitution &
Three Sisters
Jones Point
Roaches Run
Highway (14th St.)
Memorial
Constitution Ave
Francis Scott Key
Three Sisters
Nebraska Ave
Chain
Cabin John
50,000
75,000
100,000
60,000
75,000
75,000
75,000
75,000
20,000
50,000
24,300
43,200
77,300
47,300
68,300
45,000
24,300
42,000
76,500
42,500
60,000
27,500
37,300
14,700
7,900
10,000
7,900
30,800
8,100
7,900
328,000
328,000
328,000
TOTALS
28
24,300
42,900
77,000
43,000
63,000
31,000
�PART
IV
Cost of New Bridges and Improvements
An extensive program of bridges and
highway improvements has been discussed
in the foregoing sections of this report.
The feasibility of revenue bond financing
of these new facilities depends directly on
the amount of money required to build and
operate them.
Construction Costs
All estimates of the construction costs
of new bridges, bridge improvements,
bridge approach roads, and the installation
of toll collecting equipment were prepared
for the consultant by the District of Columbia Department of Highways, except for
cost estimates of the Three Sisters Bridge
and approaches which were developed by
the consultant. While these estimates are
felt to be representative of probable costs,
the Director of the Department of Highways has indicated that they should not be
construed to indicate the cost of an approved plan at any given location. The estimated costs of proposed new facilities are
show in Table X . Cost estimates for the
toll plazas shown in Table X for the Highway, Memorial and Key Bridges were prepared by the District of Columbia Department of Highways based upon schematic
layouts prepared by the consultant; cost
figures used for the toll plazas of all other
bridges are figures assumed for the purposes of this study and are not based upon
specific designs. Toll plaza costs for the pro-
posed bridges were assumed to be considerably lower than the costs of constucting
plazas on existing bridges since in most
locations the new bridge approaches would
be designed to incorporate the toll plaza.
The construction cost estimates prepared by the Highway Department include
property acquisition where new property
is required, engineering costs, a contingency reserve, and other usual construction
items.
Extensive approach roads and connections to arterial highways would be required to unite each of the new bridges
with the principal flows of traffic which they
are designed to accommodate. The cost of
access facilities would exceed the cost of
the bridges in the cases of the Roaches
Run, Constitution Avenue, Three Sisters,
and Cabin John Bridges.
Maintenance and Operation of Bridges
The Highway Bridge and the Memorial
Bridge are low-level structures which must
be opened for river traffic. Roaches Run
and Constitution Avenue Bridges would be
of similar construction. The Key Bridge
and all bridges upstream from it would be
high-level fixed structures. Annual costs of
low-level bridge operations have been developed by the District of Columbia Department of Highways and are shown in
Table X I . Also shown in the table are estimated annual maintenance costs for each
of the bridges.
29
�Table X
ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS— NEW POTOMAC RIVER BRIDGES AND IMPROVEMENTS
Bridge
Jones Point
Roaches Run
Highway (14th St.)
Cost of
Structure
D.C.
Approaches
Virginia
Approaches
Maryland
Approaches
$14,847,000
$ 1,200,000
$ 7,488,000
$ 885,000
11,087,000
15,698,000
8,850,000
290,000
Toll
Plazas
Toll
Equipment
Project
Cost
$ 500,000
$185,000
$25,105,000
21,376,000
1,500,000
275,000
49,936,000
848,000
1,602,600
460,000
12,050,600
6,540,200
275,000
6,815,200
Memorial
7,457,000
8,388,300
1,884,000
2,000,000
275,000
20,004,300
652,600
2,793,000
1,449,900
6,675,300
275,000
11,845,800
Three Sisters*
5,616,000
4,936,000
750,000
1,500,000
275,000
13,077,000
Nebraska Ave
5,663,750
1,647,250
1,261,550
1,500,000
275,000
10,347,550
200,000
100,000
300,000
200,000
185,000
7,485,000
Constitution Ave
Francis Scott Key
Chain
Cabin John
2,600,000
3,500,000
1,000,000
* Estimates for Three Sisters Bridge and approaches prepared by consultant. A l l other estimates for construction costs were prepared by the District of Columbia
Department of Highways; these estimates are felt to be representative of probable costs but should not be construed to indicate the cost of an approved plan
at any given location. Cost figures for the toll plazas of the Jones Point, Roaches Run, Constitution Avenue, Three Sisters, Nebraska Avenue, Chain and
Cabin John Bridges included above are not based on detailed estimates of any particular design but are assumed figures for the purposes of the feasibility
studies included in this report.
Note that all construction costs include the costs of engineering, cost of property acquisition, a contingency reserve, and the other usual construction items.
�Toll Collection Costs
The costs of collecting tolls is a major
item of expense on all toll facilities. However, the operation of a number of toll
bridges as a system will allow certain overhead items to be pro-rated over the several
components in the system. Administrative
and accounting costs, insurance, toll bridge
patrol, and other cost items do not increase
in direct proportion to the number of new
bridges added to a toll system. The only
cost tied directly to the volume of traffic
using the bridges is that of toll collection.
In Table X I I the estimated annual costs
of maintaining and operating toll collection
facilities have been set forth for traffic volumes anticipated in 1960 and tabulated
with bridge maintenance and operation
costs shown in Table X I . Tentative estimates of total annual maintenance and
operation costs have been prepared for
each of the several toll bridge systems described in Part I of this report (Schemes
I to I V ) .
Other Costs
Revenue bond financing will also involve
financing charges and interest during construction. The amount of such costs will
depend on the size of bond issue required
and the rate of interest that the bonds draw.
These costs have been worked out for assumed rates of interest in the following
feasibility studies, each of which is tailored
to an assumed set of conditions, costs, and
revenues.
Table XI
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF POTOMAC RIVER BRIDGES
Bridge
Jones Point
Roaches Run
Highway (14th St.)
Memorial
Constitution Ave
Francis Scott Key
Three Sisters
Nebraska Ave
Chain
Cabin John
Annual Operating
Cost
Annual Bridge
Maintenance
Total Annual
M&O
$35,000
35,000
35,000
50,000
35,000
$24,000
29,000
18,000
29,000
21,000
1,000
13,000
13,000
3,000
13,000
$59,000
64,000
53,000
79,000
56,000
1,000
13,000
13,000
3,000
13,000
31
�Table XII
ANNUAL MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION COSTS FOR POTOMAC RIVER TOLL BRIDGE SYSTEMS —1960
Cost Items
Scheme I
Outer
Crossing
Scheme I-A
Jones Point
Bridge Only
Scheme II
Eight
Bridges
Scheme I I-A
Scheme II
With Additional Bridge
Scheme III
Six Central
Crossings
Scheme IV
Five Central
Crossings
Administration & Accounting
$125,000
$ 75,000
$ 325,000
$ 350,000
$ 275,000
$ 235,000
Bridge Maintenance & Operation
72,000
59,000
328,000
341,000
256,000
177,000
Toll Collection
65,000
40,000
650,000
725,000
585,000
470,000
Toll Plaza & Bridge Patrol
20,000
12,000
75,000
80,000
55,000
45,000
Insurance & Miscellaneous
75,000
45,000
250,000
280,000
190,000
165,000
$357,000
$231,000
$1,628,000
$1,776,000
$1,361,000
$1,092,000
Total Annual Cost
�PART V
Toll Rates and Potential Revenues
The volume of Potomac River crossing
demands expected by 1960 and by 1970
and the manner in which traffic would distribute to the several bridges have been developed in Part I I I . It should be noted
again that the volumes thus developed are
based on the assumption that travel time
between points of origin and destination
would remain substantially as it is today.
Generated Traffic
Effect of Toll Charges
On the other hand, if a direct charge
were levied against all vehicles which presently use the Potomac River crossings
the volume of crossings would be curtailed.
The degree of curtailment would depend
upon the amount of toll charged and the
relation of toll charges to other costs of
vehicle operation.
The very purpose of the proposed new
Potomac River bridges is to relieve and
improve traffic operations across the Potomac River. It follows that tollfinancingof
these new structures ought to be accomplished by using the lowest possible tollrate structure consistent with revenue requirements to pay for the improvements.
Only by keeping toll rates low can the primary purpose of the bridges— to accommodate large volumes of traffic — be
realized.
If new bridges and an extensive network
of freeways were constructed which would
materially reduce the amount of time presently required for trans-river travel, the
volume of trips crossing the Potomac would
be considerably increased. A study recently
submitted to the National Capital Planning
Commission by this consultant found that
the construction of a sufficient number of
new free bridges with appropriate approach
facilities should induce new crossing trips
amounting to about 25 percent more than
In preparing the several analyses of tollin the amount of traffic anticipated by pro- bridge feasibility, the following toll-rate
jecting the normal growth trend described schedules have been used as a basis for
in Part I I of this report.
revenue calculations:
TOLL RATES FOR POTOMAC RIVER CROSSINGS
Vehicle-Class
Basic 10c Toll
Basic 15c Toll
Passenger Cars and Light Trucks
(4-tire panels, pickups, etc.)
10c each way
15c each way
Medium Trucks (2-axle, 6-tires)
15c
"
"
20c
"
"
Heavy Trucks and Combinations
25c
"
"
35c
"
"
25c
"
"
35c
"
"
33
�A basic ten-cent passenger car toll and
charges of 15c and 25c for trucks may be
considered nominal rates. Although these
rates of toll will not seriously discourage
drivers from crossing the Potomac River,
the toll will depress the amount of transriver travel to some degree, and to compensate for this loss no allowance has been
made for the traffic inducement that would
normally be generated by the development
of new and improved river crossings and
access routes.
At a basic passenger car rate of 15c it
would be necessary to anticipate some reduction in trans-river traffic volumes. Commercial vehicles would be affected to a
lesser degree than passenger cars, due to
the basic nature of commercial trips. In
developing traffic volumes expected under
the basic 15c schedule, the number of commercial trucks has been reduced byfivepercent and private passenger cars by 20
percent. Where commuter rates were employed, the proportion of commuters was
actually assumed to increase since the
higher toll schedule afforded greater relative benefits than the lower rate schedule.
It has been assumed that buses and government vehicles would be affected to a negligible degree.
imposed, 1960 revenues would come to
$13,058,278, or about 22 percent more
than would be realized if the basic 10c
schedule were used.
Free Vehicles:
The most equitable treatment of toll
bridge users would require that all vehicles
be treated alike in paying for use of the
bridges. It is not always possible to achieve
this goal, however. Government owned
vehicles, as a class, are sometimes granted
free use of toll facilities. In the case of the
Potomac River bridges, government vehicles were found to number nearly three percent of the total crossing volume. (See
Table I I ) . A high proportion of this traffic
consists of trucks and buses so that the
overall effect on revenues would be considerable if government vehicles were allowed free passage.
In Table X I V potential toll-bridge revenues have been computed for the year
1960, assuming that government vehicles
would be allowed to cross the Potomac
River without charge and that all bridges
would operate as toll facilities. Gross revenues expected to accrue at a 10c basic rate
would amount to about $10,288,986 during the course of the year. Gross revenues
earned by the basic 15c toll schedule
Expected Toll Revenues
would amount to $12,489,607. Losses due
If either of the toll schedules noted above to free use by government vehicles amount
were adopted and tolls collected from every to nearly $420,000 on the 10c schedule
bridge user in accordance with these rates, and $568,000 on the 15c schedule.
earnings of the bridge system could readily
be computed. Revenues which could be
Commuters: Ticket Books
expected if all bridge users paid tolls have
been developed in Table X I I I . With a
Commuters account for a large share of
basic 10c passenger car toll on all bridges, passenger car use on the Potomac River
gross income would amount to $10,705,- bridges, and commuter fees must be ex919 in 1960. If the 15c toll schedule were pected to pay a substantial share of bridge
34
�Table XIII
POTENTIAL REVENUES, 1960 — POTOMAC RIVER TOLL BRIDGE SYSTEM
TOLLS ON ALL CROSSINGS; ALL VEHICLES PAY
i
10cl tasic Pass. lar Rate
C
Vehicle Class
Daily*
Vehicles
Govt. Trucks
3,100
Toll
Rate
\
$0.20** $
15c Sasic Pass. Zar Rate
<
i
Annual
Revenues
Daily*
Vehicles
226,300
Medium Trucks . .
18,960
0.15
1,038,060
Heavy Trucks . . .
4,750
0.25
Govt. Buses
510
Other Buses
3,100
Toll
Rate
\
Annual
Revenues
$0.25** $
282,875
18,012
0.20
1,314,876
433,438
4,512
0.35
576,408
0.25
43,538
510
0.35
65,153
3,950
0.25
360,438
3,950
0.35
504,613
Govt. Pass. Cars .
4,030
0.10
147,095
4,030
0.15
220,643
Other Pass. Cars .
231,700
0.10
8,457,050
184,360
0.15
10,093,710
$10,705,919
218,474
267,000
TOTALS
$13,058,278
* Based on Department of Highway's traffic classification counts on all Potomac River Bridges, January, 1955.
** Government trucks are not shown segregated by class. Toll charges would be identical with those paid by commercial vehicles of the same size. These rates are intended to represent the average toll paid by government trucks.
Table XIV
POTENTIAL REVENUES, 1960 —POTOMAC RIVER TOLL BRIDGE SYSTEM
TOLLS ON ALL CROSSINGS; GOVT. VEHICLES FREE; ALL OTHERS PAY
t
i
Vehicle Class
Govt. Trucks
Daily*
Toll
Annual
10c
VehiclesBasic Pass. Car Rate
Rate
Revenues
3,100
$
...
18,960
0.15
1,038,060
Heavy Trucks . . .
4,750
0.25
433,438
Govt. Buses
510
Other Buses
3,950
Govt. Pass. Cars .
4,030
Other Pass. Cars .
231,700
TOTALS
267,000
15c Basic Pass. Car Rate
Daily*
Vehicles
3,100
$
.
Medium Trucks
•
Toll
Rate
$
...
\
Annual
Revenues
$
18,012
0.20
1,314,876
4,512
0.35
576,408
0.35
504,613
0.15
10,093,710
510
0.25
360,438
3,950
4,030
0.10
8,457,050
184,360
$10,288,986
218,474
$12,489,607
* Based on Department of Highway's traffic classification counts on all Potomac River Bridges, January, 1955.
35
�costs if non-commuter rates are to be kept
low.
Several methods are currently used to
favor commuter travel on toll facilities.
Most common, perhaps, is the sale of ticket
books at a discount. Thus, at the 10c basic
rate, a fifty-ride book with a face value of
$5.00 might be sold to commuters for
$4.00, allowing them a 20 percent advantage. On the 15c schedule it might be possible to offer commuters even greater proportionate saving and still develop an
income advantage to the toll system. A 50ride book for $5.00 would allow the commuter a 33 1/3 percent advantage which
would, of course, generate greater use of
commuter tickets.
The use of commuter tickets would appreciably reduce annual revenues potential
to a toll bridge system. Table X V shows
the income which could be expected if commuter tickets were sold at the rates suggested above, and if government vehicles
were permitted to cross the river free of
charge. Under the basic 10c schedule the
toll bridge system would gross $9,443,281
in 1960; with the 15c schedule expected
income would amount to $12,121,504. If
government vehicles were also required to
pay tolls, additional income from them
would amount to about $390,000 on the
10c schedule and $495,000 with the 15c
schedule.
When the methods of commuter toll collections have been studied and evaluated,
the ticket book is found to have considerable appeal. The driver pays for each trip;
he realizes a substantial saving on each
crossing; tickets can be issued to remain
valid for a considerable length of time so
that the occasional user can benefit; every
ticket holder is treated just alike, so that no
one can be said to gain certain advantages
by virtue of very frequent use; and an important advantage lies in the fact that the
toll collector is required to show evidence
for each vehicle that passes through his
station, thereby reducing opportunities for
toll collecting fraud.
Table XV
POTENTIAL REVENUES. 1960 — POTOMAC RIVER TOLL BRIDGE SYSTEM
TOLLS ON ALL CROSSINGS; COMMUTER TICKETS; GOVT. VEHICLES FREE
,
Vehicle Class
Govt. Trucks
Medium Trucks . .
Heavy Trucks . . .
Govt. Buses
Other Buses
Govt. Pass. Cars .
Commuters
Other Pass. Cars .
TOTALS
10cB a e Pass. Car Rate
w
\
Toll
Daily*
Annual
Vehicles
Rate
Revenues
3,100
18,960
4,750
510
3,950
4,030
115,850
115,850
267,000
%
...
$
0.15
0.25
1,038,060
433,438
0.25
360,438
0.08
0.10
3,382,820
4,228,525
$9,443,281
,
15c Basic Pass.Car Rate
n
Toll
Daily*
Annual
Rate
Vehicles
Revenues
3,100 $ . . .
18,012
0.20
4,512
0.35
510
3,950
0.35
4,030
127,435** 0.10
92,680** 0.15
$
254,229
$12,121,504
1,314,876
576,408
504,613
4,651,377
5,074,230
* Based on Department of Highway's traffic classification counts on all Potomac River bridges, January, 1955.
** Estimated that the higher single trip rate would encourage 10 percent greater use of commuter tickets and would
reduce the remaining potential use by 20 percent.
36
�Commuters: Special Tags
There are several serious drawbacks to
Commuters might also be allowed to this method of toll collection, however. It
purchase a distinctive monthly tag which is difficult to establish a toll charge that
could be pasted to the windshield where it will be attractive to the commuter who
would be readily recognized by toll col- crosses the river only for work without allectors. Or the driver might be permitted lowing unfair advantage to those who use
to purchase an annual plate which could the bridges more often. Allowing for holibe fastened above his license plate and days, sick leave, and vacation, the ordinary
commuter probably averages about 40
which need be changed only once a year.
Tags or stickers which are purchased at crossings per month to and from work. To
monthly or annual intervals have certain be attractive to him under the 10c rate
advantages. Cars so equipped can be passed schedule, the tag should cost no more than
through a toll station very quickly, thereby $3.50 per month. Using the 15c schedule
reducing the labor and cost of toll col- a charge of $5.00 per month might be
lection and reducing congestion on the made. These values were assumed in develbridges. They are especially attractive to oping the data in Table X V I .
taxi drivers and others who have occasion
The advantage gained by the 40-ride
to cross the river very frequently.
commuter is less than the discount he might
Table XVI
POTENTIAL REVENUES. 1960 — POTOMAC RIVER TOLL BRIDGE SYSTEM
TOLLS ON ALL CROSSINGS; MONTHLY COMMUTER PASSES; GOVT. VEHICLES FREE
,
Vehicle Class
Govt. Trucks . . . .
Medium Trucks . .
Heavy Trucks . . .
Govt. Buses
Other Buses
Govt. Pass. Cars .
Commuters
lCc Ba sic Pass. Car Rate
Daily*
Vehicles
Toll
Rate
3,100
18,960
4,750
510
3,950
4,030
115,850**
s...
,
Annual
Revenues
$
0.15
0.25
1,038,060
433,438
0.25
360,438
3.50
1,596,000
i
ic Pass. Car Rate
\
15c Bas
Toll
Annual
Daily*
Rate
Revenues
Vehicles
3,100
$ ...
18,012
0.20
4,512
0.35
510
3,950
0.35
4,030
127,435*** 5.00
per mo.
Other Pass. Cars .
TOTALS
115,850**
267,000
0.10
$
1,314,876
576,408
504,613
2,508,000
per mo.
4,228,525
$7,656,461
92,680*** 0.15
254,229
5,074,230
$9,978,127
* Based on Department of Highway's traffic classification counts on all Potomac River Bridges, January, 1955.
** Estimated that 38,000 monthly passes would account for 115,850 trips each day—averaging a little over three
trips per day per commuter. This rather liberal estimate is based on the assumption that most of the drivers who
average more than two trips a day would buy the passes while many of those who make only two trips per day
would not. Many of the pass holders would be taxis and other heavy users of the bridges.
*** Estimated that the higher single trip rate would encourage 10 percent greater use of commuter passes (41,800
tickets per month) and would reduce the remaining potential use by 20 percent.
37
�enjoy using a ticket book, yet the effect on
toll collections is much more drastic. The
10c schedule, using a $3.50 monthly commuter ticket, would be expected to produce
gross revenue amounting to $7,656,461 in
1960, about $1,787,000 less than a commuter ticket system charging $4.00 for 50
rides. The 15c basic toll schedule, using a
$5.00 monthly commuter ticket would realize revenues amounting to $9,978,127 in
1960, or about $2,143,377 less than the
corresponding commuter ticket system.
A further disadvantage of the commuter
tag is the difficulty of controlling revenues
collected at the toll stations. Even the best
toll collection systems are subject to theft
in some degree. Classes of vehicles which
pass free coupled with adoption of com-
muter tags would increase the difficulties
inherent in the money-handling problem.
Feasibility Studies
The feasibility studies which follow have
been developed on the basis of revenues
derived from commuters by the use of
commuter ticket books. The earnings which
would be obtained by charging government
vehicles at the same rate imposed on private operators have also been included as
potential revenues, and the amount of such
earnings identified in each study.
Feasibility has been computed for the
various systems of toll bridges using both
10c and 15c basic toll schedules in order
to compare their relative attractiveness.
38
�P A R T VI
Scheme I - The Outer Bridges
These studies of revenue bond feasibility serve the sparsely-settled outlying areas
were undertaken to determine which, if and would doubtless provide a strong stimany, of the proposed Potomac River bridges ulus to their further development.
could be financed from toll revenues. AnalPossible revenue bond financing of the
ysis of the origins and destinations of traf- Outer Bridges was studied by this consultfic which would use each of the bridges ant in 1953, and the proposed project was
shows that the bridges can logically be seg- found infeasible at that time. The present
regated into two groups, based on traffic study contemplates a somewhat postponed
desires. Through trips, and trips generated construction of the bridges, with 1960 the
across the Potomac River between sub- first year of the toll bridge operation. Since
urban zones near the river would be poten- metropolitan area traffic is expected to
tial users of the Outer Bridges — especially show large increases in the years 1953 to
if long sections of the Outer Circumferen- 1960, it would seem worthwhile to retial are constructed to provide good access examine bridge feasibility in terms of 1960
to the bridges. The remaining Central potentials.
Crossings serve traffic generated primarily
within the heavily built-up portions of the
city.
Basic Considerations
3
The Jones Point and Cabin John Bridges
are both about four miles removed from the
nearest Central Crossings and may be considered somewhat isolated from them. It
is not unreasonable to consider separate
schemes for financing the Outer Bridges
and the Central Crossings. The Cabin John
Bridge is of principal concern only to Virginia and Maryland, but the Jones Point
Bridge and its approaches is the joint responsibility of both states and the District
of Columbia.
Under the plan considered here, both
the Outer Crossings would be built to fourlane standards although immediate traffic
potential does not require that amount of
bridge capacity. These bridges would
39
In order to develop a practical approach
to the study of bridge feasibility, it is necessary to make certain assumptions regarding
conditions which are expected to prevail in
1960, the first year of toll bridge operation.
Among the most important of these considerations, it is assumed:
That the pattern of population and vehicle registration increase in the Washington Metropolitan area will continue, but at a decreasing rate of
growth, during the years prior to
opening of the bridges.
3
"Highway Transportation in the Washington Metropolitan Area of Virginia," a report prepared for the
Virginia Department of Highways, 1953.
�That the Outer Bridge approach roads
illustrated in Figure 1 will be completed and opened for traffic by the
beginning of the year 1960.
That new Central Crossings will be built
and operated free of toll at Roaches
Run and Constitution Avenue, together with the approach roads and
other access facilities illustrated on
Figure 1, and that the existing Highway Bridge (14th Street Bridge) will
be improved.
That no new bridge will be built between
the site of the proposed Roaches Run
Bridge and the proposed Jones Point
Bridge.
That no new bridge will be built between
the Chain Bridge and the proposed
Cabin John Bridge.
That toll charges made for use of the
bridges will be as set in each of the
alternate studies reported here.
Both Bridges —10c Toll Schedule
The volumes and classes of traffic expected to use each of the Outer Bridges
during the first year of operation are shown
in Table X V I I . It has been assumed that
commuters using the bridges would use
tickets sold to them at 80 percent of face
value. Under the assumed conditions, first
year gross income on the Jones Point
Bridge would amount to $596,411 and on
the Cabin John Bridge would be $166,222
if no tolls were charged against government
vehicles; another $10,985 would be earned
by the bridges if all government vehicles
were required to pay the designated rates.
The toll revenues that would be earned
by the Outer Bridges in 1970 (Table
X V I I I ) have been developed from projec-
tions of 1970 trans-river travel, based on
expected population distribution and car
ownership. By 1970 the Jones Point Bridge
would be expected to earn about $909,643
annually and Cabin John tolls would
amount to $291,811 with an additional
$10,985 received if government vehicles
were charged for use of the bridges. (It
was assumed that there would be no change
in the volume of government vehicles using
the bridges during the years 1960-1970.)
Table X I X shows the pattern of earnings
that the bridges would be expected to develop during the years following the opening if government vehicles are permitted
to travel free and also if they are tolled the
designated rates. This table also shows the
estimated cost of maintaining and operating
the bridges and toll collection facilities during these years and the amount of net
revenues that would be available for debt
service.
It should be understood, of course, that
the estimates of revenue shown in Table
X I X , as income expected to accrue to the
Outer Bridges in years after they have been
opened to traffic, are intended to represent
the general trend of earnings over a period
of years. Earnings for specific years might
exceed or fall short of the values shown.
40
Feasibility — In order to be acceptable
for revenue bond financing, a toll facility
should usually earn sufficient net revenues
during its first full year of operation to
cover bond interest by a factor of approximately 1.5 times or more and to cover interest and amortization of bonds (level
debt service) by a factor of 1.0. Debt service coverage should average about 1.5 over
the life of the bonds. A major proportion
of level debt service consists of interest on
outstanding bonds during the early years
of toll operations. The feasibility of a proj-
�Table XVII
SCHEME I —OUTER BRIDGES
FIRST YEAR TRAFFIC AND REVENUES — 1960
(10c Passenger Car Tolls)
tint Bridge
i
Jones
Daily Pc
Traffic
>
Total
Revenue
I960
Vehicle Class
Govt. Trucks . . . .
$ . .
90
Med. Trucks . . . .
0.15
1,210
66,248
360
19,710
85,958
Heavy Trucks . . .
0.25
300
27,375
90
8,213
35,588
28,288
90
8,213
36,501
Govt. Buses
Other Buses . . .
Annual
Revenues
i— Cabin J'ohn Bridge ^
Daily
Annual
Revenues
Traffic
Toll
Rate
$
$
$
10
0.25
Govt. Pass
310
120
Commuters
0.08
4,800
140,160
1,980
57,816
197,976
Other Pass
0.10
9,160
334,340
1,980
72,270
406,610
16,000
$596,411
4,500
$166,222
$762,633
TOTALS
Note: I f tolls were collected from government vehicles at the average rate of 20c per trip for trucks, 25c per trip
for buses, and 8c per trip for passenger cars (assuming all government cars to take advantage of the commuter rate), the additional income would amount to $10,985 annually.
Table XVIII
SCHEME I —OUTER BRIDGES
ESTIMATES TRAFFIC AND REVENUES — 1970
(10c Passenger Car Tolls)
Vehicle Class
Toll
Rate
Govt. Trucks . . . .
$ . .
90
Med. Trucks . . . .
0.15
Heavy Trucks . . .
0.25
rint Bridge
>
Annual
Revenues
1,847
462
i— Cabin J 'ohn Bridge —^
Daily
Annual
Traffic
Revenues
$
$
Total
Revenue
1970
$
101,123
632
34,602
135,725
42,158
158
14,418
56,576
42,158
158
14,418
56,576
10
Govt. Buses
Other Buses . . . .
Daily
i Traffic Pc
Jones
0.25
Govt. Pass
462
120
Commuters
0.08
7,339
214,299
3,476
101,499
315,798
Other Pass
0.10
13,970
509,905
3,476
126,874
636,779
24,300
$909,643
7,900
$291,811
$1,201,454
TOTALS
Note: I f tolls were collected from government vehicles at the average rate of 20c per trip for trucks, 25c per trip
for buses, and 8c per trip for passenger cars (assuming all government cars to take advantage of the commuter rate), the additional income would amount to $10,985 annually.
41
�Table XIX
SCHEME I — OUTER BRIDGES
TRAFFIC AND REVENUE SUMMARY
(10c Passenger Car Tolls)
Crovt. Vehicles Free
r~
A verage Daily
Traffic
Annual Revenues
1960
20,500
$ 761,902
$357,000
1961
21,670
805,856
1962
22,840
1963
Govt. Vehicles Tollt •d
Net A vail, for
Debt Service
,
Net Avail, for
Debt Service
Annual Revenues
Maint. & Oper.
404,902
$ 772,887
$357,000
360,570
445,286
816,841
360,570
456,271
849,810
364,176
485,634
860,795
364,176
496,619
24,010
893,765
367,818
525,947
904,750
367,818
536,932
1964
25,180
937,720
371,496
566,224
948,705
371,496
577,209
1965
26,350
981,675
375,211
606,464
992,660
375,211
617,449
1966
27,520
1,025,630
378,963
646,667
1,036,615
378,963
657,652
1967
28,690
1,069,585
382,753
686,832
1,080,570
382,753
697,817
1968
29,860
1,113,541
386,580
726,961
1,124,526
386,580
737,946
390,446
778,036
Year
Maint. & Oper.
$
$
415,887
1969
31,030
1,157,497
390,446
767,051
1,168,482
1970
32,200
1,201,454
394,350
807,104
1,212,439
394,350
818,089
32,200
1,201,454
394,350
807,104
1,212,439
394,350
818,089
Next 27 yrs.
Total 38 yrs
28,460,880
28,878,310
748,971
759,956
�ect may thus depend very heavily on the
interest rate at which bonds are sold.
Interest rates on revenue bonds have
ranged between three percent and four percent on recent projects. In order to illustrate the relative attractiveness of the several schemes considered in this report, an
interest rate of 3Vi percent has been used
throughout. For those schemes which appear to be only marginally attractive, the
assumed interest rate might be lower than
could actually be achieved on the bond
market. On the other hand, it might be
possible to finance those combinations of
bridges which show very satisfactory earnings potential at interest rates somewhat
lower than the one assumed.
toll charges, first year earnings would
amount to only 33 percent of the interest
charges with practically no change in average debt service coverage.
If revenues are applied to the cost of the
bridge structures only, Table X X indicates
that first year interest charges would be
covered by a factor of only 0.57 even if
government vehicles are subject to the tolls;
level debt service would be covered by a
factor of only 0.41 during the first year.
It is clear that a toll schedule based upon a
10c passenger car rate will not earn enough
to finance the Outer Bridges.
Both Bridges—15c Toll Schedule
Traffic and revenue data have been deTable X X has been developed to deter- veloped for the Outer Bridges based on the
mine the degree to which toll revenues 15c toll schedule. While the higher toll
earned on the Outer Bridges would be able schedule yields greater returns than the 10c
to finance their construction. A 40-year schedule just examined, the increased revebond issue at 3Vi percent interest has been nue is not sufficient to develop a feasible
assumed in the computations since it is project.
generally not advisable to consider bond
First year net revenues (1960) would
issues of greater life for projects of this
amount to about $625,000 if tolls from
nature. Bond interest has been capitalized
government vehicles were included in
for a two-year construction period and an
bridge earnings. This amount of revenue
additional sum has been included to cover
would cover IVi percent interest on a
financing costs.
$21,000,000 investment for bridge strucToll revenues available for debt service tures alone by a factor of 0.85. A sum of
during the first year of toll bridge operation $1,007,580 would be required to cover anhave been applied to two sets of conditions. nual debt service on 40-year bonds (38
First, earnings have been measured against years of earnings), which would be cova $36,500,000 bond issue required to ered only 0.62 times by first year's income.
finance both bridges and the approach
Average net earnings of the bridges durroads necessary to serve them. If govern- ing the life of the bonds would amount to
ment vehicles are not subject to tolls, the about $1,024,000, which would cover annet earnings can be expected to meet in- nual debt service 1.06 times.
terest charges by only 32 percent during
the first year of operation. Level debt service coverage over the life of the bonds Scheme 1-A — The Jones Point Bridge
would be only 0.43. Even if government
Although a toll schedule based on 10c
vehicles are required to pay the designated or 15c passenger car tolls is not sufficient
43
�Table XX
SCHEME I —OUTER BRIDGES
FEASIBILITY OF TOLL FINANCING
(10c Passenger Car Tolls)
— Outer Bridges and Appioaclies
* f "
\
Govt. Veh. Free
Govt. Veh. Tolled
$
Gross Earnings — First Year
761,902
$
772,887
Bnage Structures
Govt. Veh. Free
$
761,902
>
Govt. Veh. Tolled
$
772,887
Maintenance and Operation Costs
357,000
357,000
357,000
357,000
Net Available for Debt Service
404,902
415,887
404,902
415,887
17,447,000
17,447,000
17,447,000
17,447,000
14,073,000
14,073,000
1,070,000
1,070,000
1,070,000
1,070,000
32,590,000
32,590,000
18,517,000
18,517,000
2,555,000
2,555,000
1,470,000
1,470,000
1,355,000
1,355,000
1,013,000
1,013,000
36,500,000
36,500,000
21,000,000
21,000,000
1,277,500
1,277,500
735,000
735,000
0.32
0.33
0.55
0.57
Interest and Amortization — 38 Years Earnings .
1,751,270
1,751,270
1,007,580
1,007,580
Level Debt. Service, First Year Coverage . . . .
0.23
0.24
0.40
0.41
Level Debt Service Coverage over Life of Bonds
0.43
0.43
0.74
0.75
Cost of Structures
Approaches
Toll Plazas and Equipment
Total Capital Costs
3Vi % Interest During Const. (2 Year Period)
.
Financing Costs, Legal Fees, etc
Bonds Required
First Year Interest (3Vi%)
Interest Coverage — First Year
40 Year Bonds % 3*6%
�to finance the Outer Bridges, a larger toll
might be found sufficient if applied to the
Jones Point Bridge alone (the Jones Point
Bridge would earn more than 3Vi times as
much as the Cabin John Bridge — see
Table X V I I ) .
Table X X I has been developed to show
the volume of traffic expected to use the
Jones Point Bridge when toll schedules are
based on passenger car rates of 25c and
50c without provision for special commuter
rates. It is interesting to note that bridge
earnings would be greater under the 25c
schedule. Proximity to the free Central
Crossings would overcome the advantages
of increased toll rates in the 50c schedule.
In Table X X I I the 1970 traffic and earnings on a Jones Point Toll Bridge have
been determined for tolls based on a 25c
passenger car rate. Additional revenue in
the amount of $25,915 would be earned
each year if government vehicles were also
required to pay tolls. Table X X I I I shows
the pattern of earnings that the bridge
would be expected to develop during the
years following the opening. The table also
shows maintenance and operating costs and
the amount of net revenues available for
debt service. Again, traffic and revenue
estimates for years after 1960 are intended
to indicate a general trend of earnings
rather than precise estimates of earnings
for specific years.
Feasibility — Table X X I V has been developed to determine the feasibility of the
Jones Point Bridge as a revenue bond project. The net revenues earned from tolls
based on a 25c passenger car rate schedule
have been applied against the cost of a
bridge and approaches and against the cost
of the bridge alone. In the latter case it is
assumed that the approach facilities would
be constructed with funds derived from
other sources and would be opened to traffic at the same time the bridge is put in use.
Table XXI
SCHEME I-A —JONES POINT BRIDGE
FIRST YEAR TRAFFIC AND REVENUES —1960
(25c and 50c Passenger Car Tolls)
25t - Passenger Ca Schedule
r
,
Vehicle Class
Govt. Trucks . . . .
Medium Trucks . .
Heavy Trucks . . .
Govt. Buses
Other Buses
Govt. Pass
Other Pass
TOTALS
Toll
Rate
Daily
Traffic
$ ...
90
839
211
10
218
120
9,912
0.35
0.50
0.50
0.25
11,400
\
Annual
Revenues
50c Passenger Car Schedule — — s
.
Toll
Rate
$
$
.
.
Daily
Traffic
.
107,182
38,508
0.75
1.00
39,785
1.00
904,470
0.50
$1,089,945
Annual
Revenues
90
388
97
10
105
120
4,940
$
5,750
$1,081,495
106,215
35,405
38,325
901,550
Note: I f tolls were collected from government vehicles at the average rate of 40c per trip for trucks, 50c per trip
for buses, and 25c per trip for passenger cars, the bridge would earn additional income amounting to $25,915
annually.
45
�Under the above conditions, the anticipated earnings are not sufficient to cover
the annual debt service required for a 40
year bond issue at 3Vi percent interest for
construction of both the bridge and the
approaches. Table X X I V indicates that the
bridge alone might be financed with a 40year bond issue, although the interest coverage for the first year appears to be a little
low at 1.40 (if government vehicles are not
subject to tolls) and first year coverage of
debt service is barely met with a factor of
1.02. Average coverage of debt service
during the 40-year life of 3V2 percent
bonds would amount to only 1.40 times
average requirements, if government vehicles are permitted free use of the bridge.
Assuming that the coverage values
shown are satisfactory for bond financing,
the feasibility of this project would depend
very largely on the accuracy of construction cost estimates. The cost estimates used
in this analysis were those furnished the
consultant by the District of Columbia De-
partment of Highways. A cost estimate for
this bridge, prepared for the consultant in
1953 by the Virginia Department of Highways was nearly $900,000 greater. If the
revenue figures developed here were applied to that estimate a less favorable result
would be obtained.
On the other hand, the traffic estimate
is believed to be a conservative one. If government vehicles were charged tolls instead
of crossing free, toll revenues would be increased by a small amount as shown in the
tables. If new Central Crossings were not
built at Roaches Run and Constitution
Avenue by the time this bridge is opened
to traffic, the bridge would get more use
than these estimates show. If all Central
Crossings were to be operated as toll facilities (at the 10c rate), the Jones Point
Bridge (operated at the 25c passenger car
rate) would attract considerable volume
that has been considered lost to it under
the assumed conditions of free Central
Crossings.
Table XXII
SCHEME I-A —JONES POINT BRIDGE
ESTIMATED TRAFFIC AND REVENUES — 1970
(25c Passenger Car Tolls)
Vehicle Class
Govt. Trucks
Medium Trucks
Heavy Trucks
Govt. Buses
Other Buses
Govt. Pass
Toll
Rate
$ .
0.35
0.50
0.50
0.25
TOTALS
Daily
Traffic
Annual
Revenues
90
1,160
290
10
298
120
13,432
$
15,400
$1,481,170
148,190
52,925
54,385
1,225,670
Note: I f tolls were collected from government vehicles at the average rate of 40c per trip for trucks, 50c per trip
for buses, and 25c per trip for passenger cars, the bridge would earn additional income amounting to $25,915
annually.
�Table XXIII
SCHEME I-A— JONES POINT BRIDGE
TRAFFIC AND REVENUE SUMMARY
(25c Passenger Car Tolls)
i
Av erage Daily
Traffic
Year
G ivemment
<
Vehicles.Free
Annual
Revenues
Maint.
& Oper.
\
Net Avail, for
Debt Service
Annual
Revenues
Maint.
& Oper.
858,945
$1,115,860
$231,000
Net Avail, for
Debt Service
1960
11,400
$1,089,945
$231,000
1961
11,840
1,129,068
233,310
895,758
1,154,983
233,310
921,673
1962
12,280
1,168,190
235,643
932,547
1,194,105
235,643
958,462
1963
12,720
1,207,313
237,999
969,314
1,233,228
237,999
995,229
1964
13,160
1,246,435
240,379
1,006,056
1,272,350
240,379
1,031,971
1965
13,600
1,285,558
242,783
1,042,775
1,311,473
242,783
1,068,690
1966
13,960
1,324,680
245,211
1,079,469
1,350,595
245,211
1,105,384
1967
14,320
1,363,803
247,663
1,116,140
1,389,718
247,663
1,142,055
1968
14,680
1,402,925
250,140
1,152,785
1,428,840
250,140
1,178,700
1969
15,040
1,442,048
252,641
1,189,407
1,467,963
252,641
1,215,322
1970
15,400
1,481,170
255,167
1,226,003
1,507,085
255,167
1,251,918
15,400
1,481,170
255,167
1,226,003
1,507,085
255,167
1,251,918
Next 27 Years
$
Go\ 'ernment Vehicles T
oiled
$
884,860
Total 38 Years
44,571,280
45,556,052
Avg. 38 Years
1,172,928
1,198,843
�Table XXIV
SCHEME I-A — JONES POINT BRIDGE
FEASIBILITY OF TOLL FINANCING
(25c Passenger Car Tolls)
i—
Bridges and Approaches
Govt. Veh. Tolled
Govt. Veh. Free
\
r
BJ idge Only
Govt. Veh. Tolled
Govt. Veh. Free
$ 1,089,945
231,000
858,945
$ 1,115,860
231,000
884,860
$ 1,089,945
231,000
858,945
$ 1,115,860
231,000
884,860
Cost of Structures
Approaches
Toll Plazas and Equipment
Total Capital Costs
14,847,000
9,573,000
685,000
25,105,000
14,847,000
9,573,000
685,000
25,105,000
14,847,000
14,847,000
685,000
15,532,000
685,000
15,532,000
Interest During Const. (2 Year Period)
Financing Costs, Legal Fees, etc
Bonds Required
1,995,000
1,400,000
28,500,000
1,995,000
1,400,000
28,500,000
1,225,000
743,000
17,500,000
1,225,000
743,000
17,500,000
997,500
0.86
997,500
0.89
612,500
1.40
612,500
1.43
1,367,430
0.63
0.86
1,367,430
0.65
0.88
839,650
1.02
1.40
839,650
1.05
1.44
Gross Earnings — First Year
Maintenance and Operation Costs
Net Available for Debt Service
First Year Interest (3Vi%)
Interest Coverage — First Year
40 Year Bonds @ 3Vi%
Interest and Amortization — 38 Years Earnings
Level Debt Service, First Year Coverage
Level Debt Service Coverage over Life of Bonds
^
�PART
VII
Scheme I I - All Potomac River Bridges
Although the Jones Point Bridge may be
able to earn sufficient revenues to finance
the structure itself from toll revenues, it
does not appear likely that tolls earned by
the Outer Bridges alone would support construction of both bridges and the approach
roads necessary to serve them. The Outer
Bridges might, however, be incorporated
in a complete system of Potomac River
Toll Bridges.
Commercial truck volume has been reduced
five percent, which is believed to be a generous allowance. Commuters have not been
reduced, but more passenger car drivers
would be expected to take advantage of
the greater cost differential between the
single trip rate and the commuter ticket
rate. The remaining non-commuters have
been reduced by 20 percent to adjust for
the higher toll rate. These values are believed to be conservative.
Basic Considerations
If tolls were to be charged on all bridges,
traffic volumes across the Potomac River
would be reduced to some extent, no matter how small the toll. On the other hand,
as previously pointed out, the contemplated
improvements to the arterial highway system which would accompany the construction of new bridges would tend to induce
much new trans-river traffic. It has been
quite arbitrarily assumed that the effects
of a nominal toll charge, such as the proposed schedule based on a 10c passenger
car rate, would cancel the inducement due
to new improvements. This is believed to
be a very conservative view.
The toll schedule based on a 15c passenger car charge would have greater adverse influence than the 10c schedule, of
course. Certain vehicle categories would
react more strongly than others. The higher
rates would be expected to have a negligible
effect on the volume of government vehicles and buses crossing the Potomac River.
49
Other Basic Considerations
Other important considerations upon
which this phase of the study is based are
the assumptions:
That the patterns of population growth
and vehicle registration increases will
continue upward at a slowly decreasing rate during the years prior to
1960, the year upon which first year
estimates of toll revenues are based.
That the approach roads and interchange facilities illustrated in Figure
1 will be incorporated in the final development of new bridges and will be
available for use by 1960.
That at least eight bridges will be available for traffic use during the first
year of operation of a toll system.
Toll Revenues
Revenues which would be earned by a
complete system of Potomac River Toll
�Bridges have been computed for both the
10c and the 15c schedules of charges. Revenues earned by the 10c schedule appear to
be sufficient to pay for new bridges and
bridge approaches. However, estimated
earnings over the 40-year bond life are not
sufficiently in excess of debt service requirements to make the project attractive to
investors.
The amount of revenues that would be
earned from toll charges applied to all Potomac River Bridges in 1960 is shown in
Table X X V . Although three different conditions of central crossing are to be considered, the total volume of river crossings
has been assumed to be the same for all
studies. Therefore, revenues would be the
same under each set of conditions.
Table XXV
SCHEME II — A L L POTOMAC RIVER BRIDGES
FIRST YEAR TRAFFIC AND REVENUES (1960)
i—
Vehicle Class
Daily
Toll
Annual
i Vehicles Basic Pass. Car Rate
10c
Rate
Revenues \
15c Basic Pass. Car Rate
Daily
Vehicles
Toll
Rate
\
Annual
Revenues
Govt. Vehicles Free
Govt. Trucks
3,100
%
...
3,100
$
%
•••
$
Medium Trucks . .
18,960
0.15
1,038,060
18,012*
0.20
1,314,876
Heavy Trucks . . .
4,750
0.25
433,438
4,512*
0.35
576,408
Govt. Buses . . . .
510
0.35
504,613
Other Buses
3,950
Govt. Pass. Cars .
510
0.25
360,438
4,030
3,950
4,030
Commuters
115,850
0.08
3,382,820
127,435*
0.10
4,651,377
Other Pass. Cars .
115,850
0.10
4,228,525
92,680*
0.15
5,074,230
TOTALS
267,000
$9,443,281
254,229
$12,121,504
Govt. Vehicles Tolled
Govt. Trucks . . .
3,100
$0.20
$ 226,300
3,100
$0.25
Govt. Buses . . . .
510
0.25
46,538
510
0.35
65,153
Govt. Pass. Cars .
4,030
0.08
117,676
4,030
0.10
147,095
Sub-totals
7,640
390,514
7,640
259,360
9,443,281
246,489
12,121,504
267,000
$9,833,795
254,129
$12,616,627
Other Vehicles . .
TOTALS
$
$
$
282,875
495,123
* Volume of commuters increased 10%, other passenger cars reduced 20% and trucks reduced 5% due to the higher
toll rates.
�Toll bridge earnings have been computed on the bases of government vehicles
free and government vehicles tolled. In
each case, all government passenger cars
have been assumed to cross at commuter
rates. At the 10c rate, tolls on government
vehicles would be expected to net over
$390,000 in 1960; on the 15c schedule
these vehicles would return over $495,000.
Gross revenues earned by the Toll Bridge
System under the 10c schedule would
amount to $9,833,795 in 1960; under the
15c schedule 1960 gross revenue would
amount to $12,616,627, or about 28 percent greater income due to the increased
toll rates.
Table X X V I shows the revenues which
would be derived from traffic anticipated
on all of the bridges by 1970. Again, the
15c toll schedule would produce about
28 percent more revenue than the 10c
schedule.
Table XXVI
SCHEME II — ALL POTOMAC RIVER BRIDGES
ESTIMATED TRAFFIC AND REVENUES — 1970
i
Vehicle Class
10c Basic Pass. Car Rate
Daily
Vehicles
Toll
Rate
3,100
23,910
5,970
510
5,120
4,030
142,680
142,680
$ ...
0.15
0.25
\
Annual
Revenues
Daily
Toll
Annual
i Vehicles BasicRate Car Rate
15c
Pass.
Revenues \
Govt. Vehicles Free
Govt. Trucks
Medium Trucks . .
Heavy Trucks . . .
Govt. Buses . . . .
Other Buses
Govt. Pass. Cars .
Commuters
Other Pass. Cars .
TOTALS
$
1,309,073
544,763
0.25
467,200
0.08
0.10
4,166,256
5,207,820
328,000
$11,695,112
3,100 $ . . .
22,715* 0.20
5,672* 0.35
510
5,120
0.35
4,030
156,948* 0.10
114,144* 0.15
$
312,239
$15,014,859
1,658,195
724,598
654,080
5,728,602
6,249,384
Govt. Vehicles Tolled
282,875
65,153
147,095
7,640
304,599
$
495,123
15,014,859
312,239
$15,509,982
226,300
46,538
117,676
3,100
510
4,030
7,640
320,360
$
390,514
11,695,112
328,000
$12,085,626
3,100
510
4,030
Sub-totals
Other Vehicles . .
TOTALS
$
$
Govt. Trucks . . .
Govt. Buses . . . .
Govt. Pass. Cars .
$0.20
0.25
0.08
$0.25
0.35
0.10
* Volume of commuters increased 10%, other passenger cars reduced 20% and trucks reduced 5% due to the higher
toll rates.
�Table XXVII
SCHEME II — ALL POTOMAC RIVER CROSSINGS
TRAFFIC AND REVENUE SUMMARY (GOVT. VEHICLES TOLLED)—15c BASIC PASSENGER CAR TOLL
i
New BrieIges at Jones Point, Roaches Run, Cabiti John and:
System B
System C
System A
Const. Ave. & Three Sisters
Const. & Nebraska Aves.
Constitution Ave.
Average
Daily
Traffic
Annual
Revenues
Maint. &
Oper. Costs
Net Avail, for
Debt Service
Maint. &
Oper. Costs
Net Avail, for
Debt Service
Maint. &
Oper. Costs
Net Avail, for
Oper. Costs
1960
254,229
$12,616,627
$1,628,000
$10,988,627
$1,766,000
$10,840,627
$1,776,000
$10,840,627
1961
259,940
12,899,393
1,644,280
11,255,113
1,793,760
11,105,633
1,793,760
11,105,633
1962
265,751
13,189,458
1,660,723
11,528,735
1,811,698
11,377,760
1,811,698
11,377,760
1963
271,562
13,479,524
1,677,330
11,802,194
1,829,815
11,649,709
1,829,815
11,649,709
1964
277,373
13,769,589
1,694,103
12,075,486
1,848,113
11,921,476
1,848,113
11,921,476
1965
283,184
14,059,655
1,711,044
12,348,611
1,866,594
12,193,061
1,866,594
12,193,061
1966
288,995
14,349,720
1,728,154
12,621,566
1,885,260
12,464,460
1,885,260
12,464,460
14,639,786
1,745,435
12,894,351
1,904,113
12,735,673
1,904,113
12,735,673
14,929,851
1,762,889
13,166,962
1,923,154
13,006,697
1,923,154
13,006,697
13,439,399
1,942,385
13,277,532
1,942,385
13,277,532
Year
1967
1968
294,806
300,617
1969
306,428
15,219,917
1,780,518
1970
312,239
15,509,982
1,798,323
13,711,659
1,961,809
13,548,173
1,961,809
13,548,173
Next 26 Years 312,239
15,509,982
1,798,323
13,711,659
1,961,809
13,548,173
1,961,809
13,548,173
Total 37 Years
492,335,837
486,373,299
486,373,299
Avg. 37 Years
13,306,374
13,145,224
13,145,224
>
�In Table X X V I I is shown the amount
of net revenues that the entire system of
toll bridges would be expected to produce
over the life of a 40-year bond issue. The
income shown is based on the 15c toll
schedule and includes revenues which
would be derived from tolls charged against
government vehicles. The costs of maintenance and operation have been deducted
from gross earnings to show the amount
of money that would be available for debt
service each year.
Three different plans for the central
crossings are shown in Table X X V I I .
Maintenance and operating expenses are
least for the basic plan which includes only
eight bridges. These expenses are greatest
for the scheme which includes bridges at
both Constitution Avenue and Three
Sisters.
Estimates of revenues which are expected to accrue in years following the
opening of the Potomac River Toll Bridge
System to traffic represent the expected
earnings trend of the bridge system over
a period of years. Actual earnings might,
of course, exceed or fall short of the values
shown for a particular year.
Table XXVIII
SCHEME II—ALL POTOMAC RIVER BRIDGES—GOVT. VEHICLES TOLLED
FEASIBILITY OF TOLL FINANCING BY 15c BASIC PASS. CAR TOLL
New Bridges at Jones Point, Roaches Run
LsQDin
jotift
ana.
•
System A
Const. Ave.
System B
Const. Ave. &
Three Sisters
$ 12,616,627
1,628,000
10,988,627
$ 12,616,627
1,776,000
10,840,627
$ 12,616,627
1,776,000
10,840,627
Cost of Structures
Approaches
Toll Plazas & Equipment
Total Capital Costs
45,493,600
66,800,200
21,248,100
133,541,900
51,109,600
72,486,200
23,023,100
146,618,900
51,157,350
69,709,000
23,023,100
143,889,450
Interest During Construction (3 Year Period) . .
Financing Costs, Legal Fees, etc
Bonds Required
16,275,000
5,183,100
155,000,000
17,850,000
5,531,000
170,000,000
17,535,000
5,575,550.
167,000,000
5,425,000
5,950,000
5,845,000
2.03
1.82
1.86
7,535,015
1.46
1.77
8,264,210
1.31
1.59
8,118,371
1.34
1.62
Gross Earnings — First Year
Maintenance & Operation Costs
Net Available for Debt Service
First Year Interest (3Vi% )
Interest Coverage — First Year
System C
Const, and
Nebraska Aves.
40 Year Bonds @ 3V2 %
Interest and Amortization — 38 Years Earnings .
Level Debt Service, First Year Coverage
Level Debt Service, Average Over Life of Bonds
�Feasibility
interest by factors of 2.03, 1.82, and 1.86,
for the three bridge systems analyzed. Debt
Table X X V I I I examines the feasibility
service is earned 1.46, 1.31, and 1.34
of the alternate Central Crossing plans on
times, respectively, during the first year of
the basis of tolls earned at the 15c sched- operation. Over the life of the project averule. The eight-bridge scheme which incor- age earnings would cover debt service by
porates new crossings at Jones Point, 1.77, 1.59, and 1.62 times for the three
Roaches Run, Constitution Avenue, and bridge systems.
Cabin John is the least expensive, since
Listed below are the several coverage
each of the alternate plans includes an- factors which would be realized if the 10c
other bridge in addition to those named. toll schedule formed the basis of toll earnOn the basis of available cost estimates, ings, and for conditions by which governall schemes are eligible for revenue bond ment vehicles would be allowed free
financing. First year net earnings cover passage.
INTEREST AND DEBT SERVICE COVERAGE — 10c and 15c BASIC TOLL SCHEDULES
40-Year Bonds
3'A percent
Times Interest
Earned — 1st Year
A
System
B
,
Times Debt Service Earned
Average Year
First Year
C
A
System
B
C
A
System
B
c
10c toll schedule
Govt. Veh. Free
Govt. Veh. Toll
1.44
1.51
1.29
1.36
1.31
1.38
1.04
1.09
0.93
0.98
0.94
0.99
1.27
1.32
1.14
1.19
1.16
1.21
1.98
2.03
1.74
1.82
1.77
1.86
1.39
1.46
1.25
1.31
1.28
1.34
1.70
1.77
1.53
1.59
1.56
1.62
15c toll schedule
Govt. Veh. Free
Govt. Veh. Toll
It should be noted that all of the alter- tures. Higher toll rates mightfinanceeven
nate Potomac River bridge systems studied larger expenditures unless rates were placed
involve very large expenditures for ap- so high that the majority of present users
proach roads and interchange facilities could not afford to cross the river.
which are not a part of the bridge struc-
�PART
VIII
Scheme I I I - The Central Crossings
All of the trans-river traffic in the Washington area must presently use a centrally
located crossing. Although new Outer
Bridges would divert some of those vehicles
which were not destined to central locations, the majority of traffic would continue
to gravitate to the Central Crossings. Since
these bridges accommodate most of the
vehicles crossing the river, their earnings
potential is very great.
The four existing bridges must of course
be incorporated in any toll bridge plan that
is to provide effective relief to present congestion. Inasmuch as the modernization
and adaptation of the existing bridges will
be relatively inexpensive, they can be expected to earn considerably more revenue
than is required for their development, and
in this way assume some of the costs of the
new bridges and their approaches.
That the Outer Bridges will be constructed from other sources of revenue
and will be available for free use, together with the approaches shown in
Figure 1, during the entire first year
of full bridge operation (1960). If
these bridges are not built or if they
are built as toll structures, the use and
earnings of the Central Crossings
would be increased.
That toll charges used on the Central
Crossings will conform to the schedules set forth earlier in this report.
Traffic and Revenues
The amount of revenues which would be
expected from toll charges applied to traffic using the Central Crossings (all bridges
except the Jones Point and Cabin John
Bridges on the Outer Circumferential) are
shown in Table X X I X for the assumed
Basic Assumptions
first year of opening in 1960.
Data have been developed to show the
In developing the pattern of traffic use
and earnings on the Central Crossings cer- amount of revenue which would be earned
tain arbitrary conditions have been estab- at either a 10c or 15c basic toll schedule,
and for government vehicles tolled and free
lished. Among these are assumptions:
under each schedule. The 15c toll schedule
That population growth and vehicle reg- would produce about 32% more revenue
istration increases in the Washington than the 10c schedule.
Table X X X shows the revenues that the
Metropolitan Area will continue upwards at a decreasing rate during the Central Crossings would be expected to
years prior to 1960, the year for which earn by 1970.
revenue estimates have been develTable X X X I shows an estimate of the
oped in this report.
amount of revenues that a system of Cen55
�Again, the estimates of revenues set forth
in Table X X X I , as income expected to accrue to the operation of the Central Crossings as a toll system in years following its
opening, are intended to represent the general earnings trend of the system of bridges
over a period of years. It must be expected
that earnings for specific years will in some
degree exceed or fall short of the values
shown.
tral Crossings would earn on toll bridges
during 1960 and years following, assuming that government vehicles would pay to
use the bridges. Data have been developed
for both 10c and 15c toll schedules. Estimated costs of maintaining and operating
the bridges and toll collection facilities have
been deducted from gross revenues to show
the estimated amount of net income that
would be available for debt service each
year. These costs are based on new central
crossings at Roaches Run and Constitution
Avenue. If a central crossing were also constructed at Three Sisters or at Nebraska
Avenue, operating and maintenance costs
would be somewhat larger than the values
shown in the table while gross revenues
would be about the same.
Feasibility
Table X X X I I examines the feasibility of
all Central Crossings operated as a system
of toll bridges. The 1960 earnings of a
system of crossings which include all exist-
Table XXIX
SCHEME III — CENTRAL CROSSINGS ONLY
FIRST YEAR TRAFFIC AND REVENUES — 1960
,
Vehicle Class
Govt. Vehicles Free
Govt. Trucks
Medium Trucks . .
Heavy Trucks . . .
Govt. Buses
Other Buses
Govt. Pass. Cars .
Commuters
Other Pass. Cars .
TOTALS
Govt. Vehicles Tolled
Govt. Trucks . . . .
Govt. Buses . . . .
Govt. Pass. Cars .
10c lasic Pass. Car Rate
Toll
Daily
Annual
Vehicles
Rate
Revenues
3,010
17,390
4,360
500
3,550
3,910
109,070
104,710
$
• •
$
0.15
0.25
952,103
397,850
0.25
323,938
0.08
0.10
3,184,844
3,821,915
$8,680,650
246,500
3,010
500
3,910
\
$0.20
0.25
0.08
$
219,730
45,625
114,172
,
15c B asic Pass.Car Rate
«
Toll
Daily
Annual
Vehicles
Rate
Revenues
3,010
16,620*
4,142*
500
3,550
3,910
119,977*
83,768*
$ . .
$
0.25
0.35
1,516,575
529,141
0.35
453,512
0.10
0.15
4,379,161
4,586,298
235,377
3,010 • $0.25
500
0.35
3,910
0.10
$11,464,687
$
274,662
63,875
142,71.5
481,252
11,464,687
Govt. Sub-totals .
Other Vehicles . .
7,420
239,080
$ 379,527
$8,680,650
7,420
227,957
$
TOTALS
246,500
$9,060,177
235,377
$11,945,939
* Volume of commuters increased 10%, other passenger cars reduced 20% and trucks reduced 5% due to the higher
toll rates.
56
�ing bridges and new bridges at Roaches
Run and Constitution Avenue have been reviewed for their ability to cover interest and
debt service on a $117,500,000 loan secured by revenue bonds. The net revenues
available for debt service under the 10c
toll schedule are sufficient to cover bond interest at 3V2 percent by 1.87 times the
first year of toll bridge operation. Debt
service on 40-year bonds drawing 3Vi percent interest would be covered 1.35 times
from first year revenues. Average coverage
over the life of the bonds would amount
to 1.59 times the annual debt service costs.
A larger issue and considerably lower
coverage would result if a Three Sisters or
Nebraska Avenue Bridge were built in ad-
dition to Roaches Run and Constitution
Avenue Bridges.
The revenues which would be derived
from a 15c toll schedule would be sufficient
to cover the costs of such additional facilities as a Three Sisters or Nebraska Avenue
Bridge, or could be used to amortize
bonded indebtedness at a more rapid rate
than could be realized from lower toll rates.
As shown in Table X X X I I , earnings from
the 15c toll schedule would cover bond interest by 2.57 times the first year of toll
bridge operation (1960) and, applied to a
30-year series of 3Vi percent bonds, would
cover debt service 1.56 times. Over the life
of the bonds annual debt service would be
covered an average of 1.78 times.
Table XXX
SCHEME III — CENTRAL CROSSING ONLY
ESTIMATED TRAFFIC AND REVENUES — 1970
i
Vehicle Class
Govt. Vehicles Free
Govt. Trucks . . .
Medium Trucks . .
Heavy Trucks . . .
Govt. Buses
Other Buses
Govt. Pass. Cars .
Commuters
Other Pass. Cars .
TOTALS
10c
Daily Basic Pass. Car Rate
Toll
Annual
Vehicles
Rate
Revenues
3,010
21,430
5,350
500
4,500
3,910
131,865
125,235
$ . .
\
$
0.15
0.25
1,173,292
488,188
0.25
410,625
0.08
0.10
3,850,458
4,571,077
295,800
$10,493,640
i
15c
Pass.
Daily Basic Toll Car Rate
Annual >
Vehicles
Rate
Revenues
3,010
20,359*
5,082*
500
4,500
3,910
145,051*
100,188*
$ • •
$
0.20
0.35
1,486,207
649,225
0.35
574,875
0.10
0.15
5,294,361
5,485,293
282,600
$13,489,961
Govt. Vehicles Tolled
Govt. Trucks
Govt. Buses . . . .
Govt. Pass. Cars .
3,010
500
3,910
Govt. Sub-totals .
Other Vehicles . .
TOTALS
$0.20
0.25
0.08
$
274,662
63,875
142,715
7,420
275,180
$
481,252
13,489,961
282,600
$13,971,213
$
219,730
45,625
114,172
3,010
500
3,910
7,420
288,380
$
379,527
10,493,640
295,800
$10,873,167
$0.25
0.35
0.10
* Volume of commuters increased 10%, other passenger cars reduced 20% and trucks reduced 5% due to the higher
toll rates.
�Table XXXI
SCHEME III —CENTRAL CROSSINGS ONLY
TRAFFIC AND REVENUE SUMMARY*
Year
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
Next 26 yrs.
Annual
Revenues
$ 9,060,177
9,241,935
9,423,183
9,604,431
9,785,679
9,966,927
10,148,175
10,329,423
10,510,671
10,691,919
10,873,167
10,873,167
— JOc Basic Pass. Car Rate Maint. &
Oper. Costs
$1,361,000
1,374,610
1,388,356
1,402,239
1,416,261
1,430,424
1,444,728
1,459,175
1,473,767
1,488,505
1,503,390
1,503,390
Net Avail.
Debt Service
$
Annual
Revenues
7,699,177
7,867,325
8,034,827
8,202,192
8,369,418
8,536,503
8,703,447
8,870,248
9,036,904
9,203,414
9,369,777
9,369,777
$11,945,939
12,148,466
12,350,993
12,553,520
12,756,047
12,958,574
13,161,101
13,363,628
13,566,155
13,768,682
13,971,213
13,971,213
15c Basic Pass. Car Rate •
Maint. &
Oper. Costs
$1,361,000
1,374,610
1,388,356
1,402,239
1,416,261
1,430,424
1,444,728
1,459,175
1,473,767
1,488,505
1,503,390
1,503,390
•
>
Net Avail.
Debt Service
$ 10,584,939
10,773,856
10,962,637
11,151,281
11,339,786
11,528,150
11,716,373
11,904,453
12,092,388
12,280,177
12,467,823
12,467,823
Total 27 yrs.
Average 27 yrs
243,809,664
9,029,988
326 287 031
12,084,705
Total 37 yrs
337,507,434
9,121,823
450,965,261
12,188,250
* Based on a toll-bridge system with new bridges at Roaches Run and Constitution Avenue.
Annual Revenues include income from government-vehicle tolls.
�Table XXXII
SCHEME III —CENTRAL CROSSINGS ONLY
FEASIBILITY OF TOLL FINANCING
10c Basic
Pass. Car Rate
Gross Earnings — First Year
15c Basic
Pass. Car Rate
9,060,177
$ 11,945,939
Maintenance and Operation
1,361,000
1,361,000
Net Available for Debt Service
7,699,177
10,584,939
28,046,600
28,046,600
Approaches
52,727,200
52,727,200
Toll Plazas & Equipment
20,178,100
20,178,100
100,951,900
100,951,900
12,337,500
12,337,500
4,210,600
4,210,600
117,500,000
117,500,000
4,112,500
4,112,500
1.87
2.57
Cost of Structures
Total Capital Costs
3Vi% Interest During Construction (3 yrs.)
Financing Costs, Legal Fees, etc
Bonds Required
First Year Interest (3Vi%)
Interest Coverage, First Year
$
30 Year Bonds @ 3 V i %
6,797,610
Interest and Amortization — 27 Years Earnings
Level Debt Service, First Year Coverage
1.56
Level Debt Service, Coverage Over Life of Bonds
1.78
40 Year Bonds @ 3V2 %
Interest and Amortization — 37 Years Earnings
5,712,027
Level Debt Service, First Year Coverage
1.35
Level Debt Service, Coverage Over Life of Bonds
1.59
�0
�PART
IX
Scheme IV - Free Memorial Bridge
The most difficult task of adapting an
existing bridge for toll collection exists at
the Memorial Bridge. Not only is extensive
construction involved, but esthetic considerations are of great importance at this
location. It will be very difficult to develop
toll plazas at this site which will not appear
intrusive.
The Memorial Bridge is presently operating under near-capacity traffic loads during several hours of the day. Access to the
bridge is somewhat restrictive and cannot
well be improved. It is not likely that many
more vehicles could conveniently use the
bridge even if it were left free and all other
Central Crossings operated as a toll bridge
system.
Basic Considerations
The conditions which were assumed for
the study of the Memorial Bridge were the
same as those assumed for the Central
Crossings in Scheme I I I with the exception
that the Memorial Bridge would remain
free. Traffic volumes using the bridge in
1954 amounted to about 54,000 vehicles
per day. Daily volumes would be expected
to increase to a maximum of about 61,000
vehicles per day if the Memorial Bridge
became the only free crossing in the central
area. It is important to note that two new
bridges would be available to serve downtown Washington before the Memorial
Bridge would gain its unique position as
61
the only free bridge. The availability of fine
alternate routes would tend to minimize
the advantages of the free but overcrowded
Memorial Bridge.
Traffic and Revenue Estimate
The revenues which would be expected
from toll charges applied to traffic using the
five bridges in the Central Crossing system
(Free Memorial Bridge) are shown in
Table X X X I I I for the first year of operation (1960).
Data are shown for revenues earned under a 10c basic toll schedule and from a
15c basic schedule. The amount that would
be earned if government vehicles were
charged for use of the bridges is also shown
for each toll schedule. In deriving earnings
potential to this system it has been assumed
that all commercial vehicles (all trucks
and buses) will be prohibited from using
the Memorial Bridge.
Table X X X I V shows the revenues that
the toll bridges would be expected to earn
by 1970.
Table X X X V shows an estimate of the
amount of revenues that a system of Central Crossings would earn over the life of
revenue bonds which might be sold to
finance bridge construction. The estimates
of revenue shown in the table are intended
to develop the general earnings trend of
the toll bridge system over a period of
years. Earnings for specific years might
exceed or fall short of the values shown.
�Table XXXIII
SCHEME IV —FREE MEMORIAL BRIDGE
FIRST YEAR TRAFFIC AND REVENUES (1960)
,
70c Bo sic Pass. Car Toll
,
.
15c Ba sic Pass. Car Toll
,
Daily
Vehicles
Toll
Rate
Govt. Trucks . . . .
3,010
$ ...
Medium Trucks . .
17,390
0.15
952,102
16,520*
0.20
1,205,960
Heavy Trucks . . .
4,360
0.25
397,850
4,142*
0.35
529,140
0.35
453,512
Annual
Revenues
Daily
Vehicles
Toll
Rate
Annual
Revenues
Govt. Vehicles Free
Govt. Buses
500
Other Buses
3,550
Govt. Pass. Cars .
3,010
$
3,410
$
. . .
$
500
0.25
323,938
3,550
3,410
Commuters
78,500
0.08
2,292,200
86,350*
0.10
3,151,775
Other Pass. Cars .
75,780
0.10
2,765,970
60,624*
0.15
3,319,164
TOTALS
186,500
$6,732,060
$8,659,551
178,106
Govt. Vehicles Tolled
Govt. Trucks . . .
3,010
$0.20
$ 219,730
3,010
$0.25
$ 274,662
Govt. Buses . . . .
500
0.25
45,625
500
0.35
63,875
Govt. Pass. Cars .
3,410
0.08
99,572
3,410
0.10
124,465
Govt. Sub-totals
6,920
$ 364,927
6,920
$ 463,002
179,580
6,732,060
171,186
8,659,551
186,500
$7,096,987
178,106
$9,122,553
Other Vehicles . .
TOTALS
;
Volume of commuters increased 10%, other passenger cars reduced 20% and trucks reduced 5% due to the
higher toll rates.
62
�Table XXXIV
SCHEME IV —FREE MEMORIAL BRIDGE
ESTIMATED TRAFFIC AND REVENUES — 1970
10c Basic Pass. Car Toll
Daily
Vehicles
Toll
Rate
>
Annual
Revenues
i
15c Basic Pass.Car Toll
Daily
Vehicles
Toll
Rate
,
Annual
Revenues
Govt. Vehicles Free
Govt. Trucks
3,010
$
. . .
3,010
$
$
•••
$
Medium Trucks . .
21,430
0.15
1,173,292
20,359*
0.20
1,486,207
Heavy Trucks . . .
5,350
0.25
488,187
5,082*
0.35
649,225
0.35
574,875
Govt. Buses
500
Other Buses
4,500
Govt. Pass. Cars .
3,410
Commuters
Other Pass. Cars
TOTALS
500
0.25
410,625
4,500
3,410
100,250
0.08
2,927,300
110,275*
0.10
4,025,037
96,550
0.10
3,524,075
77,240*
0.15
4,228,890
235,000
$8,523,479
$10,964,234
224,376
Govt. Vehicles Tolled
Govt. Trucks . . .
$
274,662
3,010
$0.20
$ 219,730
3,010
$0.25
Govt. Buses . . . .
500
0.25
45,625
500
0.35
63,875
Govt. Pass. Cars .
3,410
0.08
99,572
3,410
0.10
124,465
Govt. Sub-totals .
6,920
$ 364,927
6,920
228,080
8,523,479
217,456
10,964,234
235,000
$8,888,406
224,376
$11,427,236
Other Vehicles . .
TOTALS
$
463,002
•Volume of commuters increased 10%, other passenger cars reduced 20% and trucks reduced 5% due to the
higher toll rates.
63
�Table XXX>
SCHEME IV —FREE MEMORIAL BRIDGE
TRAFFIC AND REVENUE SUMMARY*
Year
4^
Annual
Revenues
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
$7,096,987
7,276,129
7,455,271
7,634,413
7,813,555
7,992,697
8,171,839
8,350,981
8,530,123
8,709,265
8,888,406
$1,092,000
1,102,920
1,113,949
1,125,088
1,136,339
1,147,702
1,159,179
1,170,771
1,182,479
1,194,304
1,206,247
8,888,406
1,206,247
Next 26 years
15c Basic Pass. Car Rate
10c Basic Pass. Car Rate
Maint. &
Oper.
Net Avail.
Debt Service
6,004,987
6,173,209
6,341,322
6,509,325
6,677,216
6,844,995
7,012,660
7,180,210
7,347,644
7,514,961
7,682,159
$ 9,122,553
9,353,021
9,583,489
9,813,958
10,044,427
10,274,895
10,505,364
10,735,832
10,966,300
11,196,768
11,427,236
$1,092,000
1,102,920
1,113,949
1,125,088
1,136,339
1,147,702
1,159,179
1,170,771
1,182,479
1,194,304
1,206,247
11,427,236
1,206,247
Net A vail.
Debt Service
Maint. &
Oper.
7,682,159
$
Annual
Revenues
$
8,030,553
8,250,101
8,469,540
8,688,870
8,908,088
9,127,193
9,346,185
9,565,061
9,783,821
10,002,464
10,220,989
10,220,989
Total 32 years
Avg. 32 years
236,614,027
7,394,188
315,033,634
9,844,801
Total 37 years
Avg. 37 years
275,024,822
7,433,103
366,138,579
9,895,637
* Based on a toll bridge system with new bridges at Roaches Run and Constitution Avenue. Annual revenues include revenue for government vehicle tolls.
�Table XXXVI
SCHEME IV —FREE MEMORIAL BRIDGE
FEASIBILITY OF TOLL FINANCING
10c Basic
Pass. Car Rate
$
Gross Earnings — First Year
7,096,987
15c Basic
Pass. Car Rate
$
9,122,553
Maintenance and Operation Costs
1,092,000
1,092,000
Net Available for Debt Service
6,004,987
8,030,553
28,046,600
28,046,600
Approaches
52,727,200
52,727,200
Toll Plazas and Equipment
13,362,900
13,362,900
Total Capital Costs
94,136,700
94,136,700
3Vi % Interest During Construction (2 years)
11,497,500
11,497,500
3,865,800
3,865,800
109,500,000
109,500,000
First Year Interest (3Vi%)
3,832,500
3,832,500
Interest Coverage, First Year
1.57
2.10
Cost of Structures
Financing Costs, Legal Fees, etc
Bonds Required
35 Year Bonds @ 3V>%
Interest and Amortization — 32 Years Earnings . . .
5,742,344
Level Debt Service, First Year Coverage
1.40
Level Debt Service Coverage over Life of Bonds .
1.72
40 Year Bonds @ 3i6%
Interest and Amortization — 37 Years Earnings . .
5,323,151
Level Debt Service, First Year Coverage
1.13
Level Debt Service Coverage over Life of Bonds .
1.40
65
�Feasibility
First year revenues from a 15c toll schedTable X X X V I develops the feasibility ule would cover bond interest by 2.10
times and amortization costs on 35-year
of the Central Crossings toll bridges operbonds by 1.40 times. Earnings during the
ated without the Memorial Bridge. Firstlife of the bonds would cover debt service
year revenues for a 10c basic toll schedule by 1.72 times.
are estimated to be sufficient to cover bond
From the foregoing analysis it would
interest by 1.57 times and amortization appear possible to develop a system of Cencosts on 40-year bonds by 1.13 times. tral Crossings operated as a Toll Bridge
Earnings during the life of the bonds would System without placing tolls on the Memorial Bridge.
cover debt service 1.40 times.
66
�Summary and Conclusions
All of the Potomac River crossings in
the Washington metropolitan area are presently used to capacity during peak hours
on most days. There is an urgent need for
additional river crossing capacity in terms
of new bridges and bridge approaches and
improvements to existing bridges.
Means of financing additional bridges
and approach roads have been given much
attention by Congress and other political
jurisdictions for many years. The question
of revenue bond financing has often been
raised. This report has been prepared with
a view to exploring the possibilities of toll
financing and presenting data to guide
legislative and administrative policies.
Revenue bond financing of bridges and
other traffic facilities has long been an accepted means of deriving funds for immediate use. Tolls charged against traffic using
the facilities provide funds to amortize the
bonds. The money borrowed by pledging
future toll revenues can be used for the
immediate construction of those needed
facilities for which other revenue cannot
be found or the construction of which
would have to be postponed indefinitely.
This study has developed from a number
of basic assumptions which grew out of
conferences with various members of the
Regional Highway Planning Committee.
These assumptions include the extent to
which approach roads and other highway
improvements must be made a part of the
plan, the amount of repairs and improvements to existing facilities which must be
made, the scale of toll plaza development
involved at the approaches to existing
bridges, and the extent to which existing
facilities should be accepted as part of the
overall plan.
Toll schedules have been tentatively
established upon which to base estimates
of traffic likely to use the Potomac River
crossings if they are operated as a toll system. Toll rates have been investigated
which represent the lowest possible charges
that can be made against bridge users consistent with the need for revenues sufficient
tofinanceproposed improvements.
Tentative cost estimates of new bridges
and approach roads have been prepared
by the District of Columbia Department of
Highways. The costs of developing toll
plazas at existing bridges and of instalhng
toll collection equipment at all locations
have also been developed by the Department of Highways. The consultant has supplied cost estimates only where such data
were not available from the Department of
Highways. The cost estimates supplied by
the Department of Highways, with a small
amount of supplementary data, form the
basis for the feasibility studies in this report.
Basic 10c and 15c passenger car toll
rates have been investigated for each of
the bridge combinations studied. Consideration has also been given to special commuter rates and to the amount of revenues
which would be lost if government vehicles
were allowed to use the bridges without
charge. The basic toll schedules follow:
67
�Vehicle Type
Basic 10c
Pass. Toll
Basic 15c
Pass. Toll
Pass. Cars, pickups, panels
10
.15
Commuters (50-ticket book)
08
.10
Medium trucks (2-axle, 6-tires)
15
.20
Heavy trucks (3 or more axles)
25
.35
Buses
25
.35
Four possible combinations of Potomac
River bridges have been examined for revenue bond feasibility. Scheme I is composed
of two new crossings (the Outer Bridges)
at Cabin John and Jones Point. Scheme I I
is a Potomac River Toll Bridge System
composed of the four existing bridges and
four or five new structures. Schme I I I , the
Central Crossings, envisions the same Potomac River Bridge System as Scheme I I ,
but bridges at Cabin John and Jones Point
would be financed from sources other than
revenue bonds and would be operated without tolls. Scheme I V would consist of the
same Central Crossings as Scheme I I I , but
would permit the Memorial Bridge to remain a free structure.
Scheme I — A toll bridge plan which includes only the Outer Bridges (Cabin John
and Jones Point) cannot be financed by
revenue bonds on the basis of data derived
from this study. Income would not be sufficient to amortize a required $36,500,000
bond issue.
Revenue bonds might finance a $17,500,000 bridge structure only at Jones
Point with a toll schedule based on a 25c
passenger car rate. The project would not
become feasible until 1960 or later, and
extensive approach roads would have to be
provided without cost to the project.
bridge Potomac River Toll Bridge System
is estimated to cost $155,000,000 and
might befinancedby a basic 10c toll schedule if bond interest were kept below 3Vi
percent. At 3Vi percent, level debt service
during the 40-year life of revenue bonds
might not be quite sufficient to meet the
standards set by investors. A basic 15c toll
schedule would provide sufficient revenues
for a feasible project.
Scheme I I I — A Potomac River Toll
Bridge System composed of only the Central Crossings (omitting the Outer Bridges
at Cabin John and Jones Point) could earn
sufficient revenues from a basic 10c toll
schedule to make revenue bond financing
of the required $117,500,000 investment
appear feasible.
Scheme I V — Bridges and approach
roads included in the Central Crossing Plan
could be financed from tolls on all Central
Crossings except the Memorial Bridge. A
10c basic toll schedule would provide sufficient income to finance $109,500,000 of
40-year revenue bonds if interest rates were
kept below 3Vi percent. At 3Vi percent or
greater, anticipated revenues during the life
of 40-year revenue bonds might not be considered adequate to meet the standards set
by investors. A basic 15c toll schedule
would provide sufficient revenues for a
Scheme I I — Construction of an eight- feasible project.
�����
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Toll financing for Potomac River crossings : Washington, D.C.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Bridges--Washington (D.C.)
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Wilbur Smith and Associates
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
Archival Box 11
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
April 1955
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
District of Columbia. Department of Highways
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Documents
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/bb9c3c4886fbd644192f88b7be93a0c7.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=f2pgYAKmu0ZJqL6z3jTJwTk7hK5hSUyy9dactj7z52y2dcyE60Z4KxJH1KPoILDyFfmsCtAepsbeGxCM75WwW2TXag0Z3d4jnqr9tyZYbJbNqOd7IfqT9RBOGbaGz3VfOOjvPn3qmHnMhDkzizPc0JF25UHhiz-ca0Tyb6wNSMvTOfQiXsuQxt84eXDvv0F1kUmae2XYzLo92Gr7GIJ%7EhTyblVpuZeJNkdWH7jm3NU7OwBFjrlV%7Ej1Qe8J4X4xeBAUXe%7E2BRrmIgHTevM5YXNw6DU70E1DYl3itcBQFOUxvnOF-VwcxJf7BXxvaWLaMjouy53PzkvH8lO0EZgoX1Iw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
b38cd0e593ff40e8c73a80b3c91647cf
PDF Text
Text
AR@p@rtUp®m..
FUTURE BRIDGE CROSSINGS
OF THE POTOMAC RIVER
WASHINGTON, "D. C
Prepared
for
NATIONAL CAPITAL PARIC-AND PLANNING COMMISSION
��A R e p o r t Upon
FUTURE BRIDGE CROSSINGS OF THE POTOMAC RIVER
Washington, D. C.
Prepared f o r
THE NATIONAL CAPITAL PARK AND PLANNING COMMISSION
By
H a r l a n d Bartholomew and A s s o c i a t e s
C i t y
P l a n n e r s
St. Louis, Missouri
June 1952
�HARLAND
CITY
HRADATOOE
ALNBRHLMW
RUSSELL H RILEY
.
HRY AEADR
ARW LXNE
ELD RIDGE LOVELACE
BARTHOLOMEW
PLANNERS - CIVIL ENGINEERS
AND
- LANDSCAPE
ASSOCIATES
ARCHITECTS
3 1 NORTH ELEVENTH STREET
7
SAINT LOUIS l.MISSOURJ
DNL W HTO
OAD
UTN
DNL W M G A H N
OAD
cLSO
DNL W L R N
OAD O B I K
June
1952
N a t i o n a l C a p i t a l P a r k and P l a n n i n g Commission
Washington, D. C.
Gentlemen:
I n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h our agreement d a t e d June 6, 1952,
we a r e p l e a s e d t o submit h e r e w i t h our r e p o r t upon " F u t u r e
B r i d g e C r o s s i n g s o f t h e Potomac R i v e r . "
T h i s r e p o r t i s made f o r the purpose o f a s s i s t i n g your
Commission t o comply w i t h t h e terms o f an A c t of C o n g r e s s
approved March 3, 1952, and e n t i t l e d "An a c t t o a u t h o r i z e
and d i r e c t t h e Commissioners of t h e D i s t r i c t o f Columbia
t o make s u c h s t u d i e s and i n v e s t i g a t i o n s deemed n e c e s s a r y
c o n c e r n i n g t h e l o c a t i o n and c o n s t r u c t i o n of a b r i d g e over
t h e Potomac R i v e r , and f o r o t h e r p u r p o s e s . "
( P u b l i c Law
266 - 82nd C o n g r e s s )
F o l l o w i n g a r e p e r t i n e n t and s i g n i f i c a n t q u o t a t i o n s
from t h e A c t .
"A b r i d g e s o c o n s t r u c t e d , ( i . e . a c r o s s t h e
Potomac R i v e r between V i r g i n i a and a p o i n t w i t h i n t h e
D i s t r i c t o f Columbia,) w i l l be of m a t e r i a l b e n e f i t t o the
F e d e r a l Government i n t h e e v e n t t h a t t h e d i s p e r s a l of
F e d e r a l a g e n c i e s becomes an a c c o m p l i s h e d f a c t ; and t h a t
t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f s u c h a b r i d g e i s hereby d e c l a r e d t o be
a desirable project."
"The Commissioners o f t h e D i s t r i c t o f Columbia s h a l l
i n i t i a t e and e n t e r i n t o s u c h agreement a s may be n e c e s s a r y
f o r making and f i n a n c i n g t h e s t u d i e s and i n v e s t i g a t i o n s
h e r e i n a u t h o r i z e d w i t h t h e Bureau o f P u b l i c Roads,
Department of Commerce, and the Department of Highways,
S t a t e o f V i r g i n i a , and s h a l l e n l i s t t h e c o o p e r a t i o n of t h e
N a t i o n a l P a r k S e r v i c e , Department o f t h e I n t e r i o r , t h e
N a t i o n a l C a p i t a l P a r k and P l a n n i n g Commission, and o f any
s u b d i v i s i o n o f t h e S t a t e of V i r g i n i a i n which any p a r t of
s u c h b r i d g e or i t s approaches o r c o n n e c t i n g r o a d s would
be l o c a t e d , i n t h e s t u d i e s and i n v e s t i g a t i o n s made p u r s u a n t
t o s u c h agreement."
�June 26, 1952
Page 2
N a t i o n a l C a p i t a l P a r k and
P l a n n i n g Commission
D u r i n g t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f t h i s r e p o r t we have had
o c c a s i o n f r e q u e n t l y t o c o n s u l t w i t h t h e Highway Department
of t h e D i s t r i c t i n r e g a r d t o t h e f i n d i n g s o f t h e 1948
O r i g i n and D e s t i n a t i o n S u r v e y and t o o t h e r f a c t u a l d a t a
r e g a r d i n g t r a f f i c movements a c r o s s t h e Potomac R i v e r and
e l s e w h e r e i n t h e Washington a r e a . We found t h e o f f i c i a l s
of t h i s Department e x t r e m e l y c o o p e r a t i v e and t h e i n f o r m a t i o n
f u r n i s h e d h a s been i n v a l u a b l e t o u s i n o u r s t u d i e s o f t h e
b r i d g e problem.
We have a l s o c o n s u l t e d w i t h r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f t h e
f i r m o f M o d j e s k i and M a s t e r s , who a r e c o n d u c t i n g a c e r t a i n
d e t a i l e d e n g i n e e r i n g s t u d y o f t h e same problem. These
c o n f e r e n c e s were h e l d f o r t h e purpose o f a v o i d i n g any
d u p l i c a t i o n o f e f f o r t i n a n a l y z i n g t h e O r i g i n and D e s t i n a t i o n d a t a and t o exchange v i e w p o i n t s .
While our f i n a l
c o n c l u s i o n s r e g a r d i n g t h e s o l u t i o n t o t h e problem may
d i f f e r m a t e r i a l l y from t h o s e r e a c h e d by M o d j e s k i and
M a s t e r s , we found l i t t l e d i v e r g e n c e o f o p i n i o n on i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the b a s i c t r a f f i c data.
We w i s h t o e x p r e s s our a p p r e c i a t i o n o f t h e a s s i s t a n c e
r e n d e r e d by t h e Highway Department and t h e f i r m o f M o d j e s k i
and M a s t e r s .
We a l s o w i s h t o acknowledge t h e c o o p e r a t i o n
and h e l p g i v e n by t h e s t a f f o f your Commission, w i t h o u t
which t h i s r e p o r t c o u l d n o t have been p r e p a r e d w i t h i n t h e
l i m i t e d time a v a i l a b l e .
Respectfully
submitted,
HARLAND BARTHOLOMEW AND ASSOCIATES
By
LIBRARY COPY
RETURN TO
BEVCuOifAOMfAYS ,VID TRAi G
GOVL..Oft-dU>*i«*CS <•> wo.V .ja
r
�TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
No.
SUMMARY OF F I N D I N G S , CONCLUSIONS
RECOMMENDATIONS
AND
i
i
ii
ii
1
INTRODUCTION
2
FACTORS INFLUENCING THE PRESENT C R I T I C A L T R A F F I C
SITUATION
4
4
4
4
5
6
T r a f f i c E n t e r i n g and L e a v i n g
Central
Business
7
8
REVIEW OF HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT'S
AND DESTINATION SURVEY
ANALYSIS OF O R I G I N
10
T r a f f i c Movements A c r o s s t h e Potomac R i v e r
. . .
EVALUATION OF THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN
11
14
14
15
A P P L I C A T I O N OF PLANNING P R I N C I P L E S TO THE LOCATION
OF FUTURE POTOMAC R I V E R BRIDGES
A B a s i c and I n t e g r a t e d T r a n s p o r t a t i o n
Plan
. . .
17
18
20
22
23
�INDEX TO P L A T E S
Page
No.
Plate
No.
1
2
A c t u a l Volume o f B r i d g e T r a f f i c Compared
t o E s t i m a t e d Volume i f A l e x a n d r i a a n d
N e b r a s k a Avenue w e r e i n E x i s t e n c e i n
1950
13
A c t u a l Volume o f B r i d g e T r a f f i c Compared
t o E s t i m a t e d Volume i f " E " S t r e e t B r i d g e
13
3
Diagrammatic Regional Thoroughfare
Plan . .
15
�SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Findings
1.
Coincident with a sharp population i n c r e a s e , the
W a s h i n g t o n M e t r o p o l i t a n A r e a i s r a p i d l y becoming d e c e n t r a l i z e d .
B e t w e e n 1940 a n d 1950 t h e D i s t r i c t ' s p o p u l a t i o n i n c r e a s e d
2 0 . 9 p e r c e n t compared t o i n c r e a s e s i n V i r g i n i a o f 1 3 2 . 0
p e r c e n t and i n Maryland o f 106.6 p e r c e n t .
2.
Government employment i n t h e a r e a i s n e a r t h e w a r t i m e
p e a k a n d i s more t h a n d o u b l e t h a t o f 1937. T h e r e w e r e i n
1951 2 4 7 , 9 0 0 e m p l o y e e s compared t o 111,900 i n 1937 a n d a b o u t
2 8 0 , 0 0 0 d u r i n g t h e w a r t i m e p e a k i n 1943.
3.
P u b l i c t r a n s i t r i d i n g has s t e a d i l y declined s i n c e
1945, t h e p e a k y e a r . T h i s d e c l i n e h a s amounted t o 3 7 . 8
p e r c e n t i n t h e c a s e o f t h e C a p i t a l T r a n s i t Company, 2 5 . 7
p e r c e n t f o r t h e A l e x a n d r i a , B a r c r o f t and Washington T r a n s i t
Company, a n d 1 7 . 1 p e r c e n t f o r t h e A r n o l d L i n e s .
4.
Motor v e h i c l e r e g i s t r a t i o n i s i n c r e a s i n g more
r a p i d l y t h a n p o p u l a t i o n i n t h e m e t r o p o l i t a n a r e a . S i n c e 1941
p o p u l a t i o n h a s i n c r e a s e d 4 8 . 5 p e r c e n t w h i l e motor v e h i c l e
r e g i s t r a t i o n has increased 68.5 percent.
5.
T r a f f i c e n t e r i n g and l e a v i n g t h e C e n t r a l B u s i n e s s
D i s t r i c t has i n c r e a s e d 31.2 percent i n f i v e y e a r s .
6.
T r a f f i c c r o s s i n g t h e Potomac R i v e r b r i d g e s i s
i n c r e a s i n g a t t h e r a t e o f 7.4 p e r c e n t a n n u a l l y .
7.
17.5 percent o f t h e t o t a l d a i l y v e h i c l e t r i p s i n
the Washington a r e a have t h e i r o r i g i n o r d e s t i n a t i o n i n t h e
b u s i n e s s a n d Government c e n t e r .
(Zero Sector o f the O r i g i n
and D e s t i n a t i o n S u r v e y . )
8.
T r a f f i c p a s s i n g through t h e c e n t r a l a r e a aggregates
A& percent
o f t h e t o t a l d a i l y t r i p s dmm L i n e il t o t h e a r e a .
0
9.
I f t h e / N e b r a s k a a n d A l e x a n d r i a b r i d g e s h a d been i n
e x i s t e n c e i n QJJ5JJ} i t i s e s t i m a t e d t h a t t h e y w o u l d h a v e
c a r r i e d r e s p e c t i v e l y iUS,230 a n d >U),604 v e h i c l e s d a i l y o r
£,"3 Vdr^r p e r c e n t a n d ?T!5/percent o f t h e t o t a l 24 h o u r weekday
t r a f f i c over a l l of/the b r i d g e s . ^
_
IS.S/6.
"L
�1^(^10.
I f t h e " E " S t r e e t B r i d g e had been i n e x i s t e n c e i n
i t i s e s t i m a t e d t h a t i t w o u l d h a v e c a r r i e d 37%-63T>
v e h i c l e s d a i l y o r BO.6r p e r c e n t o f t h e t o t a l 24 h o u r weekday
t r a f f i c o v e r a l l o f thp b r i d g e s .
Conclusions
1.
P u b l i c p o l i c y i n W a s h i n g t o n s h o u l d be d i r e c t e d t o w a r d
m o v i n g more p e o p l e and l e s s i n d i v i d u a l p a s s e n g e r v e h i c l e s .
2.
A b a s i c and i n t e g r a t e d p l a n o f t r a n s p o r t a t i o n i s
f u n d a m e n t a l to a permanent s o l u t i o n of the t r a f i i c problem.
S u c h a p l a n h a s b e e n f o r m u l a t e d by t h e C o m m i s s i o n and s h o u l d
be c a r r i e d o u t .
3.
A t t e m p t s t o revamp t h e downtown s t r e e t s y s t e m t o
accommodate an e n d l e s s i n c r e a s e i n a u t o m o t i v e t r a f f i c i s i l l
a d v i s e d a s i t c a n o n l y end i n e v e n t u a l
failure.
4.
I n c r e a s i n g t h e c a p a c i t y o f a r t e r i a l s t r e e t s and b r i d g e s
a t t h e a p p r o a c h e s t o t h e b u s i n e s s and G o v e r n m e n t c e n t e r w i l l
r e s u l t i n c r o w d i n g more v e h i c l e s on t h e downtown s t r e e t s
w h i c h a l r e a d y a r e o v e r l o a d e d d u r i n g peak p e r i o d s .
I t will
i m p a i r t h e movement o f t h e more e s s e n t i a l v e h i c u l a r t r a f f i c .
Improvements of t h i s n a t u r e w i l l m e r e l y a g g r a v a t e p r e s e n t
d i f f i c u l t i e s , not r e s o l v e them.
Recommendations
The b a s i c t r a n s p o r t a t i o n p l a n a s o u t l i n e d i n t h i s r e p o r t
s h o u l d be c a r r i e d out a s r a p i d l y a s f u n d s p e r m i t and l e g a l
a u t h o r i t y c a n be o b t a i n e d .
S p e c i f i c a l l y , public policy
s h o u l d be d i r e c t e d t o w a r d :
(1)
V i g o r o u s p r o s e c u t i o n of the p l a n
g o v e r n m e n t a l employment c e n t e r s .
for
dispersing
(2)
Improvement o f t h e mass t r a n s p o r t a t i o n
on a m e t r o p o l i t a n b a s i s .
system
(3)
Making i m p r o v e m e n t s t o t h e h i g h w a y s y s t e m t h a t
w i l l f a c i l i t a t e c i r c u l a t i o n throughout the a r e a .
T h e s e , i n t h e o r d e r o f p r i o r i t y s h o u l d be:
(a)
P r o g r e s s i v e c o n s t r u c t i o n of the i n n e r
c i r c u m f e r e n t i a l r o u t e e v e n t u a l l y t o be
c o m p l e t e l y grade s e p a r a t e d .
�iii
(b)
C o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e i n t e r m e d i a t e and
outer r i n g routes i n c l u d i n g the A l e x a n d r i a
and N e b r a s k a Avenue b r i d g e s and t h e S o u t h w e s t
Freeway.
(4)
C a r r y i n g out t h e comprehensive p l a n f o r o f f street parking f a c i l i t i e s , including provision for
fringe parking.
�INTRODUCTION
Washington i s r a p i d l y approaching a c r i s i s .
in
the C e n t r a l A r e a of the c i t y
points
and
Congestion
i s becoming c r i t i c a l
t h e s i t u a t i o n grows w o r s e d a i l y .
a t many
A decision
must be made w h e t h e r t o a t t e m p t f u r t h e r s a t u r a t i o n o f
C e n t r a l A r e a by
i n t r o d u c t i o n of a d d i t i o n a l e n d l e s s
v e h i c l e s or whether to a c c e p t ,
basic,
integrated
transportation plan.
future bridges across
p a r t of such a
A few
the
very
important f a c t o r s are
numbers o f
c a r r y out
location
is a
a
of
fundamental
traffic
involved
crossings.
f u l l e s t recognition.
t h e p r i n c i p l e s and
in selecting
While present
f l o w must be r e c o g n i z e d and
f u n d a m e n t a l t o t h e p r o b l e m and
given
w h i c h must be
given
f o r the Washington
p l a n n i n g p r i n c i p l e s and
this report
to consider
with
basic
region.
to analyze
the
the
h a v e t o do
o b j e c t i v e s o f a f u n d a m e n t a l and
i s the purpose of
careful
w h i c h a r e much more
These c o n s i d e r a t i o n s
of t r a n s p o r t a t i o n
It
the
plan.
study, there are other considerations
plan
The
t h e Potomac R i v e r
l o c a t i o n of f u t u r e r i v e r
p a t t e r n of
i m p l e m e n t and
soon
these broad
following:
1.
The b a s i c t r a n s p o r t a t i o n p l a n a s s e t o u t i n t h e
o o m p r e h e n s i v e p l a n o f W a s h i n g t o n and i t s e n v i r o n s .
2.
The f u n c t i o n a l v a l u e
t h i s basic plan.
of f u t u r e bridge c r o s s i n g s
to
3.
The manner i n w h i c h
t h e l o c a t i o n o f f u t u r e Potomac
R i v e r c r o s s i n g s can a i d i n r e d u c i n g t r a f f i c c o n g e s t i o n
i n the c e n t r a l a r e a .
�- 2 -
4.
The u l t i m a t e e f f e c t upon t h e f o r m and c h a r a c t e r o f
the Nation's C a p i t a l t h a t w i l l r e s u l t from c o n t i n u a l l y
p r o v i d i n g more f a c i l i t i e s f o r moving more t r a f f i c i n t o
the c e n t r a l p a r t of the c i t y .
5. A r e v i e w o f t h e f i n d i n g s o f t h e D i s t r i c t D e p a r t m e n t
o f H i g h w a y s b a s e d upon t h e i r a n a l y s i s o f t h e 1948 O r i g i n
and D e s t i n a t i o n S u r v e y i n r e s p e c t t o p r e s e n t and f u t u r e
t r a f f i c movements a c r o s s t h e r i v e r .
Planning
Considerations
The N a t i o n a l C a p i t a l P a r k a n d P l a n n i n g C o m m i s s i o n
has recognized
t h a t the t r a f f i c
long
p r o b l e m p r i m a r i l y i s one o f
m o v i n g p e o p l e and goods and n o t t h e moving o f more motor
vehicles.
The C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n o f 1950 o u t l i n e d t h i s
and
other planning o b j e c t i v e s i n the f o l l o w i n g language:
(1)
"To move p e o p l e and goods i n and o u t o f t h e m e t r o p o l i t a n r e g i o n , and f r o m p l a c e t o p l a c e w i t h i n i t ,
q u i c k l y , s a f e l y and e c o n o m i c a l l y . "
(2)
"To f u r t h e r t h e w e l f a r e o f t h e 2,000,000 p e o p l e
who w i l l be l i v i n g i n t h e m e t r o p o l i t a n community t h i r t y
y e a r s hence."
(3)
"To e n c o u r a g e a s t a b l e , a t t r a c t i v e and
c e n t r a l business area."
profitable
(4)
"To p r e s e r v e t h e b e s t o f t h e p a s t i n c i t y b u i l d i n g
and e x p e r i e n c e , j o i n e d w i t h l e a d e r s h i p i n new sound ways
of development.
(5)
"To d e v e l o p a N a t i o n a l C a p i t a l t h a t w i l l be l o v e d
a n d h o n o r e d f o r i t s e m i n e n c e among c i t i e s - a n i n s p i r i n g
s y m b o l , t o c i t i z e n s and v i s i t o r s , o f t h e d i g n i t y and
v i g o r of American democratic
government."
A grave danger e x i s t s which not o n l y t h r e a t e n s the
s t a b i l i t y of the C e n t r a l B u s i n e s s D i s t r i c t but a l s o the
e s s e n t i a l c h a r a c t e r o f the e n t i r e c e n t e r o f government
i n the
�- 3 -
rapidly
and
increasing vehicular t r a f f i c
throughout the D i s t r i c t
t h e concomitant c o n g e s t i o n found i n n e a r l y a l l p a r t s of
the C e n t r a l Area.
T h e way t o remove t h i s d a n g e r i s by a
b a s i c i n t e g r a t e d p l a n r a t h e r t h a n by p a l l i a t i v e s w h i c h a c c e p t
and
continue the error.
The e s s e n t i a l p a r t s o f t h i s
plan
are as follows:
1.
Prevention of f u r t h e r concentration of Federal
employment e s t a b l i s h m e n t s i n t h e c o n g e s t e d a r e a t o g e t h e r w i t h
e f f e c t i n g a b e t t e r d i s t r i b u t i o n o f s u c h employment c e n t e r s
o v e r an e x t e n d e d c e n t r a l a r e a and throughout t h e o u t l y i n g
points of the region.
2.
Development o f a t h o r o u g h l y e f f i c i e n t t r a n s i t system.
Movement o f p e o p l e i s t h e f i r s t c o n s i d e r a t i o n .
Movement o f
v e h i c l e s i s secondary.
3.
M a i n t e n a n c e o r d e v e l o p m e n t o f good r e s i d e n t i a l a r e a s
w i t h i n w a l k i n g d i s t a n c e o f t h e C e n t r a l A r e a a n d some s a t e l l i t e
towns a t d e c e n t r a l i z e d Government c e n t e r s .
4. D e v e l o p m e n t o f a p l a n f o r i m p r o v e d m a j o r h i g h w a y s ,
e x p r e s s w a y s , f r e e w a y s and p a r k w a y s , throughout t h e m e t r o p o l i t a n
a r e a f o r u s e by b o t h mass t r a n s p o r t a t i o n v e h i c l e s a n d p r i v a t e
a u t o m o b i l e s , s u p p l e m e n t e d by a n a d e q u a t e a n d c o n v e n i e n t
system of parking f a c i l i t i e s .
�FACTORS INFLUENCING THE PRESENT C R I T I C A L
TRAFFIC SITUATION
P o p u l a t i o n has R i s e n R a p i d l y i n the M e t r o p o l i t a n
S i n c e 1900
Area
t h e p o p u l a t i o n , pi. t h e D i s t r i c t h a s
f r o m 2 7 8 , 7 1 8 t o 804,178 o r
6, p e r c e n t .
increased
During
t h e same
p e r i o d t h e N a t i o n a l C a p i t a l r e g i o n i n c l u d i n g Montgomery
P r i n c e G e o r g e ' s c o u n t i e s i n M a r y l a n d , A l e x a n d r i a and
and
Arlington
and F a i r f a x C o u n t y i n V i r g i n i a i n c r e a s e d f r o m 3 7 8 , 6 0 5 t o
1,466,035, o r 287.2 p e r c e n t .
( S e e T a b l e 5, R e g i o n a l
Aspects
of Comprehensive P l a n . )
The
Metropolitan
I n 1900
Area
the D i s t r i c t r e p r e s e n t e d
metropolitan
a r e a ' s populatoon.
d e c l i n e d t o 54.7
continue
i s Becoming D e c e n t r a l i z e d
p e r c e n t and
i n the f u t u r e .
population
B e t w e e n 1940
i n c r e a s e d 132.0
i n c r e a s e d 106.6
percent.
the Comprehensive
1950
percent
and
and
of
the
t h i s percentage
undoubtedly t h i s
i n c r e a s e d o n l y 20.9
in Virginia
By
73.6
1950
trend
had
will
the
District's
percent whereas the
population
the p o p u l a t i o n
(See T a b l e
i n Maryland
5, R e g i o n a l A s p e c t s
of
Plan.)
G o v e r n m e n t Employment i n t h e D i s t r i c t A r e a C o n t i n u e s
High
F e d e r a l employees i n the D i s t r i c t a r e a were e s t i m a t e d
247,900 i n 1951
280,000.
1937.
compared t o t h e w a r - t i m e p e a k o f
at
about
P r e s e n t employment i s more t h a n t w i c e t h a t o f
pre-war
G e o g r a p h i c d i s t r i b u t i o n o f p r e s e n t employment i s
approximately
as f o l l o w s :
O l d C i t y , 74 p e r c e n t ;
in District
�- 5 -
o u t s i d e o f O l d C i t y , 2 p e r c e n t ; i n V i r g i n i a , 2 1 p e r c e n t ; and
i n Maryland, 3 percent.
P u b l i c T r a n s i t Continues
t o Lose Patronage
to the P r i v a t e
Motor V e h i c l e
S i n c e t h e p e a k y e a r o f 1945 t h e r e h a s been a s t e a d y
d e c l i n e i n t h e number o f p a s s e n g e r s
p r i n c i p a l t r a n s i t companies.
c a r r i e d by t h e t h r e e
I n 1945 t h e C a p i t a l
Transit
Company, s e r v i n g t h e D i s t r i c t , c a r r i e d a t o t a l o f 531,000,000
passengers.
and
S i n c e t h e n t h e r e h a s been a s t e a d y a n n u a l d e c l i n e
i n 1951 o n l y 330,000,000 p a s s e n g e r s
Similar
trends a r e observed
were
carried.
on t h e two t r a n s i t
systems
s e r v i n g the V i r g i n i a portion of the Metropolitan Area.
Alexandria, Barcroft
and W a s h i n g t o n T r a n s i t Company
The
primarily
s e r v e s t h e s o u t h e r n p a r t o f A r l i n g t o n County and t h e C i t y o f
A l e x a n d r i a and c a r r i e d a p p r o x i m a t e l y 2 9 , 1 0 0 , 0 0 0
i n 1945.
I n 1951 t h e s e l i n e s c a r r i e d 21,620,000
The A r n o l d L i n e s ,
which
passengers.
serve the northern portion of
A r l i n g t o n County, c a r r i e d approximately
i n 1945.
passengers
15,000,000
passengers
I n 1 9 5 1 t h i s number h a d d e c l i n e d t o 1 2 , 4 3 5 , 0 0 0 .
The d e c r e a s e
i n passengers
c a r r i e d on t h e V i r g i n i a bus l i n e s
i s p a r t i c u l a r l y s i g n i f i c a n t as population has s h a r p l y
i n c r e a s e d i n t h e 1945-1951 p e r i o d .
�- 6 -
Motor V e h i c l e R e g i s t r a t i o n i s I n c r e a s i n g More R a p i d l y
Population
S i n c e 1941
A r e a had
the p o p u l a t i o n
i n c r e a s e d 48.5
motor v e h i c l e r e g i s t r a t i o n h a s
W h i l e no o f f i c i a l
i n the Washington Area
of the Washington
percent.
than
During
Metropolitan
t h e same p e r i o d
i n c r e a s e d 68.5
percent.
r e g i s t r a t i o n f i g u r e s are available
M a r y l a n d and V i r g i n i a c o u n t i e s
(except i n Arlington
for
and
A l e x a n d r i a where l o c a l l i c e n s e s a r e r e q u i r e d ) , i t i s p o s s i b l e
t o a p p r o x i m a t e motor r e g i s t r a t i o n i n t h e s e c o u n t i e s
applying
the s t a t e r a t i o of persons to automobiles to
county population.
differ
4.1
i n t h i s manner may
any
t o 3.5
s i n c e 1940
The
estimates
be a t v a r i a n c e w i t h a c t u a l c o n d i t i o n s .
i n M a r y l a n d and
f r o m 5.4
t o 3.7
D i s t r i c t r a t i o has remained c o n s t a n t
t h i s p e r i o d a t 4.2.
d e c l i n e d f r o m 4.1
i n 1940
t o 3.1
i n 1950.
I t i s possible
n a t i o n as a whole d u r i n g
years.
the ensuing
t h e t r e n d i n motor v e h i c l e o w n e r s h i p w i l l
e x c e s s of f u t u r e population
Area.
b e t w e e n 1940
i n t h e M a r y l a n d and
of
I f this
continue
the
occurs,
t o be
in
increases.
Motor v e h i c l e r e g i s t r a t i o n
percent
in
during
approach those
o n l y 22.6
from
N a t i o n a l l y the persons per v e h i c l e
t h a t the Washington a r e a r a t i o s w i l l
percent
may
number o f p e r s o n s p e r motor v e h i c l e has d e c r e a s e d
Virginia.
has
the
I t i s r e a l i z e d t h a t county r a t i o s
f r o m t h e s e on a s t a t e - w i d e b a s i s and
prepared
The
by
i n the D i s t r i c t has
and
1950
increased
compared t o
V i r g i n i a p a r t s of the
178
Metropolitan
T h i s p o i n t s to the n e c e s s i t y of g i v i n g p r i o r i t y
to
�- 7
-
needed highway improvements i n the s u b u r b s as w e l l as
those p r o j e c t s which are designed to expedite
between the c e n t e r
districts.
o f t h e a r e a and
r a d i a l movements
the suburban r e s i d e n t i a l
A b a l a n c e d program i s e s s e n t i a l .
T r a f f i c Entering
and
Leaving
the C e n t r a l B u s i n e s s
Increased
The
to
District
Annually since
D i s t r i c t Highway D e p a r t m e n t makes p e r i o d i c
S t r e e t , 7 t h S t r e e t , C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue and
397,241 v e h i c l e s were counted c r o s s i n g
compared t o 3 0 2 , 2 8 9 i n 1946
an
i n c r e a s e o f 31.2
in
1951
for
21st
percent i n f i v e years.
entering
percent crossed
and
and
"K"
the 2 1 s t
Street
the
no
comparable data
percentage
from the e a s t ,
S t r e e t boundary
( w e s t ) , 38
percent crossed
C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue
i n 1948,
i t was
s y s t e m o f t h e downtown a r e a was
percent of
i t s peak hour c a p a c i t y .
18
7th S t r e e t
(east)
(south).
estimated
operating
west,
percent
t h o r o u g h f a r e s t u d y made i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h
Comprehensive P l a n
t o 85
This i s
Then, as now,approximately
( n o r t h ) , 27
17 p e r c e n t c r o s s e d
In
l e a v i n g the a r e a
o r s o u t h s i n c e 1946.
crossed
cordon
i s available.
traffic
north
In
24-hour volumes
T h e r e h a v e been no s i g n i f i c a n t c h a n g e s i n t h e
of
"K"
Street.
f o r a t e n hour p e r i o d .
a g g r e g a t e d 624,272 v e h i c l e s , b u t
1946
the
1946
cordon
c o u n t s a r o u n d t h a t p a r t o f t h e C e n t r a l A r e a bounded by
1951
has
the
that the s t r e e t
a t a b o u t 75
Since
percent
that time
i n c r e a s i n g number o f v e h i c l e s c o n t i n u e t o pour i n and
out
an
of
�- 8 -
the area.
and
Obviously
the s a t u r a t i o n point
further increases in t r a f f i c
i s about
reached
i n the a r e a w i l l r e s u l t
in
virtual strangulation.
I t w o u l d seem p e r t i n e n t t o r a i s e t h e q u e s t i o n
be
t h e u l t i m a t e e f f e c t upon t r a f f i c
W a s h i n g t o n C i r c l e and
Twenty-third
40
i n the
e n t e r i n g t h e a r e a by
F r e e w a y , t h e R o c k C r e e k and
S t r e e t and
way
Potomac P a r k w a y ,
the Memorial B r i d g e , an a d d i t i o n a l
t o 50,000 v e h i c l e s d a i l y w e r e s u p e r i m p o s e d upon t h e
overloaded
streets
i n t h i s p a r t of the
1941,
River bridges
April
1952,
period.
i s Increasing
Rapidly
121,057 v e h i c l e s c r o s s e d
t h e f o u r Potomac
d u r i n g an a v e r a g e 2 4 - h o u r weekday p e r i o d .
In
210,636 v e h i c l e s were c o u n t e d i n a comparable
T h i s i s an
an a v e r a g e a n n u a l
numerical
already
city.
T r a f f i c C r o s s i n g t h e Potomac R i v e r B r i d g e s
In A p r i l
will
L i n c o l n Memorial a r e a i f , i n a d d i t i o n
t o t h e t h o u s a n d s o f v e h i c l e s now
of the Whitehurst
circulation
o f what
i n c r e a s e o f 74.0
i n c r e a s e o f 7.4
i n c r e a s e has
occurred
percent
percent.
i n 10 y e a r s
The
or
greatest
a t t h e Highway B r i d g e ,
over
w h i c h 9 6 , 6 7 9 v e h i c l e s c r o s s e d d u r i n g an a v e r a g e weekday i n
1952,
compared t o 45,567 v e h i c l e s i n 1 9 4 1 .
i n c r e a s e o f 112.2
and
was
c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e new
capacity.
42.7
and
The
46.0
Key
and
percent,
T h i s i s a percentage
b r o u g h t a b o u t l a r g e l y by
bridge
i n 1948
Memorial b r i d g e s
the
which doubled
the
show i n c r e a s e s o f
r e s p e c t i v e l y , during
t h e same p e r i o d ,
�w h i l e C h a i n B r i d g e has had an i n c r e a s e
percent.
The i n c r e a s e
in traffic
i n p e a k h o u r t r a f f i c h a s been a t
a b o u t t h e same r a t e a s t h e d a i l y i n c r e a s e .
p a r t i c u l a r l y s i g n i f i c a n t as i t i s during
e v e n i n g r u s h hour t h a t d i f f i c u l t i e s
approaches.
of 151.1
This trend i s
t h e m o r n i n g and
occur a t the Bridge
The a b n o r m a l Government
employment i n t h e Cen-
t r a l Area undoubtedly i s the p r i n c i p a l cause of t h i s
A n a l y s i s of the trends
leads
1.
to the f o l l o w i n g
Present
revealed
i n t h e above
increase
statistics
conclusions:
and p r o p o s e d p o l i c i e s o f i n c r e a s i n g
traffic
s
il ^
c a p a c i t i e s of bridges across
t h e Potomac
leading
to the
Central Area, i f continued, i n e v i t a b l y w i l l r e s u l t
overloading
t h e s t r e e t s y s t e m , p a r t s o f w h i c h now
in further
have
1
2.
r e a c h e d B a r r i n g r p r o n o u n c e d p a c i t y e s u r in gn a t e a k a l o o r s i n t e r n a t i o n a l
t h e i r p a c t i c a l c a chang d i n
pi o n h u .
conditions,
i t seems a p p a r e n t t h a t Government
employment i n
the Washington a r e a w i l l c o n t i n u e i n d e f i n i t e l y a t i t s p r e s e n t
high l e v e l .
C o n c e n t r a t i o n o f t h i s employment i n t h e C e n t r a l
Area i s a p r i n c i p a l cause of present t r a f f i c
3.
Mass t r a n s p o r t a t i o n
which, unless
averted,
difficulties.
i s facing a financial
will result
i n bankruptcy.
eventuality occurs present d i f f i c u l t i e s
A r e a c o n g e s t i o n w i l l be f u r t h e r
crisis,
I f this
of r e l i e v i n g C e n t r a l
complicated.
�- 10
REVIEW OF
It
-
HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT'S A N A L Y S I S OF
AND DESTINATION SURVEY
ORIGIN
i s beyond t h e s c o p e o f t h i s r e p o r t t o make an
d e n t a n a l y s i s o f t h e 1948
O r i g i n and
the Washington m e t r o p o l i t a n
area.
D e s t i n a t i o n Survey
by
the Planning
D i s t r i c t D e p a r t m e n t o f H i g h w a y s and
b e i n g u n d e r t a k e n by M o d j e s k i and
p e r t i n e n t to t h i s
would d u p l i c a t e
S e c t i o n of
the
the a n a l y s i s c u r r e n t l y
Masters under the terms of
t h e i r agreement w i t h the D i s t r i c t .
r e s u l t s o f t h e Highway P l a n n i n g
of
Such an a n a l y s i s would
r e q u i r e f a r more t i m e t h a n i s a v a i l a b l e and
t h e w o r k done h e r e t o f o r e
indepen-
I n s t e a d , a summary o f
S e c t i o n ' s s t u d i e s which
the
are
inquiry follow:
1.
The B u s i n e s s and Government C e n t e r o f W a s h i n g t o n i s
a P r i n c i p a l O b j e c t i v e f o r T r a f f i c Movements i n t h e S u r v e y A r e a
Sector
Z e r o o f t h e O r i g i n and
t h e c e n t r a l a r e a o f t h e c i t y and
a r e a s and
and
D e s t i n a t i o n Survey embraces
i n c l u d e s the major
government i n s t a l l a t i o n s
t h e Potomac R i v e r and
business
l o c a t e d between the C a p i t o l
b e t w e e n "K"
and
"H"
Streets
and
Independence Avenue.
T h e r e w e r e i n 1950
an e s t i m a t e d
d e s t i n a t i o n s w i t h i n the Zero S e c t o r
originating there.
daily
trips
percent
152,000 t r i p s
and
an e q u a l
T h e s e compare w i t h t h e
t h r o u g h o u t t h e S u r v e y A r e a and
o f t h e t o t a l movements.
with
number
1,725,000
constitute
estimated
17.5
�- 11 -
is
2. A L a r g e P a r t o f t h e T r a f f i c Found i n t h e C e n t r a l A r e a
P a s s i n g T h r o u g h a n d h a s no B u s i n e s s T h e r e
The e s t i m a t e d
152,000 d a i l y
t r i p s having d e s t i n a t i o n s
w i t h i n t h e Z e r o S e c t o r t o t a l b u t s l i g h t l y more t h a n t h e 122,500
t r i p s p a s s i n g t h r o u g h the a r e a w i t h d e s t i n a t i o n s a t some o u t s i d e
location.
T h i s through t r a f f i c
amounts t o a b o u t i j j K p p e r c e n t
/
o f t h e t o t a l movements i n t h e c o n g e s t e d c e n t e r .
3. Much T r a f f i c i n t h e C e n t r a l A r e a Moves f r o m One
to Another Without L e a v i n g the Zero S e c t o r
I n a d d i t i o n t o the t r a f f i c
and
traffic
d e s t i n e d t o the Zero
Sector
p a s s i n g through the a r e a , t h e r e were an
74,500 i n t e r n a l t r i p s
estimated
d a i l y , w h i c h add t o t h e t r a f f i c
T h e s e i n t e r n a l t r i p s amounted i n volume t o 49 p e r c e n t
total
number o f t r i p s
percent
and
Point
load.
of the
d e s t i n e d t o t h e C e n t r a l Area and 6 1
o f t h e number o f t h r o u g h
tiips.
4. A R e l a t i v e l y S m a l l Amount o f T r a f f i c h a s i t s O r i g i n
D e s t i n a t i o n Beyond t h e S u r v e y A r e a
Of t h e t o t a l
1,725,000 e s t i m a t e d
d a i l y t r i p s made i n 1950
i n t h e W a s h i n g t o n m e t r o p o l i t a n a r e a , 226,000 o r 1 3 . 1 p e r c e n t
w e r e f r o m p o i n t s beyond t h e s u r v e y b o u n d a r i e s .
13 p e r c e n t
o f t h e i n t e r n a l t r i p s a n d 18 p e r c e n t
e x t e r n a l t r i p s w e r e made by
Approximately
of the
trucks.
T r a f f i c Movements A c r o s s
t h e Potomac R i v e r
The Highway P l a n n i n g S e c t i o n a l s o h a s p r e p a r e d
an a n a l y s i s
o f t h e t r a f f i c movements a c r o s s t h e f o u r Potomac R i v e r
bridges
�-
in
1950
12
-
and t h e t h e o r e t i c a l movements w h i c h w o u l d h a v e
o c c u r r e d i f t h e p r o p o s e d N e b r a s k a Avenue
and A l e x a n d r i a
b r i d g e s h a d been i n e x i s t e n c e a t t h a t t i m e .
The a n a l y s i s shows
t h a t t h e N e b r a s k a Avenue B r i d g e
c a r r y -to- p e r c e n t o f t h e t o t a l c r o s s - r i v e r
i t would c h i e f l y a f f e c t
traffic
would
and t h a t
t h e C h a i n a n d Key b r i d g e s , r e d u c i n g
t h e i r volume f r o m *4-r9* t o - l i f e p e r c e n t and -24. r t o -12.6* p e r c e n t
of the t o t a l , r e s p e c t i v e l y .
The A l e x a n d r i a B r i d g e
would
c a r r y a p p r o x i m a t e l y ^.6; percent of the t o t a l t r a f f i c
w o u l d r e d u c e t h e volume on t h e Highway
to
99.4* p e r c e n t o f t h e t o t a l .
Bridge t r a f f i c
Avenue
and
Bridge from-42.3*percer
I t was c o n c l u d e d t h a t Memorial
w o u l d be a f f e c t e d n e i t h e r by t h e N e b r a s k a
nor t h e A l e x a n d r i a B r i d g e .
D e t a i l s of t h i s
analysis
follow.
Bridge
Chain
Nebraska
Key
Memorial
Highway
Alexandria
Total
19&0-Actual
Number
Percent
1950- A s s i g n e d
Number
Percent
^ ^ ' 2 9 * ? - 4-46
T
—
—
43% 906* TL2..7 24.1"
52,400 x 4 , o 2 8 . 7
77 ,100 44..0 42.-3—
H&.*Wri$2 S0Q
r
—
100.0
-i-rG-
j S i l l 18; 230 6*, 10.0-
iii&*Mr,Vi*
i'fi/^i 5 2 , 5 0 2
J/,/2# 71,827-
/?.*>
12.6-
TJio
28-.839.4-
13-T&64 7^
t
a/e,*A4»i82,3oo
r
7.6-
100.0
(1)
A v e r a g e 24-hour d a i l y volume.
Peak hour p e r c e n t a g e s o f
t o t a l d a i l y volumes a t the v a r i o u s b r i d g e s a r e a s f o l l o w s :
H i g h w a y , 9-10; K e y , 1 1 - 1 2 ; M e m o r i a l , 14-16.
���- 13
-
A n o t h e r a n a l y s i s b a s e d upon t h e t h e o r e t i c a l p r e s e n c e
f i v e Potomac R i v e r b r i d g e s
bridge,
bridge
i n c l u d i n g the proposed "E" S t r e e t
showed t h a t u n d e r t h o s e
will
reduce the t r a f f i c
c o n d i t i o n s the
on
Key
and
"E" S t r e e t
Memorial
bridges,
w o u l d h a v e no p r e d i c t a b l e e f f e c t upon t h e C h a i n 3 r i d g e ,
t h a t Highway B r i d g e
this analysis
traffic
of
w o u l d be
increased..
but
D e t a i l s of
follow.
/f/f
195ft. A c t u a l
Number
Percent
1950
Assigned
Number
Percent
Chain
\\.\0<* 8,900^ £ 3
-4.9fct
Key
f 7 ' ^ 43y»90 U..7 24.1Memorial
j>f # 7 * 1
5 2 4 0 0 Z^.© 28.7Highway
§fc>77 7 ^ , ^ 0 0 ^ . ^ 4 2 . 3
"E" S t r e e t
—
—
fO.£o<[ -Q,408 £
~L4-Jl£ 2 2 y l S O
y\©7/
27,-800 Z+.fc 15.3^Vxf & 5 t ^ 3 2 <5< 46.8"
f, f
j ^ ' s e ^ 37,-533 Z J . l _ 2 6 v € -
Bridge
7
Total
Z/ ,Z44 1827-300
d
100.0
0
7
,
*t(°' ' M82>306*
100.0
Both o f t h e above a n a l y s e s a r e the r e s u l t of the a p p l i c a t i o n
of judgment i n i n t e r p r e t i n g the
Traffic
Survey
S i m i l a r but
Reid,
by
the D i s t r i c t
O r i g i n and
Highway P l a n n i n g
Destination
Section.
i n d e p e n d e n t a n a l y s e s h a v e been made by Mr.
traffic
engineer
f o r t h e f i r m o f M o d j e s k i and
and
while there are s l i g h t
two
are i n general
Lloyd
P l a t e s 1 and
f l o w u n d e r t h e two
B.
Masters,
d i f f e r e n c e s i n the e s t i m a t e s ,
agreement.
the e s t i m a t e s of t r a f f i c
above.
1948
the
2 show g r a p h i c a l l y
conditions
described
�- 14 EVALUATION OF THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN
When t h e D i s t r i c t a n d M e t r o p o l i t a n
Area Thoroughfare
Plans
w e r e p r e p a r e d by t h e C o m m i s s i o n a n d i t s c o n s u l t a n t s i n
194C-49, r e s u l t s o f t h e c o m p r e h e n s i v e O r i g i n a n d D e s t i n a t i o n
T r a f f i c Survey f o r t h e a r e a were n o t a v a i l a b l e .
There was,
h o w e v e r , s u f f i c i e n t d a t a r e l a t i v e t o t r a f f i c movements t h r o u g h out
the area to permit
a n i n t e l l i g e n t a n a l y s i s t o be made o f
the p r i n c i p a l problems f a c i n g t h e c i t y .
Thoroughfare Plan admittedly
The r e s u l t i n g
was p r e l i m i n a r y i n n a t u r e and
subject to revision after r e s u l t s of the Origin
S u r v e y became a v a i l a b l e .
personnel,
Because o f a severe
and D e s t i n a t i o n
shortage of
i t h a s n o t been p o s s i b l e f o r t h e s t a f f o f t h e
Commission t o complete t h e r e s t u d y
of the Plan as y e t .
Premises
The
T h o r o u g h f a r e P l a n s w e r e b a s e d on s e v e r a l p r e m i s e s
d e r i v e d from p a s t e x p e r i e n c e
a n d known f a c t s .
T h e s e m i g h t be
summarized a s f o l l o w s :
1.
The C e n t r a l B u s i n e s s D i s t r i c t and i t s a d j a c e n t
g o v e r n m e n t a l employment c e n t e r s g e n e r a t e e x t r e m e l y l a r g e
volumes o f t r a f f i c d u r i n g t h e r u s h hours.
As a r e s u l t , t h e
downtown s t r e e t s a r e becoming i n c r e a s i n g l y c o n g e s t e d a n d a t
c e r t a i n key p o i n t s p r a c t i c a l c a p a c i t i e s a r e being approached
or even exceeded.
2.
The s p r e a d o f Washington o v e r an e v e r - e n l a r g i n g a r e a ,
t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e r a p i d i n c r e a s e . i n t h e number o f motor
v e h i c l e s and t h e i r u s e e m p h a s i z e s t h e c r i t i c a l need f o r
d e v e l o p i n g modern h i g h w a y f a c i l i t i e s d e s i g n e d n o t o n l y t o
e x p e d i t e movement b e t w e e n t h e C e n t r a l A r e a a n d t h e o u t l y i n g
r e s i d e n t i a l d i s t r i c t s , but t o i n t e r - c o n n e c t each major a r e a ,
one w i t h t h e o t h e r t h r o u g h o u t t h e W a s h i n g t o n r e g i o n .
�NATIONAL
CAPITAL
PARK
AND
PLANNING
COMMISSION
DIAGRAMMATIC REGIONAL THOROFARE
LEGEND
MAJOR.
PLATE 3
INTERCHANGE
POINTS
S
C
^
^
^
PLAN
�- 15 -
Proposals
The C o m p r e h e n s i v e
P l a n p r o v i d e s a broad,
solution - a basic plan of transportation.
long-range
Briefly
i t proposes:
1.
A s y s t e m o f r a d i a l f r e e w a y s a n d e x p r e s s w a y s l o c a t e d and
d e s i g n e d t o move l a r g e v o l u m e s o f t r a f f i c q u i c k l y a n d s a f e l y
between t h e s e v e r a l p a r t s o f t h e M e t r o p o l i t a n A r e a .
2.
An i n n e r , i n t e r m e d i a t e a n d o u t e r c i r c u m f e r e n t i a l o r
r i n g r o u t e i n t e r c e p t i n g a l l dominant r a d i a l t h o r o u g h f a r e s , t h u s
p e r m i t t i n g t r a f f i c t o bypass congested c e n t e r s and t o d i s p e r s e
i t s e l f throughout the r e g i o n .
3.
A c o o r d i n a t e d and i n t e g r a t e d s y s t e m o f secondary main
throughfares interconnecting a l l points of the region with the
dominant r a d i a l s and r i n g r o u t e s , t h u s p e r m i t t i n g t r a f f i c
movements e x p e d i t i o u s l y t o r e a c h a p r i n c i p a l r a d i a l o r
circumferential route.
The a c c o m p a n y i n g d r a w i n g
(Plate 3) i l l u s t r a t e s
diagrammati-
c a l l y a n d g r a p h i c a l l y t h e p r i n c i p l e s upon w h i c h t h e T h o r o u g h f a r e
P l a n i s based.
R e s u l t s of the Origin
the
a n d D e s t i n a t i o n S u r v e y show t h a t
p r e m i s e s upon w h i c h t h e P l a n i s b a s e d a r e sound.
r e s u l t s were summarized
i n a preceding section of t h i s
They show t h a t a l t h o u g h a s u b s t a n t i a l number o f d a i l y
are
i n and o u t o f t h e C e n t r a l A r e a
These
report.
trips
(17.5percent of t o t a l
t r i p s ) t h e p r e d o m i n a t i n g movements a r e s p r e a d t h r o u g h o u t
region.
the
to
They a l s o show t h a t 45 p e r c e n t o f a l l t r a f f i c
the ^
entering
C e n t r a l A r e a i s p a s s i n g t h r o u g h f r o m one p a r t o f t h e r e g i o n
a n o t h e r and u n n e c e s s a r i l y adds t o t h e c o n g e s t i o n .
f a c t s g i v e added e m p h a s i s
t o t h e soundness
P l a n i n i t s b r o a d and p r i n c i p a l
aspects.
These
of the Thoroughfare
�- 16 U n d o u b t e d l y , some c h a n g e s a n d r e v i s i o n s i n t h e d e t a i l e d
l o c a t i o n and s c a l e o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l r o u t e s c o m p r i s i n g t h e
system w i l l
be f o u n d a d v i s a b l e upon f u r t h e r s t u d y .
changes, however,
as a whole.
These
should strengthen the v a l i d i t y of the p l a n
�- 17
-
A P P L I C A T I O N OF PLANNING P R I N C I P L E S TO THE
FUTURE POTOMAC R I V E R BRIDGES
Previous
derations
s e c t i o n s of t h i s r e p o r t
i n c e p t i o n of
the N a t i o n a l
P l a i n i n g C o m m i s s i o n many y e a r s ago.
OF
the
consiNation's
C a p i t a l Park
Recent trends
and
i n population
t r a f f i c movements t h r o u g h o u t t h e r e g i o n ,
those across
particularly
t h e Potomac R i v e r b r i d g e s , h a v e been a n a l y z e d
c e r t a i n conclusions
drawn a s t o what l i e s
s e c t i o n of the r e p o r t
might, be
have o u t l i n e d
w h i c h have e n t e r e d i n t o the p l a n n i n g of the
C a p i t a l s i n c e the
g r o w t h and
LOCATION
termed
i s concerned w i t h
i n the
and
future.
This
a d i s c u s s i o n o f what
the b a s i c p l a n n i n g approach to
Washington's t r a f f i c problems i n c o n t r a s t
solving
to a c c e p t i n g
the
i n e v i t a b i l i t y of c o n t i n u e d growth of t r a f f i c c o n c e n t r a t i o n
the c i t y ' s c e n t e r
which w i l l
n e c e s s i t a t e more and
f a c i l i t i e s which i n turn w i l l
ad
infinitum.
p o l i c y w i l l be
erosion
and
The
It
i n the
d e s t r u c t i o n of
Central Business
i n the
of
the
of
most
world.
i s g e n e r a l l y a g r e e d by
t r a f f i c movements a c r o s s
District,
those p r i c e l e s s a s s e t s
open s p a c e s w h i c h make W a s h i n g t o n one
beautiful cities
this
pyramiding of c o s t s , a p e r s i s t e n t
of property v a l u e s
p a r k s and
traffic
more a u t o m o b i l e
i n e v i t a b l e r e s u l t of a p r o j e c t i o n of
an e n d l e s s
the e v e n t u a l
a t t r a c t more and
more
in
a l l who
are conversant with
t h e Potomac R i v e r t h a t t h e
present
bridges are r a p i d l y approaching t h e i r p r a c t i c a l
peak-hour
capacity.
the
Indeed, the peak-hour t r a f f i c
across
the
new
�- 18
Highway B r i d g e f i n i s h e d o n l y
design capacity.
-
two
y e a r s ago
I t i s also evident
by
now
exceeds i t s |
casual
observation
t h a t C e n t r a l Area congestion i s growing i n c r e a s i n g l y c r i t i c a l
and
that r e l i e f
imperative.
A B a s i c and
It
is
Integrated
Transportation
i s proposed t h a t t h i s r e l i e f
p r o m o t i n g t h e b a s i c and
heretofore
p r e p a r e d by
integrated
be a f f o r d e d
the P l a n n i n g
The
to the
a u t o m o b i l e t o d a y makes p o s s i b l e
u r b a n i z e d a r e a of u n l i m i t e d
size.
vigorously
plan,
Commission, r a t h e r
r e a s o n i n g b e h i n d t h i s r e c o m m e n d a t i o n may
follows:
^
by
transportation
by b u i l d i n g a d d i t i o n a l b r i d g e s l e a d i n g
The
Plan
than
C e n t r a l Area.
be
summarized
^
as
a potential
However, most p e o p l e
are
u n w i l l i n g t o s p e n d more t h a n 30 m i n u t e s i n d r i v i n g b e t w e e n home
and
place
o f employment.
There are s i g n i f i c a n t f a c t o r s
becoming a p p a r e n t t h a t w i l l p r e s c r i b e
urbanization
possible.
t o an a r e a much s m a l l e r
Some o f
the p h y s i c a l l i m i t s
than formerly
now
of
seemed
these emerging l i m i t a t i o n s a r e as
follows:
(1)
S t r e e t c o n g e s t i o n i s becoming most a c u t e and t h e
d e l a y s e n c o u n t e r e d r e d u c e t h e d i s t a n c e t r a v e l e d i n any f i x e d
time.
(2)
D r i v i n g i s becoming more o f a s t r a i n , b o t h p h y s i c a l
and m e n t a l , t h u s c a u s i n g many women and p e r s o n s o f l e s s r o b u s t
nature to r e s t r i c t t h e i r d r i v i n g .
I t i s no l o n g e r a p l e a s a n t
diversion.
(3)
T r u c k t r a f f i c i s i n c r e a s i n g t o s u c h an e x t e n t a s t o
d i s c o u r a g e t h e u s e o f p r i v a t e a u t o m o b i l e s on m a i n h i g h w a y s
and on h e a v i l y u s e d c i t y s t r e e t s .
(4)
The p a r k i n g p r o b l e m i s becoming c o n s t a n t l y
d i f f i c u l t , more t i m e c o n s u m i n g and more e x p e n s i v e .
more
�- 19
-
( 5 ) T r a f f i c a c c i d e n t s and f a t a l i t i e s h a v e i n c r e a s e d t o
t h e p o i n t where a u t o m o b i l e d r i v i n g i s u n i v e r s a l l y r e c o g n i z e d
a s h a z a r d o u s - and p r o g r e s s i v e l y s o .
( 6 ) While times a r e prosperous, the c o s t of d r i v i n g
i n d i v i d u a l passenger c a r s i s not a f a c t o r of concern to a l a r g e
segment o f t h e p o p u l a t i o n .
Once t h e upward t r e n d i n t h e
n a t i o n a l economy s l o w s o r t u r n s downward, h o w e v e r , t h e r e a l i z a t i o n o f t h e h i g h c o s t o f o p e r a t i o n w i l l c a u s e a marked s h i f t
t o mass t r a n s p o r t a t i o n . At 7$ p e r m i l e f o r o p e r a t i o n s and
25£ f o r p a r k i n g ( a most c o n s e r v a t i v e f i g u r e i n W a s h i n g t o n ) t h e
d a i l y c o s t i s $1.09 f o r a d r i v e r whose home i s s i x m i l e s f r o m
t h e o f f i c e , and $1.39 f o r one w h i c h i s t w e l v e m i l e s .
Even
a l l o w i n g a s u b s t a n t i a l p a r t of overhead c o s t of the auto f o r
f a m i l y r e c r e a t i o n p u r p o s e s , t h e r e i s a w i d e gap b e t w e e n t h i s
d a i l y t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c o s t and t h a t o f t h e mass t r a n s p o r t a t i o n
carrier.
We
have not
cities.
on o u r
yet experienced
Production
turers w i l l
Our
continue
the f u l l
impact of the
c a p a c i t y i s v e r y l a r g e and
automobile
manufac-
t o p r o d u c e so l o n g a s demand h o l d s
up.
n a t i o n a l f i g u r e s show 3 1 , 1 0 4 , 0 0 0 v e h i c l e s r e g i s t e r e d i n
1940
and
4 4 , 6 5 1 , 0 0 0 i n 1 9 5 1 , w h i c h r e p r e s e n t s an
43.6
percent
i n t h e s h o r t s p a n o f 10 y e a r s .
r e g i s t r a t i o n has
i n V i r g i n i a and
i n c r e a s e d 22.6
alter
percent
during
d e v e l o p m e n t and
extremely
t h a t w o u l d seem t o be
Many t h i n g s cnn
low p o p u l a t i o n
of a c i t y
happen m e a n w h i l e .
4
regis-
the
To
what
automobile
Will
the
d i s p e r s e d w i t h much s c a t t e r e d
the present
extensive transformation
area
t h e same p e r i o d . )
c h a r a c t e r of the American C i t y ?
tomorrow be w i d e l y
District
i n t h e l a s t decade w h i l e
t h e v a s t c h a n g e s b r o u g h t a b o u t by
t h e f o r m and
c i t y of
( I n the
Maryland p a r t s of the m e t r o p o l i t a n
t r a t i o n i n c r e a s e d 178
extent w i l l
percent
i n c r e a s e of
trend.
density?
Certainly
Complete or
i s a slow process,
As
the d i f f i c u l t i e s
even
however.
mentioned
�- 20 -
above become more a c u t e a n d more w i d e l y
apparent that the extent
sharply
the
o f d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n may be much more
l i m i t e d t h a n we e x p e c t .
shift
r e c o g n i z e d , i t becomes
I f such an e v e n t u a l i t y
occurs
f r o m mass t r a n s p o r t a t i o n t o i n d i v i d u a l p a s s e n g e r
car transportation w i l l
be h a l t e d
- n o t by l a w o r r e g u l a t i o n ,
but
by l i m i t a t i o n s o f i n c o n v e n i e n c e , c o s t
and
i n c r e a s i n g danger t o l i f e
and limb.
i n t i m e a n d money,
These a r e very
effective limitations.
T h i s matter of excessive
consideration,
but
decentralization requires careful
not a l o n e from t h e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n
standpoint,
b e c a u s e o f t h e e f f e c t upon numerous o t h e r a s p e c t s
life.
To w h a t e x t e n t
i sexcessive
decentralization
of urban
causing
c e n t r a l b l i g h t and impairment o f t h e t a x b a s e , f o r example?
What i s t h e f u l l p r i c e o f b u i l d i n g a l l o f t h e new s t r e e t s ,
bridges,
e x p r e s s w a y s and p a r k i n g
t r a n s f e r f r o m mass t r a n s p o r t a t i o n
f a c i l i t i e s required
for a
to individual cars?
the end r e s u l t c o n s t i t u t e a d i s t i n c t
full
Will
improvement i n c o n d i t i o n s ?
Requisites of the Plan
C i t y s t r e e t and h i g h w a y s y s t e m s c a n n o t t a k e
p o t e n t i a l load, except i n small c i t i e s .
paying i s too great
public
T h e p r i c e we a r e
f o r the r e s u l t s obtained.
i n t e r e s t from t h e s t a n d p o i n t o f p u b l i c
p u b l i c s a f e t y and g e n e r a l
the f u l l
I t i s i n the
convenience,
economy o f t h e community t o
on d e v e l o p i n g t h o r o u g h l y sound mass t r a n s p o r t a t i o n .
familiar with
the r e q u i s i t e s of such a plan.
o f some o f t h e s e w o u l d
include:
concentrate
We a r e a l l
A b r i e f check
list
�(1)
P r o h i b i t i o n of p a r k i n g during r u s h hours i n the
Central Business D i s t r i c t .
(2)
P r o h i b i t i o n of parking during rush hours along
main t r a f f i c t h o r o u g h f a r e s .
(3)
Ample c u r b
(4)
I n s t a l l a t i o n of a coordinated
the
loading zones.
traffic
signal
system.
(5)
R e v i s i o n o f r o u t e s t o e l i m i n a t e d u p l i c a t i o n and
s p e e d up f l o w o f p u b l i c t r a n s p o r t a t i o n .
(6)
D e v e l o p m e n t o f more e x p r e s s
service.
(7)
A n a l y s i s o f o p e r a t i o n c o s t and a d j u s t m e n t o f s e r v i c e
w i t h the type of v e h i c l e best s u i t e d to a r e a s of v a r y i n g
population density.
(8)
C o n t i n u a l study of the t r a f f i c
adjustment to speed f l o w .
(9)
Adoption of staggered
work
f l o w problem
and
hours.
(10)
The
establishment of perimeter
parking
(11)
R e v i s i o n o f s u b u r b a n commuter s e r v i c e by
(12)
More s t u d y o f new
forms of r a p i d
lots.
railroads.
transit.
P r a c t i c a l l y a l l o f t h e above s t e p s h a v e a l r e a d y been
i n W a s h i n g t o n , but
the problem s t i l l
more c o m p r e h e n s i v e m e a s u r e s must be
exists indicating
i t where n e c e s s a r y
I t does
c o n s i d e r a t i o n as
b a s i c and p r e d o m i n a n t means o f t r a n s p o r t a t i o n .
restricting
traffic.
f o r b e t t e r accommo-
d a t i o n s f o r the m a j o r i t y of the t r a v e l i n g p u b l i c .
mean g i v i n g mass t r a n s p o r t a t i o n f i r s t
that
taken.
T h i s d o e s n o t mean h a l t i n g i n d i v i d u a l a u t o m o b i l e
I t d o e s mean r e s t r i c t i n g
taken
the
I t does mean
the automobile to i t s r i g h t f u l p l a c e as a
supple-
m e n t a l v e h i c l e t o be accommodated o n l y a f t e r m a j o r t r a n s p o r t a t i o n needs have been p r o v i d e d
for.
�- 22 -
T h i s i s a d e c i s i o n t h a t must be made a t t h e t o p a d m i n i s trative level.
Once i t i s made, a w i d e r
t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c a n t h e n be
o f mass
expected.
E c o n o m i c and F i n a n c i a l
From t h e p r e c e d i n g
acceptance
Factors
d i s c u s s i o n , the f o l l o w i n g i s apparent
i n a modern m e t r o p o l i t a n c i t y ,
such a s Washington:
(1)
Any p l a n n i n g f o r mass t r a n s p o r t a t i o n f a c i l i t i e s b e g i n s
w i t h r e c o g n i t i o n o f t h e f a c t t h a t t h e r e i s a wide d i v e r s i t y of
p o p u l a t i o n d e n s i t y i n t h e a r e a s t o be s e r v e d .
(High i n c e n t r a l
a r e a s , medium i n i n t e r m e d i a t e a r e a s a n d s c a t t e r e d a n d low i n
fringe areas.)
(2)
P o p u l a t i o n g r o w t h w i l l n o t be s u f f i c i e n t l y g r e a t t o
p r o d u c e a p o p u l a t i o n d e n s i t y i n many p a r t s o f t h e m e t r o p o l i t a n
a r e a s t o p e r m i t mass t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s e r v i c e on a s e l f - s u p p o r t i n g
b a s i s , s o a p u b l i c s u b s i d y i n c e r t a i n o f t h e s e a r e a s w i l l be
n e e d e d i f t h i s s e r v i c e i s t o be p r o v i d e d .
(3)
I t w i l l be u n f a i r t o p l a c e t h e b u r d e n o f t h i s s u b s i d y
on r i d e r s i n t h e c e n t r a l and i n t e r m e d i a t e a r e a s , o r on o w n e r s
o f homes and o t h e r r e a l p r o p e r t y i n s u c h a r e a s .
(4)
S i n c e t h e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n needs o f l a r g e r c i t i e s ,
e s p e c i a l l y i n m e t r o p o l i t a n c o m m u n i t i e s , c a n n o t be met by
individual
p a s s e n g e r a u t o s , i t i s i m p e r a t i v e t h a t a good mass
t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s y s t e m be p l a n n e d a n d c o n s t r u c t e d t o s e r v i c e
t h e c e n t r a l and i n t e r m e d i a t e s e c t i o n s and a s much o f t h e
fringe areas as i s economically j u s t i f i e d .
A d e f i n i t e Mass
T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A r e a s h o u l d be d e l i n e a t e d .
A t t h i s p o i n t t h e q u e s t i o n a r i s e s a s t o how t h i s c a n be
done.
(a)
T h e r e a r e two a s p e c t s t o t h e a n s w e r t o t h i s
f i n a n c e , and ( b ) t h e r o l e o f g o v e r n m e n t .
question,
As f o r t h e r o l e
o f g o v e r n m e n t , t h e r e a r e f o u r p r i n c i p l e s t o be remembered.
1.
I t i s a government o b l i g a t i o n t o s e e t h a t a mass t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s y s t e m be p r o v i d e d and t o i n s u r e good s e r v i c e .
2.
Where a p r i v a t e company e x i s t s , g o v e r n m e n t must e s t a b l i s h
adequate standards of s e r v i c e .
�- 23
-
3.
S i n c e a m e t r o p o l i t a n a r e a i s m e r e l y a c i t y grown l a r g e
w i t h a common e c o n o m i c and p h y s i c a l u n i t y , t h e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s y s t e m must be e x p a n d e d and d e v e l o p e d on a u n i f i e d
area basis.
4.
I f t h e r e i s no p r i v a t e company ( o r i f a p r i v a t e company
c o l l a p s e s , a s some h a v e done r e c e n t l y ) , government s h o u l d
see to i t t h a t a m e t r o p o l i t a n t r a n s i t a u t h o r i t y i s
e s t a b l i s h e d w i t h power t o b u i l d and t o a s s u r e a r e a s o n a b l e
standard of s e r v i c e .
While the modernization
above i s of f i r s t
of the t r a n s i t system
as o u t l i n e d
importance there are f u r t h e r steps which
s h o u l d be t a k e n t o i m p l e m e n t t h e b a s i c t r a n s p o r t a t i o n p l a n .
O t h e r Recommendations
Immediate s t e p s s h o u l d
be
t a k e n t o make d e f i n i t e p l a n s f o r
c o n s t r u c t i n g the Inner Ring Route, p a r t s of which
e v e n t u a l l y be g r a d e - s e p a r a t e d ,
should
i n c l u d i n g the Southwest E x p r e s s -
way.
Further s t u d i e s should
t h e i n t e r m e d i a t e and o u t e r
be made on
the development of
c i r c u m f e r e n t i a l r o u t e s , of
which
t h e A l e x a n d r i a and N e b r a s k a Avenue b r i d g e s a r e i n t e g r a l
The
parts.
p r o g r a m o f t h e Motor V e h i c l e P a r k i n g Agency s h o u l d
f u r t h e r a n a l y z e d and
economically
those p r o j e c t s which a r e found to
f e a s i b l e and
p r i n c i p l e s should
It
both
i n conformity
w i t h sound
be c a r r i e d f o r w a r d w i t h o u t
planning
delay.
i s recommended t h a t t h e " E " S t r e e t B r i d g e s h o u l d
be c o n s t r u c t e d f o r t h e f o l l o w i n g r e a s o n s :
be
not
be
�- 24 -
1.
The a d d i t i o n a l t r a f f i c l o a d w h i c h w o u l d be imposed upon
the s t r e e t s y s t e m i n t h e v i c i n i t y o f i t s a p p r o a c h e s i n t h e
D i s t r i c t o f Columbia,as w e l l a s i n V i r g i n i a , would aggravate
an a l r e a d y c r i t i c a l s i t u a t i o n d u r i n g peak t r a f f i c p e r i o d s .
2. To a l l e v i a t e t h e s e c o n d i t i o n s , e x t r e m e l y e x p e n s i v e
i m p r o v e m e n t s t o t h e a p p r o a c h s t r e e t s y s t e m w o u l d be r e q u i r e d .
These improvements might t e m p o r a r i l y a l l e v i a t e c o n g e s t i o n ,
but i f p r e s e n t t r e n d s c o n t i n u e and v e h i c u l a r t r a f f i c
i n c r e a s e s w i t h i n t h e C e n t r a l A r e a , t h e new f a c i l i t i e s w i l l
s o o n be u s e d t o c a p a c i t y and t h e p r o b l e m w i l l r e m a i n
unsolved.
��»
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
A report upon future bridge crossings of the Potomac River : Washington, D.C.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Bridges--Washington (D.C.)
Potomac River
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Harland Bartholomew and Associates
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
Archival Box 11
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
June 1952
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
National Capital Park and Planning Commission
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Documents
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Description
An account of the resource
<a href="https://ddotlibrary.omeka.net/files/show/6500" target="_blank" rel="noopener" title="Notes found within report upon future bridge crossings of the Potomac River">Notes found within this report</a> are also available.
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/b767a053516a57b75df1abeec43d2b16.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=VWzhATfoXqaVUJSy9DlubiKzoWkUpj0Bm87Uzcp%7E0WUZ0NUZiOSnO1cLYdj2et8jDLa5LaeHA%7EXuQ4RSX%7EpvvMQrbCgjNLCNNC3-u8JZ2Xvhcu-jF81xZTjA5easd6wg2qHWB7mj8wpxXWtBRj6KCeo80xoPuTgHmWankgRXMnNQFtlyfNX9WzH95Ko-3pQ6hokDeEAqlqioGsFrHLZXlmXeIxVkKxrXDs-YGx9SqD59EEr-UohK-aQujznHNIA%7EaBXs9ipOLxI-FGnDORAIhIVAVt7D1HbZ1ApJKTnR1EjTluJKPfGK24H3qQz71CQpKbV8UdPfX-KOy4WUQfHdAg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
24dc0c91c9a4b98b7864ab794ddad8f3
PDF Text
Text
i&lO
Ck
(Vt^
Cs-CP
CVIA^.
/fa ft triced
-{$11,
c**rj is-p^u&u+j <^-*~*/
*
tf31~/*Hl
—
�tits''
^
-
//^vr
-
A.
/U+ZK
��
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Notes found within report upon future bridge crossings of the Potomac River
Description
An account of the resource
These notes were found within <a href="https://ddotlibrary.omeka.net/files/show/6499" target="_blank" rel="noopener" title="A report upon future bridge crossings of the Potomac River : Washington, D.C.">A report upon future bridge crossings of the Potomac River : Washington, D.C.</a>
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
Archival Box 11
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1970s?]
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Documents
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/8c48f1a5c1e17fe752a71eac87bdfe5a.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=kdGfJVrT%7EduytfbJzCsYuocUaDJlYG1s8vZPJu%7ErU6zPFM%7EMGpsLNK5H6j763ImWE2LEkKiAxBkLj0bCtTqKFo5nypWZsm0bgs2ok-ScIqdjoHNhECvHkPjYkoIDZwCCC97AzQ42BAJQTIJbVqRNgH2qmamfGQGvUrugE8LfAzKqQgVF5%7EKp3eUL-%7EUXi8zhs1M%7EJ-4VA3qqLXif6qbOh915G7H8FI0ZUBkknImjwHtqeNFlwXJJfzVME0tbdE2wZ06XTRwyvHblrXCwWY0PEHmJFAVd5Mo9R%7E03fh0RUogE4QuriKbmy4mkymhHBDO26yKqOlQfCZYAE2QzvVtr3g__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
c0d058e81f83bfc8c5c6e1f4f99c0b0e
PDF Text
Text
TRAFFIC AND CAPACITY NEEDS
FOR
POTOMAC RIVER CROSSINGS
PART I
OF
REPORT ON
TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND CAPACITY REQUIREMENTS
FOR
POTOMAC RIVER BRIDGES AND THE INNER TRAFFIC LOOP
Wilbur Smith and Associates
265 Church Street
New Haven, Connecticut
November 195U
�TABLE OF CONTENTS
Pagj
Chapter
I
II
III
17
V
INTRODUCTION
Population Factors
Future Trends
Land Use Trends
T r a f f i c Considerations
Previous Studies
Purpose and Scope
1
BASIC DATA
O r i g i n and Destination Studies
S p e c i a l Studies
Development of Present and Future T r a v e l Desires
12
COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING PROPOSALS
General Considerations
Land Use and Generators i n The Central C i t y
16
POTOMAC RIVER BRIDGES
E x i s t i n g Bridges
Highway Bridge
Memorial Bridge
Key Bridge
Chain Bridge
General T r a f f i c C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of E x i s t i n g Bridges
Future Bridge Needs
Accepted Proposed Bridges on Outer C i r c u m f e r e n t i a l
Jones Point Bridge
Cabin John Bridge
New Proposed R i v e r Crossings Considered
Roaches Run
Constitution Avenue Bridge
E S t r e e t Bridge
Three S i s t e r s
Nebraska Avenue
T r a f f i c P o t e n t i a l s of Potomao R i v e r Crossings
2$
RECOMMENDATIONS
Inner Loop Expressway
Improvements of E x i s t i n g R i v e r Crossings and Approaches
New Potomao R i v e r Crossings
Schedule
52
�Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
The Potomac R i v e r traverses the Washington Metropolitan area i n
a meandering course.
Below the Great and L i t t l e F a l l s i t becomes a
broad waterway a f f e c t e d by t i d a l waters. Washington i s located at the
head of tidewater navigation; above the c i t y the Potomac i s a mere
stream, below i t r a p i d l y transforms into an arm of Chesapeake Bay.
While not dominant economic assets i n the c i t y ' s development,
the Potomac and Anacostia R i v e r s have g r e a t l y influenced the patterns
of development, and planning of the metropolitan area.
Because of
Washington's r o l e as a " c a p i t a l c i t y " , the banks of the Potomac have
been devoted p r i n c i p a l l y to park and r e c r e a t i o n a l r a t h e r than commercial purposes.
The r i v e r has never been a formidable b a r r i e r to the development
of Greater Washington.
Bridges have spanned the Potomac since the
e a r l i e r periods of development and have l a r g e l y overcome the b a r r i e r
a f f e c t s of the r i v e r .
Figure 1 shows how the present and proposed
Potomac R i v e r Crossings r e l a t e to the land development and highway
patterns i n the Washington area.
Increased f e d e r a l employment and extended use of the automobile
have been instrumental i n the expansion and d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n of
Washington i n the l a s t quarter century. Strong i n t e r p l a y has occurred
between the population and settlement changes i n the metropolitan area,
the a v a i l a b l e Potomac R i v e r Crossings, and t r a n s - r i v e r t r i p s .
Decentra-
l i z a t i o n has accentuated the need f o r e f f e c t i v e interchange of movements
across the Potomac.
-1-
�POPULATION FACTORS
The Washington metropolitan area encompasses the D i s t r i c t of
Columbia, portions of Prince Georges and Montgomery Counties i n
Maryland, Arlington and F a i r f a x Counties i n V i r g i n i a , and s e v e r a l
incorporated communities.
Metropolitan Washington i s growing —
i n the decade between 19u0
and 19^0 i t s population increased over $0 per cent, growing to
1,U6U.292 persons.
Since 19U0,
a s i g n i f i c a n t portion of the land i n
the metropolitan area has been urbanized.
Population trends are shown
i n Table I .
The expansion of Washington into adjoining areas has diminished
the dominance of the c e n t r a l c i t y .
I n 19ii0 the c e n t r a l c i t y contained
69 per cent of the t o t a l population; by 1950 t h i s value reduced to
55 per cent.
Between 19u0
and 1950
populations increased over 200
per cent i n F a i r f a x and A r l i n g t o n Counties, V i r g i n i a , and Prince
Georges County, Maryland. Population i n Montgomery County increased
96 per cent; i n Alexandria, the oldest community i n V i r g i n i a , populat i o n grew 84 per cent.
The automobile has developed Arlington i n t o a dormitory community
of Washington.
since 1900.
I t has doubled i t s population more than four times
I t s 1953
population i s estimated a t 155*500, giving i t a
population density exceeding 7*000 persons per square m i l e .
Over h a l f of the population increase i n the V i r g i n i a area from
1950
to 1953
took place i n F a i r f a x County. Growth can be expected
to continue i n t h i s area because of the a v a i l a b i l i t y of a t t r a c t i v e
vacant lands t o absorb the c e n t r i f u g a l growth of the metropolitan area
�TABLE I
POPULATION TRENDS IN WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA
Estimated
1900
1910
1920
1930
1940
1950
1953
Alexandria
14,528
15,329
18,060
24,150
33,520
61,790
75,000
Arlington County
6,430
10,321
16,040
26,615
57,040
135,450
156,000
165,000
18,580
20,536
29,943
25,264
40,929
98,557
121,000
293,000
7,535
8,200
9,000
Census Area
1970
Virginia
F a i r f a x County
F a l l s Church
(Included i n F a i r f a x County U n t i l 1948)
103,000
39,538
46,186
56,043
76,029
131,489
303,532
367,200
570,000
2?8,720
331,070
437,570
486,870
663,090
802,180
819,500
710,000
Montgomery County
30,451
32,089
34,921
49,200
83,910
164,400
212,600
304,000
Prince Georges County
29,898
36,147
43,347
60,100
84,490
194,180
278,700
416,000
60,349
68,236
78,268
109,300
168,400
358,580
491,300
720,000
376,607
445,492
571,881
672,199
962,979 1,464,292 1,678,000
2,000,000
TOTAL
D i s t r i c t of Columbia
Maryland
TOTAL
T o t a l , Washington
Metropolitan Area
Central C i t y as
Percent of
Metropolitan Area
73.5
74.4
76.5
72.5
68.8
54.7
48.8
35.5
�Future Trends.
Based on available population data, there were
1,678,000 persons l i v i n g i n the metropolitan area i n the spring of
1953* an increase of about 15 per cent over 1950.
I t i s anticipated
that by 1970
there w i l l be a t l e a s t 2,000,000 persons i n Metropolitan
Washington;
see Figure 2.
A s l i g h t reduction i n the number of persons
r e s i d i n g w i t h i n the D i s t r i c t of Columbia can be expected by t h a t year.
This l o s s w i l l be due i n part to the greater a t t r a c t i o n of suburbs.
However, i t can be l a r g e l y a t t r i b u t e d to the need f o r a d d i t i o n a l
school and playground s i t e s , d i s p e r s a l of Federal employment centers,
and construction of a major highway net which w i l l require much land
f o r right-of-ways.
Present and anticipated future population d i s t r i b u t i o n s are
shown i n Figure 3 for the various o r i g i n - d e s t i n a t i o n areas i n s u r rounding d i s t r i c t .
areas are r e a d i l y
The large increases i n the p e r i p h e r a l suburban
apparent.
LAND USE TRENDS
Washington i s the seat of our Federal Government. The governmental
character of the National C a p i t a l Region^is r e f l e c t e d i n the r e l a t i v e l y
large amount of land i n public use, the major portion of which i s
f e d e r a l l y owned.
and public use.
Other occupied land i s l a r g e l y devoted to r e s i d e n t i a l
There i s only a s c a t t e r i n g of heavy i n d u s t r i a l develop-
ment, found p r i n c i p a l l y along the waterfront and along r a i l r o a d l i n e s .
1
Regional Aspects of the Comprehensive P l a n . A portion of the Comprehensive Plan for the National Capital and I t s Environs. National
Capital Park and Planning Commission. Mimeograph No. 6 June, 1950.
S
-U-
�Areas of most intense development include the D i s t r i c t of
Columbia (only about 5 per cent i s v a c a n t ) , older parts of Alexandria,
most of Arlington County, F a l l s Church, and Vienna, i n V i r g i n i a j
a small sector of Prince Georges County along Baltimore
(U. S. Route 1 ) ,
Boulevard
and the southernmost extremity of Montgomery County,
Maryland. Accordingly, future r e s i d e n t i a l expansion must mainly
occur i n the three l a r g e r counties —
Montgomery —
F a i r f a x , Prince Georges, and
beyond present urban l i m i t s .
The c e n t r a l business d i s t r i c t of Washington i s c e n t r a l l y
positioned w i t h i n the National Capital Region.
Including most
governmental and p r i v a t e o f f i c e s and the p r i n c i p l e r e t a i l shopping
areas, i t i s the major a t t r a c t o r of persons from throughout the
metropolitan area.
R e s i d e n t i a l development i n the D i s t r i c t i s
r e l a t i v e l y dense, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the old c i t y .
A s i z a b l e amount
of the high density r e s i d e n t i a l d i s t r i c t s are w i t h i n walking
of employment centers.
distance
Low density r e s i d e n t i a l areas are found i n
the o u t s k i r t s of the c i t y .
Areas of public and semi-public owner-
ship generally r e l a t e w e l l to the land use and land form patterns
outlined i n plans f o r the D i s t r i c t .
Through zoning, a r e l a t i v e l y e f f i c i e n t u t i l i z a t i o n of land w i t h i n
the metropolitan region has been achieved.
Zoning has been i n s t r u -
mental i n maintaining the character of many r e s i d e n t i a l areas.
The
advantages of zoning are l i k e l y extended to adjoining r e s i d e n t i a l
communities i n the metropolitan
area.
�D e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n of population has been accompanied by a
corresponding s h i f t i n r e t a i l shopping and s e r v i c e f a c i l i t i e s which
appears to be the most evident change i n the e x i s t i n g regional land
use pattern.
Encouraged by the freedom of the automobile, such
changes can be expected to
continue.
Within the D i s t r i c t of Columbia, much a t t e n t i o n i s being given
to the e l i m i n a t i o n of b l i g h t e d areas, and non-conforming land uses.
The Southwest Redevelopment Area and s i m i l a r projects may be e f f e c t e d
i n future y e a r s .
These, and other new developments, w i l l provide
p o s i t i v e density c o n t r o l .
I n V i r g i n i a , future increase i n r e s i d e n t i a l use i s expected to
take place i n the B a i l e y ' s Crossroad d i s t r i c t , at Annandale, and i n
the v i c i n i t y of F a l l s Church.
I n Alexandria, recent annexations have
g r e a t l y increased the amount of land a v a i l a b l e f o r new development.
Present trends i n d i c a t e that most of the vacant property w i l l be
used f o r high density housing.
TRAFFIC CONSIDERATIONS
Key t r a f f i c w a y s converge on Washington. The concentration of
t r a f f i c volumes i n the c e n t r a l business d i s t r i c t are g r a p h i c a l l y
depicted i n Figure 4; the Potomac River Crossings constitute the main
corridors f o r t r a v e l between the D i s t r i c t and southern and western
destinations, as w e l l as f o r commuters between the c e n t r a l city.and
the Metropolitan Area i n V i r g i n i a .
Transportation i n the Metropolitan area i s oriented strongly
towards the use of p r i v a t e passenger v e h i c l e s ; v i r t u a l l y a l l the
recent suburban growth as been predicated on the automobile.
Auto-
mobile r e g i s t r a t i o n s have increased r a p i d l y i n the region as shown
i n Figure
5.
-6-
�Growths i n t r a n s - r i v e r corssings have f a r outpaced the increases
i n population and v e h i c l e r e g i s t r a t i o n .
crossings have more than doubledl
Since 191*0 the t o t a l r i v e r
This i s r e a d i l y evident from
Table I I which summarizes bridge crossings i n recent y e a r s . I n
1924, approximately 12,000 v e h i c l e s per day crossed the Potomac R i v e r
on the Highway Bridge; today over 100,000 v e h i c l e s u t i l i z e the bridge
daily.
This corresponds to an increase of over 700 per cent.
TABLE I I
TRAFFIC GROWTHS
POTOMAC RIVER BRIDGES
Chain
Bridge
1940
1941
19U2
1943
1944
1945
1946
Key
Bridge
Memorial
Bridge
Highway
Bridge
4,638
Year
30,189
32,2oo
39,885
37,673
27,348
28,166
33,091
40,288
42,760
46,723
51,437
52,211
51,278
52,854
53,295
38,512
43,989
38,024
36,028
36,889
42,535
52,806
55,054
60,000
66,051
77,094
92,087
97,664
4,819
4,447
3,251
3,356
3,653
5,534
5,670
6,996
8,164
8,939
10,757
11,641
1947
1948
1949
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954*
13,111
15,000
32,639
29,062
21,241
21,928
23,871
30,603
31,356
32,930
35,971
43,946
45,537
46,122
46,052
47,ooo
55,ooo
100,428
107,000
•aTypical Days
I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note, too, that t r a f f i c crossing the Potomac
R i v e r has been increasing twice as r a p i d l y as movements across the c e n t r a l
business d i s t r i c t cordon. T y p i c a l comparative growths are shown i n
Table
III.
�TABLE I I I
COMPARATIVE GROWTHS
Central
Business
District
Cordon
Vehicles
Potomac
River
Index
1953" 1.00
Vehicles
Index
1953 = 1 . 0 0
1947
635,195
o.84
135,000
0.64
1953
752,141
1.00
211,000
1.00
1970
940,000
(Ant. Normal
Growth)
1.25
313,000*
1.48
•MSource - Highway Transportation i n the Washington Metropolitan
of V i r g i n i a .
Area
PREVIOUS STUDIES
The need f o r additional t r a f f i c capacity across the Potomac R i v e r
has been recognized f o r some time.
E a r l i e r s t u d i e s , such as the O r i g i n -
Destination Survey of Central Crossings, August 1948, developed by the
D i s t r i c t Department of Highways i n cooperation with the Public Roads
Administration, gave primary consideration t o improving the old Highway
(14th S t r e e t ) Bridge.
These studies became c r y s t a l l i z e d i n the 1945
Congressional Hearings2, and r e s u l t e d i n the construction of an additional structure at this location.
The Metropolitan Area Origin Destination Survey of 1948 has provided a f a c t u a l basis J?or analyzing and evaluating the highway needs
^Hearings before the Bridge Subcommittee of the Committee on I n t e r s t a t e
and Foreign Commerce, House of Representatives, Seventy-Ninth Congress,
F i r s t Session i n H.R. 5 4 l , 1945*
-8-
�of the Metropolitan Area.-
3
The survey was undertaken as a cooperative
p r o j e c t of the Board of Commissioners f o r the D i s t r i c t of Columbia, the
State of Maryland and the Commonwealth of V i r g i n i a acting through the
Advisory Committee of the Washington Metropolitan Area.
I t developed
basic information about the magnitude and d i s t r i b u t i o n of t r a v e l d e s i r e s .
I n 1952, the Advisory Committee of the Washington Metropolitan
Area Transportation Study submitted a d e t a i l e d program of Highway
improvements f o r the area.^ Recommendations were based on the d e t a i l e d
t r a f f i c studies, and on cost estimates.
The 1948
o r i g i n - d e s t i n a t i o n data have been u t i l i z e d i n recent
analyses of Potomac R i v e r Crossings.
I n June 1952,
A Report on Future
Bridge Crossings of the Potomac River, Washington, D. C. by Harland
Bartholomew and Associates was prepared f o r the National C a p i t o l Park
and Planning Commission, emphasizing planning aspects r e l e v a n t to new
r i v e r c r o s s i n g s . The report recommended the construction of an Inner
Ring Route, and f u r t h e r study of Intermediate, and Outer Ring Routes,
including the Alexandria and Nebraska Avenue Bridges and the Southwest
Freeway.
The report f u r t h e r recommended against construction of an
"E" S t r e e t Bridge because of terminal d i f f i c u l t i e s a t the D i s t r i c t
end.
A Report on Potomac R i v e r Bridges, Washington D. C«, submitted to
the Board of Commissioners, D i s t r i c t of Columbia by Modjeski and Masters
with Lloyd B. E e i d , T r a f f i c Consultant, J u l y 1952,
recommended the
3See Washington Metropolitan Area Transportation Study, Volumes
Regional Highwav Planning Committee, 1952.
1-4,
^ A Recommended Highway Improvement Program f o r the Washington Metropolitan
Area, Regional Highway Planning Committee, 1952.
- 9 -
�1 ,
M
construction of a c e n t r a l r i v e r crossing a t E S t r e e t followed
promptly with the construction of an Alexandria crossing and l a t e r
with the Nebraska Avenue Bridge or "such other crossings as may be
f u r t h e r upstream".
Both the National C a p i t a l Planning Commission and the D i s t r i c t
of Columbia Highway Department have conducted f u r t h e r studies of r i v e r
crossing needs.
I n August 195u, the President of the United States signed H.R.1980,
a b i l l authorizing the construction of two bridges over the Potomac
R i v e r , one from a point a t or near Jones Point, V i r g i n i a , and the
other frcm the v i c i n i t y of Constitution Avenue i n the D i s t r i c t of
Columbia to the V i r g i n i a s i d e .
The President suggested that the
Secretary of I n t e r i o r be authorized to approve a l l plans f o r the
Constitution Avenue Bridge and f o r i t s approach roads a t both ends.
I n November 195k> the Fine A r t s Commission opposed the construction
of the Constitution Avenue Bridge on the b a s i s that i t would detract
from the b e a u t i f u l s e t t i n g of the L i n c o l n Memorial. A tunnel was
recommended by that body.
PURPOSE AND SCOPE
This report on t r a f f i c and capacity requirements f o r Potomac
R i v e r Crossing i s a part of a more comprehensive report
authorized
i n June 195U by the National C a p i t o l Planning Commission.
I t reviews
f a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g present t r a f f i c operations on the Potomac River
crossings, and determines future requirements based on anticipated
t r a f f i c and land use patterns.
S p e c i f i c a l l y , i t i s the purpose of t h i s part of the o v e r a l l
report to make c e r t a i n t r a f f i c analyses, f i n d i n g s , conclusions, and
�recommendations with respect to plans f o r a Potomac River Bridge i n
the v i c i n i t y of Roaches Run and an upper c e n t r a l area crossing of
the Potomac R i v e r .
The report determines volume c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s
of 2ii-hour and peak-hour t r a f f i c data, r e l a t i v e to the l o c a t i o n of
e x i s t i n g and proposed f r e e bridges.
I t i n d i c a t e s the optimum use-
f u l and economic t r a f f i c capacity which would be desirable to
develop over the Roaches Run and Highway Bridges, and over the upper
c e n t r a l area Potomac R i v e r Bridges.
Capacity needs of integrated
highway approach systems serving these bridges have a l s o been
determined.
11 -
�Chapter I I
BASIC DATA
ORIGIN - DESTINATION STUDIES
A p r i n c i p a l source of information used i n a l l studies made i n
the Washington area since 1950 i s the 19U8 home-interview o r i g i n destination survey.
During the 5-year period immediately following
the survey, population i n the metropolitan area increased by more than
$0%,
A c a r e f u l zone by zone review of population changes and automo-
b i l e ownership increases was made f o r 1953 conditions and the patterns
of i n t e r n a l t r a v e l brought up to date f o r that year.
Factors which
entered i n t o up-dating the 19h& survey included t r i p frequencies,
t r a v e l d i s t a n c e s , and i n t e n s i t y of t r a n s i t use.
S p e c i a l adjustments
were applied to key t r a f f i c generators, such as business areas and
governmental centers.
Zones of o r i g i n and destination used i n the
study are i n d i c a t e d i n Figure 6 and include a s e r i e s of zones beyond
the o r i g i n a l l i m i t s of the metropolitan area.
I n order to a n t i c i p a t e 1970 r i v e r crossings, the 1953 o r i g i n destination volumes have been projected to 1970 v a l u e s .
accomplished
This has been
on the b a s i s of d e t a i l e d estimates of population d i s t r i -
bution, v e h i c l e ownership, and considerations of t r a v e l time, t r i p
frequency, and competing modes of t r a v e l .
SPECIAL STUDIES
Current t r a f f i c volume s t a t i s t i c s f o r bridge and a r t e r i a l highways
w i t h i n the studied area were obtained from the various governmental
agencies responsible f o r t r a f f i c c o n t r o l , regulatio* and planning i n
�the metropolitan area.
I n addition s p e c i a l v e h i c u l a r volume counts
were made a t key l o c a t i o n s .
Studies were also made of the q u a l i t y of t r a f f i c operation
on
each of the bridges and t h e i r approach road systems, with emphasis on
morning and evening rush hours when the greatest t r a f f i c demands
occur.
From these studies i t was possible to i d e n t i f y and
evaluate
the r e s t r i c t i v e features which c u r t a i l operational e f f i c i e n c y .
Capacities on bridges and approaches were thus established f o r use
i n appraising each of the Potomac R i v e r crossings.
Speed and delay runs were conducted during both peak and
off-peak t r a f f i c conditions, so that the e f f i c i e n c y and f l u i d i t y
of the p r i n c i p a l s t r e e t s and highways which serve bridge t r a f f i c
could be determined.
These studies serve the dual purpose of
i d e n t i f y i n g those conditions which impede t r a f f i c flow and of
e s t a b l i s h i n g the r e l a t i v e ease of access to each bridge from any
place i n the metropolitan
area.
Preliminary reconnaissance
surveys were made to inspect possible
bridge s i t e s along the Potomac R i v e r and to determine the f e a s i b i l i t y
of construction a t each.
Reconnaissance evaluations included con-
s i d e r a t i o n of e x i s t i n g land uses which would be affected by
new
bridge l o c a t i o n s , plus evaluation of terminal s t r e e t and highway
connections at e i t h e r ends of each s t r u c t u r e .
DEVELOPMENT OF PRESENT AND
FUTURE TRAVEL DESIRES
Major t r a n s r i v e r t r i p desires f o r 1953
i n Figure 7.
I n 1953
Potomac R i v e r d a i l y .
are g r a p h i c a l l y depicted
approximately 211,000 v e h i c l e s crossed the
The Washington c e n t r a l business d i s t r i c t was
- 13
-
�found to a t t r a c t about 30 percent of the t o t a l crossing movement.
The
h e a v i l y populated d i s t r i c t to the north of downtown Washington
generates another l l | percent of the t o t a l t r a n s r i v e r t r i p s .
three-fourths of a l l 1953
About
crossings had o r i g i n s or destinations
w i t h i n the D i s t r i c t of Columbia.
The centroid of a l l t r a n s r i v e r t r i p d e s i r e s , based on the
o r i g i n - d e s t i n a t i o n study was found to be about an eighth of a mile to
the south of the Memorial Bridge, i n approximate alignment with the
c e n t r a l a x i s of the M a l l .
I t i s evident that the greatest p u l l i s
to the north of the Mall on the Washington s i d e j hence, i t follows
that the c e n t r o i d a l t r i p desire l i n e has a northeast to southwest
orientation.
This centroid can be expected to s h i f t to the north
of i t s present l o c a t i o n as the settlement and t r i p generating p o t e n t i a l s
of F a i r f a x County increase.
The p r i n c i p a l through t r i p movements are between U.S.
i n Maryland and the S h i r l e y Highway, U.S.
Route 50.
U.S.
Route 1
Routes 29-211, and
U.S.
Route 2lj0 i n Maryland i s a secondary generator
of through t r i p s .
The recent completion of the Baltimore-Washington
Parkway w i l l l i k e l y modify the through t r i p d i s t r i b u t i o n s .
The trends i n t o t a l Potomac R i v e r crossings are shown i n
Figure 8.
I t i s expected that by 1970
there w i l l be approximately
313,000 v e h i c l e s crossing the Potomac River d a i l y .
represents a HQ percent increase over the 1953
This value
movement of 211,000
trips.
The types of t r i p s crossing the r i v e r i n 1970,
given i n Table I V .
and 1953
are
I t i s anticipated that the through t r i p s w i l l
be s l i g h t l y more important part of the o v e r a l l t r a f f i c pattern
- lh
-
�i n 1970 than they are i n 1953.
TABLE I V
PASSENGER CAR AND TRUCK TRIPS
CROSSING THE POTOMAC RIVER*
IS >53
Type Trip
Per Cent
Number
191'0
Per Cent
Number
194,000
91.9
28h,000
90.7
E x t e r n a l to Washington
9,000
4.3
16,000
5.1
Through
8,000
3.8
13,000
4.2
211,000
100.0
313,000
100.0
V i r g i n i a Zones
INCREASE
1970:1953 * 48 per cent
# Source:
Highway Transportation i n the Washington Metropolitan Area
of V i r g i n i a .
Total Potomac R i v e r crossings generated by zones of o r i g i n or
destination i n 1970 and i n 1953 are compared i n Figure 9.
The greatest
growths i n t r a n s r i v e r crossings are experienced i n F a i r f a x County, which
i s expected to develop the greatest population i n c r e a s e s .
P r i n c i p a l t r a n s r i v e r t r i p d e s i r e s f o r 1970 are depicted i n
Figure 10.
I n general, the flow patterns are s i m i l a r to those
experienced i n 1953.
_ 15 _
�Chapter I I I
COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING PROPOSALS
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
The planning of t r a f f i c and transportation f a c i l i t i e s must be r e l a t e d
to the general planning of land use and occupancy.
Accordingly, i t i s
e s s e n t i a l that o r i g i n - d e s t i n a t i o n data and other information which form
the b a s i s f o r most t r a f f i c studies be integrated with many other planning
considerations i n devising a sound and workable t r a f f i c plan f o r the
Washington Metropolitan area.
Studies f o r the l o c a t i o n and design of
new bridges and highways must a n t i c i p a t e the future d i s t r i b u t i o n of
populations and t h e i r souces of employment.
Plans f o r the regulation
of f u t u r e land use and land occupancy should evolve i n conjunction with
the r e a l i s t i c extension of transportation f a c i l i t i e s to integrate t r a v e l
and movement of goods i n the whole area.
Past developments of comprehensive plans have found c e r t a i n p r i n c i p l e s
and concepts of transportation planning e s p e c i a l l y u s e f u l and e f f e c t i v e .
Such concepts are not s t a t i c .
I n the f i e l d of urban t r a f f i c they are
presently i n a state of change.
I t i s important, therefore, to consider
the possible changes i n basic concepts which might gain wide-spread
acceptance i n f u t u r e y e a r s .
Hence, conventional t r a f f i c analyses and t r a f f i c planning
concepts
have been augumented w i t h considerations of land use and occupancy which
a f f e c t recommendations on bridge l o c a t i o n and construction p r i o r i t i e s .
General aims of the National C a p i t a l Planning Commission's
comprehensive plan include the c r e a t i o n of s a t i s f y i n g h e a l t h f u l l i v i n g
conditions through the best possible arrangement of uses of land; the
encouragement of a stable a t t r a c t i v e , c e n t r a l business area; the
- 16 -
�r e s t o r a t i o n of l i v a b i l i t y to conservation and blighted r e s i d e n t i a l areas;
the achievement of orderly development on urban f r i n g e and outlying sections
where the land i s s t i l l vacant; and the e f f i c i e n t movement of persons and
goods w i t h i n the metropolitan area. .
I t i s evident t h a t the National C a p i t a l c i t y must represent a symbol
of the a s p i r a t i o n s and accomplishments of the nations.
c e n t r a l area i s an important planning aim.
Hence, an aesthetic
The o v e r a l l plans have been,
based on f a c t u a l information and are reviewed i n l i g h t of objective values
which are subject to change.
Any aesthetic considerations must be integrated
on a sound b a s i s i n t o the comprehensive plan which i s founded on f a c t s .
LAND USES AND GENERATORS IN THE CENTRAL CITY
Much a t t e n t i o n i n recent years has been given to the c o r r e c t future
development of metropolitan Washington, with e s p e c i a l emphasis placed
on the c e n t r a l c i t y area.
The future pattern of land use w i t h i n the
c e n t r a l business d i s t r i c t , p a r t i c u l a r l y the s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s between
structures and open space, i s d i f f i c u l t to p r e d i c t . Only through vigorous
o f f i c i a l planning i s the commercial d i s t r i c t l i k e l y to develop the u n i t y
and s t a b i l i t y which would enhance and complement adjacent governmental
centers.
The governmental center i t s e l f i s due f o r a r e - a p p r a i s a l .
The
removal from the governmental area of temporary o f f i c e buildings erected
during the war i s a primary planning o b j e c t i v e . At present more than
U0,000 government workers are housed i n these b u i l d i n g s . The re-housing of
these workers must be made an important consideration i n planning and should
be integrated with plans f o r the dispersion of governmental f u n c t i o n s .
Dispersed development i s desirable not only from a s e c u r i t y or m i l i t a r y
standpoint, but a l s o as a means of reducing the concentration, and hence
- 17 - '
�congestion i n the c e n t r a l area.
Such plans would impose a p r a c t i c a l
c e i l i n g on the amount of f e d e r a l employment i n the c e n t r a l area and thus
tend to s t a b i l i z e i t , even though there might be some new construction of
f e d e r a l buildings i n the area.
Figure 11 shows the present d i s t r i b u t i o n of
f e d e r a l employment i n c e n t r a l Washington; i t should be noted that approximately one-third of a l l f e d e r a l employees are c u r r e n t l y housed i n temporary
buildings.
The need f o r reducing urban v u l n e r a b i l i t y i s becoming apparent i n both
p r i v a t e and o f f i c i a l quarters.
The Atomic Energy Commissions' recommendation
of a 30 mile radius d i s p e r s a l distance appears to be r e c e i v i n g increased
acceptance as the d a i l y minimum d i s p e r s a l f o r a l l f e d e r a l Executive Branch
agencies.
Trends i n non-governmental developments which are taking place a t
the present time are also of import.
Washington i s becoming the head-
quarters f o r an ever-increasing number of business and p r o f e s s i o n a l
associations.
P r i v a t e construction of o f f i c e f a c i l i t i e s has provided a
great deal of new o f f i c e space w i t h i n the past ten years, much of i t near
the c e n t r a l business d i s t r i c t i n blocks located between the business center
and the more expensive r e s i d e n t i a l areas to the
northwest.
The demands f o r new o f f i c e space by business and professional organizations i s focused on the downtown area.
A considerable volume of
r e t a i l sales i s now transacted i n outlying shopping centers, some of which
o f f e r a wide v a r i e t y of goods and a range of p r i c e s comparable to those i n
the downtown area.
Trade i s a t t r a c t e d to outlying centers by t h e i r prox-
i m i t y to p o t e n t i a l customers and the a v a i l a b i l i t y of parking space.
A basic support f o r the future of the c e n t r a l area, however, i s the
f a c t t h a t i t i s , and w i l l remain, c e n t r a l .
- 18 -
I t i s almost inconceivable
�that any suburb w i l l ever be as r e a d i l y a c c e s s i b l e to the c e n t r a l
business d i s t r i c t from the e n t i r e metropolitan area.
LOCATION OF CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT
The focus of the c e n t r a l business d i s t r i c t i n downtown Washington
l i e s between the White House and the Union S t a t i o n .
The main shopping
d i s t r i c t with i t s department stores and s p e c i a l t y shops extends from
7th to 15>th s t r e e t s northwest and from Pennsylvania Avenue to "H" S t r e e t .
As previously indicated, o f f i c e buildings and a " q u a l i t y " r e t a i l development are spreading to the northwest; these growths have been stimulated
by t h e i r proximity to high income r e s i d e n t i a l areas.
Some s i m i l a r new
development i s also taking place a t the eastern perimeter of the area.
The c e n t r a l business d i s t r i c t i s located i n the approximate center
of the Washington Metropolitan Area.
The governmental buildings adjacent
to i t are the l a r g e s t centers of employment i n the c i t y ; thus the downtown shopping d i s t r i c t i s w e l l situated to serve a high proportion of
the areas' wage earners. The governmental buildings and the White House
also a t t r a c t large numbers of t o u r i s t s and other v i s i t o r s , many of whom
are drawn to the shopping center.
There i s every reason to believe
that the c e n t r a l business d i s t r i c t w i l l continue to increase i n importance as the metropolitan area grows even though the r e t a i l
i n t h i s d i s t r i c t appears to be becoming l e s s s t a b l e .
activity
The increase i n
importance of the area w i l l come from increases i n a c t i v i t i e s other
than r e t a i l trade.
The d i s t r i b u t i o n of V i r g i n i a t r i p s i n the "Zero Sector" of
Washington, which encompasses the c e n t r a l business d i s t r i c t are shown
g r a p h i c a l l y i n Figure 12 f o r both 1953 and 1970.
D i s t r i c t 05 i n which
�the downtown sector i s located i s the primary a t t r a c t o r and generate
a t h i r d of a l l t r i p s between V i r g i n i a commuters and the center of the
city.
Table V shows the present and d i s t r i b u t i o n of t r a n s r i v e r t r i p s
i n downtown Washington.
The 1970 values assume some redevelopment i n
the southwest areas of the c i t y (including d i s t r i c t 03) and the eliminat i o n of temporary governmental buildings ( d i s t r i c t 0 8 ) .
By 1970,
i t is
estimated t h a t d i s t r i c t 05 w i l l generate an even higher proportion of
a l l doxmtown t r a v e l than a t present.
TABLE V
DISTRIBUTION OF VIRGINIA TRIPS TO ZERO SECTOR
OF
CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT
1rear
Sector
1953*
1970**
01
5.4
5.9
02
2.7
2.2
03
7.7
10,8
0U
2.8
3.1
OS
33.0
37.1
06
9.1
10.2
071-075
16.8
18.8
076-079
7.0
7.4
08
10.6
0.2
09
U.9
4.3
100.0
100.0
*-Based on 19U8 0-D Survey.
##Assumes elimination of temporary government buildings & e f f e c t u a t i o n
of Southwest Redevelopment P r o j e c t .
- 20
�CIRCULATION SYSTEM — THOROUGHFARE PLANS
The primary thoroughfare systems of major metropolitan areas have
t r a d i t i o n a l l y developed i n a random piecemeal manner as the communities
grew i n s i z e .
When the communities were small, the primary systems
consisted simply of the major s t r e e t s .
As the urban areas expanded,
the r e l a t i v e importance of s p e c i a l i z e d major and minor s t r e e t s became
evident and a l a r g e r v a r i e t y of thoroughfares were developed.
Primary
thoroughfares i n the modern metropolis should consist of a system of
express highways designed to l i m i t e d access standards with separation of
i n t e r s e c t i o n s and crossings and control of abutting access.
They may
include parkway features to enhance t h e i r a t t r a c t i v e n e s s to the road user.
These freeway type f a c i l i t i e s should be supplented with adequate
secondary roads together forming a comprehensive continuous road net.
A number of plans and programs have been set f o r t h f o r the development of a major thoroughfare system f o r metropolitan Washington.
Some studies have been quite comprehensive and have attempted to
e s t a b l i s h an integrated network of roads and bridges which would serve
the e n t i r e area.
The most comprehensive of these studies are those
of the National C a p i t a l Park and Planning Commission, f i r s t published
i n 19^0, and now i n process of r e v i s i o n , and the "Recommended Highway
Improvement Program" prepared by the Regional Highway Planning Committee
i n 1952 as an outgrowth of the 19U8 origin-destination study.
Both
have been supplemented i n p a r t by studies of highway needs a t s p e c i f i c
locations.
The Proposed Regional Thoroughfare Plan of the National C a p i t a l
Planning Commission i s shown i n Figure 13.
U t i l i z i n g the e x i s t i n g
elements of a comprehensive system, the plan develops an extensive
system of r a d i a l and c i r c u m f e r e n t i a l thoroughfares, of which express
- 21 -
�highways and parkways are the key elements.
Three " r i n g roads" serve
to i n t e r c e p t r a d i a l t r a f f i c — a n inner loop around the c e n t r a l business
d i s t r i c t of Washington, an intermediate loop, and an outer ring road i n
Maryland and V i r g i n i a .
The plan c a l l s f o r four new bridges across the
Potomac R i v e r to provide the t r a n s r i v e r l i n k s i n the p a t t e r n .
Improvements indicated i n the program of the Regional Highway
Committee of Washington have been designed to increase the capacity
of the s t r e e t system i n downtown Washington and i n congested suburban
centers, of important r a d i a l s , and of crosstown and cross-county routes.
I t a l s o recommends the eventual construction of an outer-circumferential
highway about the Washington area and c o r r e c t i v e treatments f o r p r i n c i p a l t r a f f i c w a y s i n the Metropolitan area.
T y p i c a l routes which are
to be improved or extended include Canal Road, Rock Creek Parkway,
Lee Highway and the George Washington Memorial Parkway.
The authorized construction of a Constitution Avenue bridge,
approved i n a recent r e s o l u t i o n by the National C a p i t a l Planning
Commission, i s an immediate step i n the o v e r a l l plan f o r highway f a c i l i t i e s and Potomac R i v e r crossings. Other components of the o v e r a l l
plan include the widening of Key Bridge, the development of the Inner
Loop and Southwest Freeway and the construction of a Roache's Run
Bridge.
Recently F a i r f a x County presented i t s master plan proposing
f i v e new r a d i a l freeways and an outer c i r c u m f e r e n t i a l .
I t i s evident t h a t i n t e g r a t i o n be e f f e c t e d of the various proposals, programs, and plans i s necessary i n order to complete a w e l l rounded highway and s t r e e t system.
Continuity of capacity and f l u i d i t y
are r e q u i s i t e .
- 22 -
�The s p e c i f i c needs of t h i s study require that an estimate be made
of 1970 t r a f f i c demands i n the Washington Metropolitan Area.
required to t r a v e l between o r i g i n and destination —
from work to shopping, e t c . —
The time
from home to work,
i s a basic element i n the generation of
t r a v e l by e i t h e r automobile or bus.
I t i s necessary, therefore, to
a n t i c i p a t e the degree to which an express highway network w i l l have
been completed
to serve the metropolitan area by 1970, and to estimate
the time required to t r a v e l on i t from one zone to another.
E x i s t i n g elements of a comprehensive highway plan are shown i n
Figure l i t .
T y p i c a l of the expressways are the Baltimore-Washington
Parkway, the Washington-Annapolis Expressway, Suitland Parkway, S h i r l e y
Highway and the Pentagon network.
The Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway,
the Mount Vernon Memorial Boulevard and the Oeorge Washington Memorial
Parkway have p a r t i a l expressway ..characteristics.
The Kenilworth Avenue
improvement and the E a s t Capitol Street Bridge are now under contract.
Further sections of the Washington-Annapolis Expressway and the
Washington National Pike are now scheduled f o r e a r l y construction.
The several major thoroughfare plans f o r the Washington area have
been c a r e f u l l y studied and the portions of them which appear to be most
l i k e l y of r e a l i z a t i o n by 1970 are shown i n Figure 1$.
I t i s t h i s system
of expressways which forms the basis f o r the 1970 estimates of t r a f f i c
interchange i n the Washington area.
This system includes the extension
of the Washington Memorial Parkway, the Inner and Outer Circumferential
and the Fort Drive Link i n the Intermediate Circumferential.
- 23 -
�POSSIBLE. EFFECTS OF PROPOSED FEDERAL HIGHWAY LEGISLATION ON ROUTE PLANNING
The p o s s i b i l i t i e s of l e g i s l a t i v e action i n the immediate future
which might modify the scope of anticipated construction programs cannot
be overlooked.
There are strong i n d i c a t i o n s that Congress i s preparing
to enact highway l e g i s l a t i o n which w i l l g r e a t l y increase the tempo of
highway construction i n and around large metropolitan areas, p a r t i c u l a r l y
those routes designated
System.
as part of the National I n t e r r e g i o n a l Highway
I f the t e n t a t i v e proposals thus f a r announced were to be
enacted, even i n p a r t , i t i s c l e a r that funds f o r new highway construct i o n would be a v a i l a b l e i n much l a r g e r amounts than those the present
plans are based on.
I f an accelerated program of highway construction takes place i n
the Washington Metropolitan
area and the highways anticipated f o r 1970
are b u i l t before t h a t date, t r a f f i c volumes w i l l undoubtedly increase
more r a p i d l y than the f o r e c a s t s made here i n d i c a t e .
- 2h -
�Chapter IV
POTOMAC RIVER BRIDGES
Increased r i v e r crossings demands are a r e f l e c t i o n of the suburbanization of V i r g i n i a , and of the development of t r a f f i c generators,
such as the Pentagon, on the V i r g i n i a side.
R i v e r crossings have more than
doubled i n the l a s t 15 years; at present (1954) there are 224,000
transriver trips.
By 1970,
based on normal growths, i t has been shown
that t o t a l crossings w i l l approach 320,000 d a i l y .
EXISTING BRIDGES
A n a l y s i s of t r a f f i c c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and operations of e x i s t i n g
bridges i s a p r e r e q u i s i t e to the determination of future bridge needs.
Accordingly, performance of the four v e h i c u l a r bridges c u r r e n t l y spanning the Potomac R i v e r -- Highway Bridge, Memorial Bridge, Key Bridge, and
Chain Bridge —
are
have been studied.
General c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of these bridges
summarized i n Table V I .
HIGHWAY BRIDGE
The Highway Bridge i s the p r i n c i p a l and most d i r e c t connector between
Central Washington and Alexandria. The o r i g i n a l Highway Bridge, with i t s
40 foot roadway was erected i n 1903.
I n 1927,
when crossings totaled
12,000 d a i l y , the street r a i l w a y t r a c k s were removed and the bridge r e surfaced.
The bridge roadway c a r r i e d two lanes of t r a f f i c i n each d i r e c -
t i o n p r i o r to 1950 when a companion Highway Bridge w i t h a f i f t y foot roadway was placed i n operation to the south of the o r i g i n a l structure.
The
new bridge provides four lanes of t r a f f i c inbound, while the old bridge
c a r r i e s three outbound lanes.
On a t y p i c a l 1954 weekday the Highway Bridge c a r r i e d 107,000
vehicles.
Hourly t r a f f i c v a r i a t i o n s f o r the Bridge are indicated i n Figure 16.
- 25 -
�for
t y p i c a l 1953 and, 1954 daye.
Peak d i r e c t i o n a l volumes were found to
approximate 5400 v e h i c l e s per hour—inbound during the morning rush
p e r i o d end outhound during the evening rush.
E f f e c t s of V i r g i n i a
em-
ployment c e n t e r s ( v i z . the Pentagon) are evident from the pronounced
secondary "counter rush" peak v a l u e s .
Table V I
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS:
Year Open
to T r a f f i c
Bridge
POTOMAC RIVER BRIDGES
Pavement Width
Lanes
Type Span
Highway - Old
1903
40
3
Movable
New
1950
50
4
Movable
Memorial
1932
60
6
Movable
Key
1924
50
4
Fixed
Chain
1938
30
2
Fixed
A d e t a i l e d t r a f f i c flow diagram f o r the Highway Bridge, and i t s
Washington approaches ( l 4 t h Street and connectors) i s presented i n
Figure 17.
f o r a t y p i c a l morning rush hour.
The d i s p e r s i o n of bridge
t r a f f i c to Maine Avenue, D S t r e e t s , Independence Avenue and 15th
i s r e a d i l y apparent.
Street
Only about 15 per cent of the t o t a l inbound bridge
t r a f f i c c r o s s e s C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue northbound on l 4 t h S t r e e t .
Maximum lane c a p a c i t y of the Highway Bridge was determined to be
about 1800 v e h i c l e s per hour.
value.
Present peak t r a f f i c volumes equal t h i s
The p r a c t i c a l lane c a p a c i t y f o r the bridge was found to be
v e h i c l e s per hour.
1500
I n V i r g i n i a , the Highway Bridge has l i m i t e d a c c e s s
connections w i t h the Mount Vernon and S h i r l e y Memorial Highways, U. S.
Route 1 and the Pentagon Road net.
The c a p a c i t y of these roads i s
- 26 -
�s u f f i c i e n t to accommodate a l l Virginia-bound t r a f f i c .
I n Washington, ezcept f o r a devious t u r n o f f to F i f t e e n t h Street,
the four inbound lanes must converge to three before reaching the o f f
ramp at Maine Avenue.
T h i s r e s t r i c t i v e cross section prevents f u l l
u t i l i z a t i o n of the inbound roadway.
The e f f e c t i v e inbound bridge cap-
a c i t y i s reduced to three lanes, and backups of t r a f f i c into V i r g i n i a
frequently r e s u l t s .
I t should also be noted that Fourteenth Street
(three lanes each way) i s saturated during periods of maximum bridge
traffic.
T r a f f i c signals at "C" Street and Independence Avenue impede
the steady flow inbound.
I n s u f f i c i e n t bridge capacity during peak hours
often causes t r a f f i c backups across the Mall on Fourteenth Street.
MEMORIAL BRIDGE
The Arlington Memorial Bridge was opened to t r a f f i c i n 1932.
It is
centered upon an a x i s connecting the L i n c o l n Memorial i n Washington w i t h
the Memorial entrance to Arlington National Cemetery, and the Lee Mansion.
The structure i s 90 feet wide, and c o n s i s t s of two f i f t e e n foot walks and
s i x ten foot v e h i c u l a r lanes. Trucks are prohibited on the bridge.
The
V i r g i n i a terminus was modernized i n 1941 by construction of a t r a f f i c
c i r c l e a t the entrance to the Arlington National Cemetery.
The bridge
connects major parkways and roadways on the V i r g i n i a side w i t h Constitution
Avenue, Independence Avenue, 23rd S t r e e t , and the extension of Rock Creek
and Potomac Parkway on the Washington side of the r i v e r .
F i f t y - f i v e thousand v e h i c l e s use the Memorial Bridge on a t y p i c a l
weekday.
Peak d i r e c t i o n a l volumes amount to about 4,400 v e h i c l e s per
hour, inbound towards Washington i n the morning and outbound to V i r g i n i a
i n the evening.
T y p i c a l hourly t r a f f i c v a r i a t i o n s are shown i n Figure 18
and pinpoint the preponderance of peak hour flows. Bridge capacity
- 27 -
�values are also indicated.
The t r a f f i c flow patterns on Memorial Bridge and i t s environs
are depicted i n Figure 19 f o r a t y p i c a l peak morning rush hour.
The
intermingling of bridge and other movements are r e a d i l y apparent.
Over
30 per cent of a l l inbound bridge t r a f f i c t r a v e l s north on 23rd Street.
Bridge t r a f f i c on Constitution Avenue at 14th Street i s only about 15
per cent of the t o t a l inbound crossings.
The Memorial Bridge, i n terms of lane d e n s i t i e s , i s the l i g h t e s t
t r a v e l l e d bridge even though i t s maximum per lane flows of 1500 v e h i c l e s
per hour exceed optimum capacity value.
Short turning r a d i i on the
t r a f f i c c i r c l e s at both ends of the Memorial Bridge, p a r t i c u l a r l y at
the L i n c o l n Memorial, r e s t r i c t speed and develop c r i t i c a l weaving conflicts.
KEY BRIDGE
The F r a n c i s Scott Key Bridge, Georgetown was completed i n 1924 r e placing an old i r o n bridge constructed i n 1888.- The Bridge has a 50
foot roadway, with a double s t r e e t c a r t r a c k i n the center.
two moving lanes of t r a f f i c i n each d i r e c t i o n of t r a v e l .
connects with the Whitehurst freeway and "M"
side of the Potomac R i v e r .
There are
The bridge
Street on the D i s t r i c t
I n V i r g i n i a a t r a f f i c c i r c l e connects Lee
Highway (U.S. 29-211) and l o c a l s t r e e t s to the bridge.
The l o c a l s t r e e t s
serve as connectors to Wilson Boulevard.
The Key Bridge c u r r e n t l y c a r r i e s 47,000 v e h i c l e s .
Hourly t r a f f i c
v a r i a t i o n s as r e l a t e d to bridge c a p a c i t i e s are indicated i n Figure 20.
Peak d i r e c t i o n a l flows approach 2,700 v e h i c l e s per hour.
The t r a f f i c flow patterns on the Washington approach of the bridge
are g r a p h i c a l l y depicted i n Figure 21 f o r a t y p i c a l 1954 morning peak
hour.
Approximately 80 per cent of a l l inbound movements are destined,
- 28 -
�to the east.
The greater number of these v e h i c l e s u t i l i z e the Whitehurst
Freeway.
Capacity r e s t r i c t i o n s on both the Washington and V i r g i n i a approaches
prevent the Key Bridge from developing a possible lane capacity i n excess
of about 1,400
v e h i c l e s per lane. As shown i n Figure 20 t h i s saturation
capacity i s frequently equalled.
T r a f f i c back-ups onto the bridge i n the
morning hour from the eastern terminum of the Whitehurst Freeway often
impede bridge t r a f f i c flows.
S i m i l a r l y the signalized operations at
"M"
Street cannot e f f i c i e n t l y accommodate the approaching steady flows.
I n the evening rush period westbound Freeway t r a f f i c backs up across the
outbound ramp from the signalized i n t e r s e c t i o n at Canal Road.
Similarly,
the t r a f f i c c i r c l e at V i r g i n i a and nearby t r a f f i c signal operations decrease possible bridge c a p a c i t i e s .
Some capacity r e s t r i c t i o n s r e s u l t s
from street railway operation on the bridge roadway.
They appear to be
r e l a t i v e l y minor when compared to the bridge approach conditions.
CHAIN BRIDGE
The Chain Bridge, located upstream and f a r t h e s t removed from c e n t r a l
Washington, was f i r s t b u i l t i n 1797operation since 1938
The present bridge has been i n
and superceded f i v e e a r l i e r s t r u c t u r e s .
The Chain Bridge has a t h i r t y foot wide roadway; one lane of t r a f f i c
moves i n each d i r e c t i o n .
I n V i r g i n i a the bridge connects w i t h Globe
Road, M i l i t a r y Road, and Route 123.
D i s t r i c t south of the r i v e r .
I t connects w i t h Canal Road i n the
There are 15,000 Potomac River crossings
over the bridge on a t y p i c a l 1954
day.
Hourly t r a f f i c v a r i a t i o n s f o r the Chain Bridge, and bridge c a p a c i t i e s
are
shown i n Figure 22.
Flows are r e l a t i v e l y minor when compared to the
loadings on the other r i v e r crossings. Movements during the peak hour
e x h i b i t pronounced d i r e c t i o n a l tendencies.
- 29 -
Peak hour d i r e c t i o n a l
�volume approximate 1500 v e h i c l e s .
The sharp curvature on the Washington side of the bridge, and the
i n t e r s e c t i o n of Route 123 and Glebe Road on the V i r g i n i a side of the
Potomac R i v e r w i t h i t s r e s t r i c t e d sight distance reduce the possible
bridge capacity to about 1,500 v e h i c l e s per lane per hour.
T h i s value
i s reached during peak hours.
GENERAL TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS OF EXISTING BRIDGES
The e x i s t i n g Potomac River Bridges must also be analyzed as a
system of r i v e r crossings. The l o c a t i o n and general a c c e s s i b i l i t y of
each bridge as r e l a t e d to desire l i n e s of t r a v e l and the t r a f f i c
a t t r a c t i v e n e s s or capacity of the bridge, w i l l determine the proportion
of t r a n s r i v e r t r i p s that w i l l use any given f a c i l i t y .
The d i s t r i b u t i o n of the present t r a n s r i v e r crossings are summarized
i n Table V I I .
Almost h a l f of the 224,000 d a i l y crossings, and about
40 per cent of the t o t a l peak hour d i r e c t i o n a l movement of 14,000 v e h i c l e s
use the Highway Bridge.
There i s r e l a t i v e l y equal usage throughout the
day of the Memorial and Chain Bridges, w i t h a somewhat heavier share of
the t o t a l peak hour crossings on the Memorial Bridge.
TABLE V I I
RELATIVE UTILIZATION
POTOMAC RIVER BRIDGES
1954
Bridge
Daily T r a f f i c
Vehicles
# of T o t a l
Crossings
Peak Hour
Inbound
Vehicles # of T o t a l
Peak Hour
Outbound
Vehicles $ of T o t a l
107,000
47.8
5,400
38.8
5,350
38.4
Memorial
55,000
24.5
4,230
30.4
4,420
31.7
Key
47,000
21.0
2,660
19.3
2,670
19.2
Chain
15,000
6.7
1,600
11.5
1,490
10.7
TOTAL
224,000
100.0
13,890
100.0
13,930
100.0
Highway
�The t r a f f i c composition of v e h i c l e s crossing the Potomac R i v e r
are summarized i n Table V I I I .
TABLE V I I I
TBAFFIC COMPOSITION
POTOMAC RIVER BRIDGES
Per Cent of T o t a l s
HighwayBridge
1948
1953
Memorial
Bridge
1948
1953
4
i
Type Vehicle
Key
Bridge
1948
1953
Chain
Bridge
1948
1954
i
i
Passenger Vehicles
84.6
87.8
97.2
97.4
83.7
87 .0
90.8
93-2
Single Unit Trucks
9.4
7.8
0.4
0.5
12.1
10 .6
8.7
6.3
Combination Trucks
3.2
2.9
0.0
0.0
1.8
0 .8
0.3
0.3
Buses
2.8
hS
2.4
2.1
2.4
1 .6
0.2
0.2
100.0
100.0
100.0
10C«0
100.0
100 .0
100.0
100.0
106
105
100
101
106
104
103
102
TOTAL
Equivalent Passenger
Vehicles
Passenger cars comprise over 85 per cent of the t o t a l movement across a l l
bridges.
Peak hour d i r e c t i o n a l movements are compared w i t h the t o t a l d a i l y
r i v e r crossings f o r each of the e x i s t i n g bridges i n Table I X .
Inbound
t r i p s i n the morning peak hour and outbound t r i p s i n the evening peak
hour each constitute over 6 per cent of the t o t a l d a i l y crossings. Peak
hour t r a f f i c ranges from 5 per cent of the t o t a l d a i l y movements across
the Highway Bridge to 10 per cent of the t o t a l d a i l y Chain Bridge t r a f f i c .
- 31
-
�TABLE I X
PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
CHARACTERISTICS
POTOMAC RIVER BRIDGES
12&
Bridge
Daily T r a f f i c
Peak Hour
Inbound
Vehicles
# of D a i l y
Total
Vehicles
$ of D a i l y
Total
H: -;hway
107,000
5,400
5.0
5,350
5.0
Memorial
55,000
4,230
7.7
4,420
8.0
Key
47,000
2,660
5.6
2,670
5.6
Chain
15,000
1,600
10.6
1,490
9.9
13,930
6.2
TOTAL
224,000
13,890
6.2
Peak hour t r a f f i c i s s l i g h t l y more concentrated on the bridges than
on the adjacent street net i n the D i s t r i c t .
As shown i n Table X evening
peak hour t r a f f i c leaving the inner cordon area of c e n t r a l Washington
represents about 5 per cent of the t o t a l d a i l y movements.
I n evaluating
a l l peak hour t r a f f i c flows i t must be remembered that 15 and. 30'minute
peaks w i t h i n the hour often have greater i n t e n s i t i e s than the indicated
hourly values.
By r e l a t i n g the t r a f f i c demands placed on a f a c i l i t y to the a v a i l a b l e
capacity, i t s adequacy can be determined.
Accordingly, capacity values f o r
the e x i s t i n g bridges and t h e i r approaches were c a l c u l a t e d . * Consideration
was giver to the number and e f f i c i e n c y of moving lanes, nature and extent
* The following capacity c r i t e r i a i n accord w i t h the Highway Capacity Manual were employed: maximum, possible, or s a t u r a t i o n capacity represents
the greatest sustained hourly loading that a f a c i l i t y can accommodate
under prevalent conditions of operations. Optimum or p r a c t i c a l capacity
represents the maximum desired loading.
- 32 -
�TABLE X
PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC IN CENTRAL WASHINGTON
AS PERCENT OF TOTAL ADT-1953
AJ1.
South Side Inner Cordon
Inbound
h*$%
Rush Hour
Outbound
h.8%
P.M. Rush Hour
Outbound
Inbound
k.7%
4.1*
West Side Inner Cordon
5.6
4.3
3.2
6.7
North Side Inner Cordon
4.9
3.4
2.9
5.0
East Side Inner Cordon
4.7
3.7
2.9
5.0
Entire Cordon Area*
$.0%
3.Q%
3.2£
5.2$
*Cordon extends south of Constitution, West of 21st, North of L Street,
east of Third Street
TABLE X I
PRESENT BRIDGE CAPACITIES
BRIDGE :
HIGHWAY*
IN
OUT
Possible Capacity*
Bridge & Approaches
MEMORIAL •
IN
OUT
IN
CHAIN*
OUT
KEY*
IN
OUT
IN
TOTAL*
OUT
5,4oo
5,400
4,800
4,800
1,600
i,5oo
2,900 2,700 14,700 i4,4oo
Possible Capacity
Bridge Only
7,200
5,4oo
4,800
4,800
1,800
1,800
3,400 3,400 17,200 i5,4oo
P r a c t i c a l Capacity
Bridge and
Appro ache s
4,500
4,5oo
3,900
3,900
1,300
1,300
2^00 2*400 12,100
12,100
Peak Hour
Loading
1954
5,350
4,230
4,420
l,6oo
1,490
2,660 2,670 13,890
13,930
5,400
•^Commercial vehicles would reduce these capacities s l i g h t l y .
�of interferences, vehicular headways, and r e l a t e d operational
factors
which influence c a p a c i t i e s .
Present bridge and approach c a p a c i t i e s are summarized i n Table X I .
The minor variances between inbound and outbound c a p a c i t i e s r e s u l t from
the c r i t i c a l approach conditions.
The combined present -possible d i r e c t i o n a l
capacity of the four bridges and t h e i r approaches approximates 14,500
v e h i c l e s per hour.
The maximum optimum d i r e c t i o n a l loading i s about 12,000
v e h i c l e s per hour f o r the bridges and approaches. Present t o t a l peak hour
d i r e c t i o n a l loadings approximate 14,000 v e h i c l e s .
The p o t e n t i a l c a p a c i t i e s of the bridges, i f r e s t r i c t i v e approach
conditions were eliminated, are also indicated.
The most marked capacity
increase i s that of the inbound span of the Highway Bridge.
Pull u t i l i -
zation of a l l four lanes would increase present c a p a c i t i e s about a t h i r d .
Trends i n inbound peak hour Potomac Biver Bridge t r a f f i c are compared with available c a p a c i t i e s i n Figure 23.
I t i s s i g n i f i c a n t to note
that the p r a c t i c a l capacities of a l l bridge systems have been exceeded i n
recent years.
Trends i n outbound peak hour Potomac R i v e r Bridge t r a f f i c , as r e l a t e d
to c a p a c i t i e s are shown i n Figure 24. The patterns of growth are s i m i l a r
to those f o r inbound t r a f f i c .
Approximate d a i l y c a p a c i t i e s have also been determined from the
present (1954) r e l a t i o n s h i p s between peak hour d i r e c t i o n a l loadings ?nd
average d a i l y flows.
These capacity values have "been superimposed over
the trends of average d a i l y t r a f f i c crossing the Potomac River on e x i s t ing bridges and are g r a p h i c a l l y summarized i n Figure 25.
a d d i t i o n a l bridge capacity i s evident!
-
3
4 -
The need f o r
�The t r a f f i c s u f f i c i e n c i e s f o r the e x i s t i n g Potomac R i v e r bridges
and t h e i r approaches are indicated i n Table X I I .
Peak hour volumes are
expressed as a per cent of a v a i l a b l e c a p a c i t i e s .
I t i s r e a d i l y apparent
that the p r a c t i c a l c a p a c i t i e s of a l l four bridges are exceeded during
peak t r a f f i c hours.
Possible or s a t u r a t i o n capacity values are reached
during both peaks on the Highway Bridge, and are approached on a l l the
other s t r u c t u r e s .
The Memorial Bridge appears to be the l e a s t overloaded.
The s u f f i c i e n c y of the Potomac R i v e r Crossings i s summarized i n Table
XIII.
The seriousness of the bridge problem, and the need f o r additional
r i v e r crossings, i s evident. At the present time the d i r e c t i o n a l peak hour
t r a f f i c exceeds the combined " p r a c t i c a l capacity" of a l l bridges.
The peak
hour loads are w i t h i n 95 per cent of the possible capacity of the combined
bridges.
Peak hour congestion involving r i v e r crossings can be expected
to reach the "breaking point" - complete saturation - i n approximately one
year.
FUTURE BRIDGE NEEDS
I t has been previously indicated t h a t , based on normal growth trends,
there w i l l be about 313,000 v e h i c l e s .
T h i s value represents an increase of
approximately I4O per cent over present crossings. I f a t t r a c t i v e and
fully
adequate systems of approach roads can be provided, the desired crossings
can be expected to approach 375,000 d a i l y .
To e f f e c t i v e l y meet peak hour demands and to accommodate reasonable
t r i p requirements, the minimum lane requirements w i l l be fourteen a d d i t i o n a l
lanes w i t h i n the next 16 y e a r s .
T h i s assumes t h a t the new bridges w i l l be
located so as to permit d i r e c t and e f f e c t i v e t r a v e l between motorists'
p r i n c i p a l points of origins and destinations and that a l l lanes w i l l be
- 35 -
�TABLE X I I
TRAFFIC SUFFICIENCIES
POTOMAC RIVER BRIDGES*
PEAK HOUR VOLUME AS PERCENT OF
AVAILABLE CAPACITY
INBOUND
OUTBOUND
A
B
A
B
Highway Bridge
120
100
119
100
Memorial Bridge
108
88
114
93
Key Bridge
111
92
112
99
Chain Bridge
122
100
114
99
A- P r a c t i c a l Capacity B- Possible Capacity
» As a f f e c t e d by r e s t r i c t i v e approach conditions.
TABLE X I I I
PRESENT TRAFFIC SUFFICIENCY
' POTOMAC RIVER BRIDGES"
Inbound
T o t a l Volume-Typical 1954 Day
Peak Hourly Flow
P r a c t i c a l Capacity
Sufficiency
Possible Capacity
Sufficiency
•^Volume as per cent of capacity
Outbound
13,890
13,930
12,100
12,100
114
114
14,700
14,400
94
96
�utilized.
I t i s evident that t h e i r locations w i l l have to conform with
n a t u r a l t r a v e l patterns.
The new bridges w i l l have to be located so that
t h e i r capacity can be served by approach roads on each side of the r i v e r .
Approach road nets must be c a r e f u l l y integrated with bridge plans.
Inad-
equate approach highways, or required c i r c u i t o u s t r a v e l w i l l g r e a t l y reduce
the p r a c t i c a l e f f e c t i v e n e s s of a bridge.
Improper locations can mean,
therefore, that more lane c a p a c i t i e s w i l l be required.
- 37 -
�ACCEPTED PROPOSED BRIDGES ON OUTER CIRCUMFERENTIAL
Comprehensive plans for new Potomac R i v e r Bridge crossings should
give cognizance to both capacity and access needs.
Bridges should
constructed not only to eliminate capacity d e f i c i e n c i e s , but also a t
those locations where they w i l l become i n t e g r a l l i n k s of primary r e gional t r a f f i c w a y s .
A balanced system of Potomac River crossings
should contain both c e n t r a l and p e r i p h e r a l bridges.
Highway as w e l l as planning o f f i c i a l s have already agreed on the
construction of the Jones Point and Cabin John Bridges as part of the
Greater Washington outer c i r c u m f e r e n t i a l route.
This i s an accepted
condition i n t h i s report.
Jones Point Bridge
The l o c a t i o n f o r a r i v e r crossing a t Alexandria has been one of
the Regional proposals of the Comprehensive Plan.
B i l l H.R. i960, signed
by the President, authorized the Jones Point Bridge.
The Jones Point
crossing s i t e i s located south of the c e n t r a l d i s t r i c t of Alexandria.
Tentative plans r e v e a l that a four-lane bridge would meet t r a f f i c demands. I n V i r g i n i a the bridge would have interchange w i t h the Mount
Vernon Memorial Highway, J e f f e r s o n Davis Highway and Telegraph Road,
and v i a an extension with the S h i r l e y Highway.
I f the proposed Potomac
River expressway i s developed i t would l i k e l y provide access to the
bridge.
I n Maryland the bridge would have interchange with the proposed
George Washington Memorial Parkway, Indian Head Road, and eventually
be extended eastward as part of the Cuter C i r c u m f e r e n t i a l .
The bridge would provide a valuable t r a f f i c s e r v i c e , by affording
a much needed by-pass of c e n t r a l Washington.
I t would permit d i r e c t
routing between southwestern portions of the Metropolitan area and
- 38 -
�southeastern Washington, and eliminate v i r t u a l l y a l l the reverse movements c u r r e n t l y negotiated over the Highway and South C a p i t o l Street
Bridges.
S i m i l a r l y , the connection to the S h i r l e y Highway would a t t r a c t
t r a f f i c which would otherwise be required t o traverse the Pentagon Road
net.
I t would encourage suburbanization and would provide a "dispersed
development" crossing of the Potomac R i v e r .
Cabin John Bridge
The Cabin John Bridge would span the Potomac i n the v i c i n i t y of
Cabin John Park about 8 miles northwest of c e n t r a l Washington. I t
would have contact w i t h Route 193 i n V i r g i n i a , and MacArthur Boulevard
i n Maryland. The bridge would be an i n t e g r a l l i n k i n the outer
circumferential.
I t would tap new areas, and stimulate t h e i r develop-
ment.
Preliminary t r a f f i c studies i n d i c a t e d that there are i n s u f f i c i e n t
t r a f f i c p o t e n t i a l s to j u s t i f y i t s construction a t the present time.
I n l i g h t of the recent plans by Maryland t o expedite the construction
of the outer c i r c u m f e r e n t i a l , i t i s reasonable to expect s u b s t a n t i a l
increases i n the bridge's f u t u r e t r a f f i c p o t e n t i a l s .
Accordingly, i t
i s d e s i r a b l e t h a t rights-of-way be reserved a t the present time f o r
the bridge approaches i n both V i r g i n i a and Maryland.
NEW PROPOSED RIVER CROSSINGS CONSIDERED
Highway and planning agencies recognize the need f o r the cons t r u c t i o n of new intermediate and c e n t r a l Potomac R i v e r Crossings.
Three general l o c a t i o n s have been considered:
(1) a downstream c e n t r a l l o c a t i o n i n the v i c i n i t y of Roaches Run
or Hains Point:
(2) a midstream c e n t r a l l o c a t i o n i n the v i c i n i t y of Constitution
Avenue and "E" S t r e e t ; and,
- 39 -
�(3) an upstream intermediate crossing between the Key and
Chain Bridges.
Tentative locations and a l t e r n a t e s of the Roaches Run and
Constitution Avenue R i v e r Crossings are shown i n Figure 26.
Roaches Run
The planned Roaches Run Crossing would be located i n the v i c i n i t y
of Roaches Run approximately 800 f e e t down stream of the r a i l r o a d
bridge; and would be a s i x - l a n e f a c i l i t y .
The bridge would connect
d i r e c t l y with the Southwest Freeway l e g of the lower loop, and 12th
S t r e e t s i n Washington and have interchange w i t h Mount Vernon
Memorial Highway and the Pentagon road network on the V i r g i n i a side
v i a high type connectors.
By development of the Four Mile Run Expressway between the
bridge and the S h i r l e y Highway much t r a n s - r i v e r t r a f f i c could be
intercepted before reaching the Pentagon road net and conveyed d i r e c t l y
to the bridge.
The Four Mile Run Expressway integrates w e l l into the
planned Intermediate Circumferential i n the V i r g i n i a Metropolitan area.
The contemplated Potomac R i v e r Expressway to Alexandria can be r e a d i l y
t i e d into the bridge.
Advantages.
A t t r a c t i v e interchanges can r e a d i l y be provided i n
both approaches to the bridge.
The f a c i l i t y can be expected to provide
s u b s t a n t i a l r e l i e f to the heaviest t r a v e l l e d Highway Bridge.
I t can
advantageously serve densely populated sectors of the Metropolitan
area; about two t h i r d s of the V i r g i n i a Metropolitan area c u r r e n t l y l i v e
south of Arlington Boulevard.
I t i s r e a d i l y possible to integrate
the bridge approach roads with the Southwest Freeway and Southwest
Redevelopment Plans. Opportunities e x i s t f o r providing o f f - s t r e e t
parking areas i n proximity of bridge approaches.
- ho -
I t should be noted
�that these plans would increase the t r a f f i c a t t r a c t i b i l i t y
southwest portions of c e n t r a l Washington.
of the
V i a the Southwest Freeway
Bridge t r a f f i c would have f r e e flowing access to the South Capitol
S t r e e t as w e l l as to the T h i r d S t r e e t l e g of the Inner Loop Expressway.
The bridge would provide all-weather express access to the National
Airport.
I t provides d i r e c t access to the c e n t r a l shopping d i s t r i c t
v i a Twelfth S t r e e t .
Disadvantages.
Increased north-south t r a f f i c flows on surface
s t r e e t s t r i b u t a r y to the bridge can be expected to develop need f o r
a d d i t i o n a l capacity a t i n t e r s e c t i o n s along Constitution Avenue.
The
anticipated north-south flows and required capacity w i l l be developed
f u l l y i n Part I I of t h i s report.
Constitution Avenue Bridge
The proposed Constitution Avenue Bridge i s located about 1200
north of the Arlington Memorial Bridge.
feet
I t connects with George
Washington Parkway, Arlington Boulevard and the J e f f e r s o n Davis Highway
on the V i r g i n i a side i n a s e r i e s of high capacity type interchanges.
On the Washington side the bridge would have complete
interchange
with the west l e g of the Inner B e l t Expressway and would have a d i r e c t
connection to Constitution Avenue.
Twenty-third S t r e e t would be
c a r r i e d over Constitution Avenue thereby increasing the capacity of
both roadways.
Integrated with the new bridge are new Mall roads
which would serve with Memorial Bridge t r a f f i c , and reduce e x i s t i n g
weaving maneuvers.
An a t t r a c t i v e contact between the B e l t expressway
and a widened "E" S t r e e t Mall roadway would be provided.
f o r the widening of Constitution Avenue to 12th
- Ul -
Street.
Plans c a l l
�Advantages.
The bridge provides a d i r e c t c e n t r a l crossing f o r
Arlington Boulevard, Washington Memorial Parkway, and Lee Highway
t r a f f i c approaching from the west and north.
The bridge would a t t r a c t
v e h i c l e s c u r r e n t l y using Memorial and Key bridges r e l i e v i n g capacity
problems on these f a c i l i t i e s .
I t provides a t t r a c t i v e access to the
west c e n t r a l area, i n a n t i c i p a t i o n of the present development trends
of t h i s d i s t r i c t , ( s h i f t s of o f f i c e b u i l d i n g s , e t c . ) .
Disadvantages.
Converging t r a f f i c from V i r g i n i a Avenue onto
Constitution east of the bridge i s l i k e l y to develop capacity problems
on the s t r e e t , even w i t h widening.
To separate Memorial and Constitution Avenue Bridge t r a f f i c , the
Mall has been converted into a through t r a f f i c w a y to Ninth S t r e e t ;
the increased t r a f f i c movements on the Mall roadways are contrary to the
previous concepts as to the function of the roadways.
The bridge w i l l
not s u b s t a n t i a l l y r e l i e v e the t r a f f i c loadings on the Highway Bridge.
The a t t r a c t i v e interchange provided with Arlington Boulevard w i l l
l i k e l y develop increased t r a f f i c loads on the V i r g i n i a thoroughfare.
Arlington Boulevard i s c u r r e n t l y saturated during peak t r a f f i c hours.
Normal increases i n l o c a l V i r g i n i a t r a f f i c alone w i l l t a x the c a p a c i t i e s
to be provided by the planned widening.
The additive bridge t r a f f i c
would aggravate t h i s condition and r e s t r i c t operations on the roadway.
To repeat, present t r a n s - r i v e r t r a f f i c combined xtfith the r a p i d l y growing
i n t r a - V i r g i n i a t r a f f i c would absorb the capacity of t h i s important
new expressway as r a p i d l y as i t i s provided.
The Commission of Fine A r t s has c l e a r l y set f o r t h the impact of
the s t r u c t u r e on c e n t r a l area e s t h e t i c s .
I n the opinion of the
Commission, the bridge to be erected over the Potomac River between
- 42 -
�the Memorial Bridge and Theodore Roosevelt I s l a n d would s e r i o u s l y
a f f e c t the beauty of these memorials.
The Mall terminating i n the
Memorial Bridge and the wide expanse of the r i v e r , with the wooded
i s l a n d given to the Nation as a memorial to Theodore Roosevelt, provide
a s e t t i n g of incomparable beauty f o r the L i n c o l n Memorial and form
perhaps the f i n e s t c i v i c landscape i n America.
Many o f f i c i a l and
c i v i c bodies f e e l that i t i s of the utmost importance that t h i s landscape should not be marred by another bridge a t t h i s point.
The Commission of Fine A r t s s t a t e s that i f a crossing must be
provided a t t h i s l o c a t i o n that i t should be a tunnel. This type
f a c i l i t y would be very c o s t l y and would, because of grade, preclude
contact with the Inner Loop.
A l l t r a f f i c would tend to be unduly
concentrated on Constitution Avenue. Extensive approach roadways
would be required.
E S t r e e t Bridge.
E a r l y plans f o r a c e n t r a l crossing a l s o considered a bridge connecting Arlington Boulevard w i t h E S t r e e t i n the v i c i n i t y of the E S t r e e t
Inner Loop interchange. T h i s bridge would, i n general, have the same
connections i n V i r g i n i a as would be provided i n the Constitution
Avenue Bridge.
Some objections to t h i s bridge have a r i s e n because i t traverses
the b i r d sanctuary on Theodore Roosevelt I s l a n d .
costs on the D i s t r i c t side are r e l a t i v e l y high.
Land a c q u i s i t i o n
The Washington approach
develops an improved s t r e e t as the proper east-west d i s t r i b u t o r .
T r a f f i c would be routed through the White House area i n t o Pennsylvania
Avenue i n the most congested p a r t of town.
- 43 -
�Three S i s t e r s .
The proposed Three S i s t e r s Bridges would span the Potomac River
over the Three S i s t e r s I s l a n d .
I t would connect w i t h Canal Road,
MacArthur Boulevard, F o x h a l l Road and the planned Glover Archbold
Parkway on the Washington s i d e .
On the V i r g i n i a side i t would connect
w i t h the e x i s t i n g Washington Memorial Parkway, and i t s planned extension
i n a "bulb" type interchange.
The proposed F a l l s Church Expressway
would be l i n k e d w i t h the e x i s t i n g spur of the Washington Parkway to
lee Boulevard.
The proposed Whitehaven Parkway i n Washington about
a mile to the north of the bridge would serve as a major east-west
distributor.
Advantages.
The Three S i s t e r s bridge would s t r a t e g i c a l l y
" i n t e r c e p t " Washington bound t r a f f i c from northwestern V i r g i n i a areas
which would otherwise use Key, C e n t r a l , or Memorial Bridges.
That i s ,
the " t r a f f i c shed" of the Three S i s t e r s Bridge includes many of the
f a s t e s t growing areas i n the Metropolitan region.
This w i l l occur to
an even greater extent when the F a l l s Church Expressway i s completed.
The bridge would permit d i r e c t and e f f i c i e n t t r a n s - r i v e r movements to
northwest Washington from a l l of Metropolitan V i r g i n i a .
function which none of the e x i s t i n g bridges provides.
This i s a
The planned
intermediate c i r c u m f e r e n t i a l could e a s i l y u t i l i z e the bridge.
P o s s i b i l i t i e s e x i s t f o r connecting the bridge w i t h the Inner Loop.
Disadvantages.
For the Three S i s t e r s Bridge to o f f e r maximum
t r a f f i c s e r v i c e t o t r a n s - r i v e r crossings i t should have a l i m i t e d
access connection v i a the Whitehaven Parkway to the Inner Loop.
This necessitates an extension of the Whitehaven Parkway, through
s e v e r a l blocks of r e l a t i v e l y expensive residences and b u i l d i n g s , to
- hh -
�connect with the Inner Loop a t about F l o r i d a and Connecticut Avenues.
The bridge w i l l not serve t r a f f i c t r a v e l i n g to and from c e n t r a l
Washington as e f f i c i e n t l y as a more c e n t r a l crossing.
Unless Canal
Road i s developed to expressway standards and the present bottlenecks
of the Whitehurst Freeway a t i t s eastern terminus are removed, Three
S i s t e r s Bridge t r a f f i c w i l l tend to overload these roadways during
peak inbound periods.
Nebraska Avenue
The Nebraska Avenue crossing of the Potomac River i s located
about midway between the Three S i s t e r s and the Chain Bridges.
The
f a c i l i t y would be almost e n t i r e l y an intermediate crossing and would
not develop the t r a f f i c p o t e n t i a l s of the Three S i s t e r s .
F i e l d studies
indicate t h a t i t would be d i f f i c u l t to provide a t t r a c t i v e and economical connections on the V i r g i n i a s i d e .
- 45 -
�TRAFFIC POTENTIALS OF POTOMAC RIVER CROSSINGS
The present t r a n s - r i v e r crossing d e s i r e s were r e l a t e d to the
transportation s e r v i c e s afforded by the a v a i l a b l e road net of
Metropolitan Washington.
The amount of t r a f f i c p o t e n t i a l to any bridge
depends on the r e l a t i v e time and distance savings, and the q u a l i t y of
flow over the given f a c i l i t y as compared w i t h competing routes, and
i t s r e l a t i o n to v e h i c l e o r i g i n s and destinations.
Motorists can be
expected to seek out the e a s i e s t route from t h e i r o r i g i n s to t h e i r
destinations.
The d i v e r s i o n f a c t o r s that have been empolyed give due
cognizance to that - component of t r a f f i c which i s p o t e n t i a l to s e v e r a l
alternate f a c i l i t i e s .
O r i g i n - d e s t i n a t i o n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of c e n t r a l
Washington were analyzed i n d e t a i l .
Assignments of 1954
average d a i l y t r a f f i c volume to the e x i s t i n g
bridges are summarized i n Table XIV.
The a c t u a l t r a f f i c flows on the
e x i s t i n g bridges are also i n d i c a t e d . I n general, there i s a reasonable
correspondence between the a c t u a l and assigned crossings. I t should
be noted that the t r a f f i c assigned to the Key Bridge i s considerably
l i g h t e r than the volumes recorded on the f a c i l i t y .
This crossing ap-
pears u n a t t r a c t i v e when t r i p desires are considered, c h i e f l y because
of i t s i n d i r e c t approach connections and i t s poor o r i e n t a t i o n .
The
present loadings are to a considerable extent r e s u l t a n t from the extreme t r a f f i c pressures on more d i r e c t crossings and t h e i r
approaches.
I n t h i s regard the Key Bridge i s used as an a l t e r n a t e route f o r the
Memorial Bridge.
The desire t r a f f i c loadings on each bridge are shown g r a p h i c a l l y
i n Figure 27.
T r i p d e s i r e s to the zero s e c t o r are a l s o i n d i c a t e d . I t
i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note t h a t over 35 per cent of a l l t r i p s assigned to
- U6 -
�the Memorial and Highway bridges are between V i r g i n i a and downtown
Washington.
TABLE XIV
PRESENT TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION
TYPICAL 195U
DAY
Approx.
Daily
Practical
Capacity*
Actual Count
Daily
Traffic
Bridge
Effective
Lane
Highway
6
90,000
107,000
Memorial
6
50,000
55,000
24.5
69,000
30.3
Key
4
U3,ooo
1)7,000
21.0
32,000
llj.3
Chain
2
12,000
15,000
6.7
Dl, 000
6.2
224,000
100,0
224,000
100.0
TOTAL
p
Of T o t a l
Crossings
U7.8*
Assigned
Daily
Traffic
Of T o t a l
Crossings
109,000
Capacities are based on the r e l a t i o n of e x i s t i n g peak hour d i r e c t i o n a l
volumes to t o t a l d a i l y t r a f f i c . I t can be assumed that t h i s value
does not f u l l y represent the approach demand on the peak hour; t h i s
value would probably be l e s s , say 35,000.
Present t r a n s - r i v e r crossings projected to 1970 approximate
313,000 v e h i c l e s d a i l y .
As new bridges and approach road systems are
placed into operation they w i l l generate new t r a f f i c t r i p s .
generated t r a f f i c i s a d d i t i v e to normal projected volumes.
the t o t a l
This
Accordingly,
a n t i c i p a t e d 1970 t r a n s - r i v e r crossings, assuming the devel-
opment of new Potomac R i v e r bridges has been estimated a t 375,000 t r i p s
daily.
This value i s used i n subsequent t r a f f i c
- 47 -
assignments.
�TABLE 15
ANTICIPATED 1970 TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION
OF
POTOMAC RIVER CROSSINGS
Based on Trip Desires
BRIDGE
THREE SISTERS CROSSING
AND
OUTER CRi
DSSINGS
DSSING
CENTRAL CRi
AND
OUTER CROS SINGS
Daily
Traffic
Percent of T o t a l
Crossings
Daily
Traffic
Percent of Total
Crossings
Jones Point
28,000
7.5
23,000
7.5
Roaches Run
1+9,000
13.1
5o,ooo
13.3
Highway
39,000
23.7
92,000
2U.5
Memorial
51,000
13.5
72,5oo*
19.3
Central
90,000*
24.0
-
Key
41,700
11.2
-
-
96,000*
25.6
17,000
4.5
11,500
3.1
9,300
2.5
7,800
2.1
375,000
100.0
375,000
100.0
Three S i s t e r s
Chain
Cabin John
TOTAL
*Exceeds the p r a c t i c a l capacity of bridge.
17,200
4.6
T r a f f i c would d i s t r i b u t e to
Key and other bridges where excess capacity i s a v a i l a b l e .
- 48 -
-
�Anticipated 1970 t r a f f i c volumes have been assigned to e x i s t i n g and
proposed bridges. Assignments were predicated on the completion of c e r t a i n
highway improvements, delineated i n Figure 1%.
They have assumed the
planned Outer Potomac Crossings a t Cabin John and Jones P o i n t , and an i n t e r mediate nex-r crossing a t Roaches Run. With these bridges i n p l a c e , a n t i c i pated loadings were determined f o r the e n t i r e system of Potomac R i v e r
crossings assuming ( l ) a c e n t r a l bridge and (2) a Three S i s t e r s Bridge.
T r a f f i c values are i n d i c a t e d i n Table XV.
The Three S i s t e r s location
was considered p r e f e r e n t i a l to the Nebraska Avenue s i t e because i t can
be more r e a d i l y integrated into o v e r a l l highway plans.
A study of t h i s t a b l e shows that the maximum percentage of t r a f f i c
on any one bridge i s about h a l f the present percentage.
A more equitable
o v e r a l l d i s t r i b u t i o n of t r a f f i c a t t a i n e d . Over 35 per cent of a l l
t r a n s r i v e r crossings would use c e n t r a l or intermediate bridges; only
15 percent of the t o t a l t r a f f i c i s p o t e n t i a l to Jones Point, Chain and
Cabin John Bridges.
T r a f f i c demands would be served best by e i t h e r the Central or Three
S i s t e r s Bridge.
E i t h e r crossing would a t t r a c t about one-quarter of the
t o t a l t r a n s r i v e r t r i p demands. E i t h e r f a c i l i t y would d i v e r t appreciable
volumes from e x i s t i n g adjacent bridges.
The Roaches Run Bridge would
s u b s t a n t i a l l y reduce o v e r a l l loadings on the Highway Bridge.
The Central crossing a t t r a c t s considerable more t r a f f i c than the
Memorial Bridge because of i t s a b i l i t y to " i n t e r c e p t " t r a n s r i v e r t r i p s
approaching from western and northern V i r g i n i a areas.
I t affords r e l i e f
to Memorial and Key Bridges. S i m i l a r l y the Three S i s t e r s crossing a t t r a c t s s i g n i f i c a n t l y greater volumes than Key Bridge because of more
d i r e c t roadway connection.
I t provides greatest r e l i e f to Key and Chain
- 49 -
�TABLE 16
ANTICIPATED 1970 TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION
OF
POTOMAC RIVER BRIDGE CROSSINGS
Based on Trip Desires as Related to Bridge Capacities
Bridge
Larles
Approx.
Daily
Practical
Capacity*
Central Crossing;s
and
Outer
Crossings
%
Daily
of t o t a l
Traffic
Crossings
Three S i s t e r s
Crossings
and
Outer
Crossings
%
Daily
of t o t a l
Traffic
Crossings
Jones Point
ll
$0,000
23,000
Roaches Run
6
75,000
51,000
13.6
52,000
13.9
Highway-
8
100,000
89,000
23.7
93,000
2U.8
Memorial
6
60,000
54,000
14.4
60,000
16.0
Central
6
75,000
75,ooo
20.0
-
-
Key
6
75,000
51,700
13.8
46,300
12.3
Three
Sisters
6
75,000
-
-
75,ooo
20.0
Chain
2
20,000
17,000
4.5
12,900
3.4
Cabin John
4
5o,ooo
9,300
2.5
7,800
2.1
375,000
100.0
TOTAL
*
375,000
7.5$
100.0
28,000
Assumes that peak hourly d i r e c t i o n a l movements w i l l be 6 per cent
of t o t a l d a i l y crossings.
For Memorial and Chain Bridges, a 7 per cent value has been used.
- 5o -
7.5$
�bridges, although i t d i v e r t s t r a f f i c from Memorial Bridge as w e l l .
I n assigning t r a f f i c i t has been assumed that the Roaches Run
and Central or Three S i s t e r s Bridges would provide three moving lanes i n
each d i r e c t i o n , while the outer bridges would be four lane f a c i l i t i e s .
Assigned loadings to the Three S i s t e r s or Central Bridges appear to
exceed optimum capacity values.
There i s a tendency f o r t r a f f i c to
d i s t r i b u t e i t s e l f i n accord with a v a i l a b l e c a p a c i t i e s . Hence, the
t r a f f i c excess or overload has been r e - a l l o c a t e d i n order to determine the
a c t u a l t r a f f i c volumes on each of the Potomac River crossings.
1970
Anticipated
volumes based on t r i p d e s i r e s and c a p a c i t i e s are summarized i n
Table XVI.
Highway and the Central or Three S i s t e r s Bridges w i l l c a r r y
the heaviest flows:
anticipated 1970
Figure 28 g r a p h i c a l l y summarizes and compares the
t r a f f i c loadings on the Potomac River Bridges.
- 51
-
�Chapter V
RE COMMENDATIONS
Long-range plans f o r Potomac R i v e r Crossings can be made from
the data and analyses presented.
A l s o , other improvements e s s e n t i a l
to e f f i c i e n t use of the bridges are apparent.
Coincident with the improvement of e x i s t i n g bridges, and t h e i r
approaches, and taking precedence over the construction of new crossings,
i t i s e s s e n t i a l that a d d i t i o n a l s t r e e t capacity be provided on the
Washington side of the r i v e r .
Roadways are c u r r e n t l y taxed during
peak hours and cannot accommodate the a d d i t i o n a l loadings which would
r e s u l t from increased bridge capacity.
1.
Inner Loop Expressway.
The Inner Loop Expressway d i s t r i b u t o r should be developed before
any new bridge i s b u i l t .
2.
Improvements to E x i s t i n g R i v e r Crossings and Approaches.
Capacities of e x i s t i n g bridges and t h e i r approaches can be r e a d i l y
increased.
E x i s t i n g bridges should be improved as f o l l o w s :
Highway Bridge - A new four lane span should be constructed to
replace the o r i g i n a l Highway Bridge.
The inbound bridge should be
connected to Maine Avenue and the Inner Loop by a new ramp which
permits f u l l u t i l i z a t i o n of the four inbound l a n e s .
These im-
provements w i l l increase the bridge capacity about 2$ per cent.
The plans to depress llrth S t r e e t under Independence Avenue and
the Mall are good, and w i l l increase both north-south and east-west
capacities.
Long-range plans should develop north-south one way
operations through the Central area.
P a i r i n g of llrth and l5th
S t r e e t s as a one-way system between Thomas C i r c l e and llrth and
- 52 -
�Madison Drive would s u b s t a n t i a l l y improve operations through the
downtown area and should be considered.
Memorial Bridge - By modification of the ramp connections on
the V i r g i n i a side of the r i v e r , s e v e r a l weaving sections can be improved.
Improvements on the Washington side are contingent on the development
of a c e n t r a l crossing.
The present weaving maneuvers a t the L i n c o l n
Memorial should be reduced by making the Bacon Drive a one-way eastbound roadway, and by increasing i t s radius a t Constitution Avenue.
Pending the grade separation of 23rd S t r e e t a t Constitution Avenue,
westbound bridge t r a f f i c should t u r n l e f t a t 2hth S t r e e t extended and
merge with bridge-bound t r a f f i c on the Loop from Ohio D r i v e . These
improvements should increase Memorial Bridge c a p a c i t i e s a t l e a s t 10
per cent.
Key Bridge -
S t r e e t railway operation on t h i s bridge should be
replaced with buses and the e x i s t i n g s t r e e t c a r tracks removed as planned.
The Bridge should be widened to provide three moving lanes i n each
d i r e c t i o n , including the c a n t i l e v e r i n g of the south w a l k .
plans for south terminus are workable.
Existing
E f f i c i e n t interchange should
be provided between Key Bridge and George Washington Memorial Parkway.
I n i t i a l l y a one-way s t r e e t system over e x i s t i n g right-of-way should
connect Arlington Boulevard to Key Bridge with grade separations
developed a t Arlington and Wilson Boulevards.
Long range plans should
provide f o r a l i m i t e d access north-south connector to Arlington
Boulevard.
On the Washington side a grade separated interchange
at M S t r e e t should be constructed. 35th and 3hth S t r e e t s should be
developed as one way connectors through Georgetown to Wisconsin Avenue
and the planned Whitehaven Parkway.
- 53
.
�Plans t o develop Canal Road as an expressway extension of the
Whitehurst Freeway w i l l eliminate the present congested operations a t
their intersection.
The improvement of K S t r e e t as an eastern extension
of the Whitehurst Freeway w i l l eliminate the present bottleneck a t the
eastern terminus and permit over a 30 per cent increase of inbound
freeway capacity. For maximum s t a b i l i t y and f l e x i b i l i t y of operations
a t t r a c t i v e connectors should be developed between the Whitehurst
Freeway and the Inner Loop.
The widening of Key Bridge and the im-
provement of i t s approaches should increase the crossing capacity over
15 per cent.
Chain Bridge - The planned improvement of Canal Road w i l l improve
the bridge approach on the Washington side.
I n V i r g i n i a , widening of
the nearby i n t e r s e c t i o n , including the provision of increased s i g h t
distance i s desirable.
About a 10 per cent increase i n bridge capacity
would be r e a l i z e d a f t e r these improvements are effected.
3.
New Potomac R i v e r Crossings.
The analyses of t r a f f i c growth and o r i g i n - d e s t i n a t i o n data r e v e a l s
that by 1970 a minimum of 1U additional bridge lanes w i l l be required,
assuming that the lanes are a l l positioned i n accord with d r i v e r s '
desire l i n e s of t r a v e l .
Recommended improvements to the Highway and
Key Bridge w i l l provide four new lanes.
New r i v e r crossings are r e -
quired to provide the additional lanes.
1.
New bridges must have adequate approach and d i s t r i b u t o r
connections on both sides of the r i v e r .
At present a f l e x i b l e
road net e x i s t s on the V i r g i n i a side.
2.
While the acceptance of the extremity bridges, Jones Point and
Cabin John, i s desirable from a standpoint of regional development
�and a c c e s s i b i l i t y , the bridges would not d i v e r t appreciable
quantities of t r a f f i c from more c e n t r a l l y located crossings,
now or i n the f u t u r e .
Four lane roadways would adequately
accommodate t r a f f i c demands a t each crossing.
3.
Roaches Run must be developed as a separate f a c i l i t y and
not merely as another bridge to r e t u r n Highway Bridge t r a f f i c .
I t should provide s i x lanes.
U.
A new s i x lane c e n t r a l crossing should be provided.
The
development of e i t h e r the Constitution Avenue or Three S i s t e r s
Bridge with adequate approach connectors would a f f o r d the
maximum t r a f f i c s e r v i c e s .
(a)
Both bridges would have about the same o v e r a l l t r a f f i c
a f f e c t s on the system of Potomac R i v e r crossings and
would r e l i e v e e x i s t i n g crossings.
(b)
The Constitution Avenue Bridge would be better adapted f o r
t r i p s to or from the c e n t r a l area of Washington.
The
Three S i s t e r s Bridge would receive i t s greatest usage
from other than downtown oriented t r i p s .
(c)
The Three S i s t e r s Bridge appears to have better long range
planning p o s s i b i l i t i e s .
I t permits a north to south t r a n s -
r i v e r movement removed from the c e n t r a l area.
I t s Virginia
approaches are removed from the heavy peak hour loadings
i n the Pentagon Road net.
I t i s b e t t e r suited to new highway development: the
planned F a l l s Church expressway i n V i r g i n i a , which w i l l
tap some of the f a s t e s t growing sections of the metropolitan
- 55 -
�region would l i n k d i r e c t l y i n t o the bridge.
S i m i l a r l y , the
bridge would a t t r a c t t r a f f i c flows from areas served by the
Washington Memorial Parkway extension.
The bridge can and
should be integrated with the intermediate c i r c u m f e r e n t i a l
route.
I n Washington the Glover Archbold Parkway should be
extended northward at l e a s t as f a r as Wisconsin Avenue,
(d)
For e i t h e r the C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue or Three S i s t e r s Bridge,
d i r e c t l i m i t e d access connections to the Inner Loop Expressway should be provided.
To achieve t h i s f o r the Three S i s t e r s
Bridge the planned Whitehaven Parkway would have to be
developed between the Inner Loop and the Glover Archbold
Parkway,
.»
:
5.
Even with the proposed system of bjfidges, by: 1970 a l l motorists
would not be able to cross where they prefer during peak hours,
although there would be s u f f i c i e n t t o t a l reserve capacity. I n
any large metropolitan area i t i s never possible to accommodate
a l l t r i p d e s i r e s , and some r e d i s t r i b u t i o n of t r a f f i c i s necessary.
6.
Anticipated t r a f f i c requirements and assignments have been predicated on optimum c a p a c i t i e s * .
Higher capacity values are c u r r e n t l y
attained on e x i s t i n g bridges and can be expected to develop on new
f a c i l i t i e s as pressures mount. Thus, the use of a conservative
capacity c r i t e r i a represents a f a c t o r of insurance i n s o f a r as
future bridge requirements are concerned.
* P r a c t i c a l lane capacity values approximating 1^00 v e h i c l e s per steady
flow lane per hour were assumed.
- 56 -
�SCHEDULE
I n programming proposed Potomac R i v e r Bridge improvements, i t
i s evident that primary a t t e n t i o n should be turned to c e n t r a l crossings
and t h a t outer bridges should be b u i l t subsequently as funds become
available.
The recommended scheduling of improvements f o l l o w s :
Immediate Construction
1.
B u i l d the Inner Loop Expressway giving p r i o r i t y to the Southwest Freeway.
2.
Replace the old Highway Bridge and improve the Washington
approaches on the new bridge so as to develop four e f f e c t i v e
lanes i n each d i r e c t i o n .
3.
Widen the Key Bridge and improve i t s interchange on both sides
of the Potomac R i v e r .
U.
Construct a c e n t r a l bridge crossing e i t h e r a t Three S i s t e r s or
at Constitution Avenue.
5.
Improve approaches to Memorial Bridge.
Second Stage Construction ( t o be i n i t i a t e d by I960)
1.
Construct the Roaches Run Bridge.
2.
Improve the approaches to the Chain Bridge.
3.
Construct the Jones Point Bridge.
Eventual Construction ( t o be i n i t i a t e d by
1.
1965)
Construct the Cabin John Bridge.
Bridge improvements must of course be integrated into the o v e r a l l
highway plans for the metropolitan area.
I n l i g h t of t h i s , some mod-
i f i c a t i o n s i n the recommended construction sequence may be necessary.
- 57
-
�FIGURES
The following figures w i l l be incorporated i n the report when they are reproduced:
1.
Potomac River Crossings - Washington and V i c i n i t y
2.
Population Trends
3.
D i s t r i b u t i o n of Population - 1953 and 1970
U.
T r a f f i c Volumes - Downtown Washington
5.
Passenger Car R e g i s t r a t i o n
6.
Origin - Destination Zones and Stations
7.
Major T r i p Desires - T y p i c a l 1953 Uay
1920 - 1970
8. Trend of T o t a l D a i l y T r a f f i c Crossing the Potomac R i v e r
9.
T o t a l Potomac R i v e r Crossings Generated by Zones
10.
Major T r i p Desires - T y p i c a l 1970 Day
11.
D i s t r i b u t i o n of Government Employment - 195U
12.
D i s t r i b u t i o n of V i r g i n i a T r i p s i n Zero Sector or Central Washington
13.
Regional Thoroughfare Plan
lh.
E x i s t i n g Elements - Metropolitan Expressway System
15.
Assumed Status - 1970 - Metropolitan Expressway System
16.
Hourly T r a f f i c V a r i a t i o n s - Highway Bridge
17.
Present T r a f f i c Volumes - Highway Bridge and Approaches
18.
Hourly T r a f f i c V a r i a t i o n s - Memorial Bridge
19.
Present T r a f f i c Volumes - Memorial Bridge and Approaches
20.
Hourly T r a f f i c V a r i a t i o n s - Key Bridge
21.
Present T r a f f i c Volumes - Key Bridge
22.
Hourly T r a f f i c Variations - Chain Bridge
23.
Trends i n Inbound Peak Hour Potomac R i v e r Bridge T r a f f i c
2U.
Trends i n Outbound Potomac R i v e r Bridge T r a f f i c
25.
Trends i n D a i l y Potomac R i v e r Bridge T r a f f i c
26.
Inner Loop Expressway and Potomac R i v e r Bridges
27.
Present T r a f f i c D i s t r i b u t i o n Based on T r a n s r i v e r T r i p Desires
28.
Anticipated 1970 T r a f f i c D i s t r i b u t i o n - Potomac R i v e r Crossings
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Traffic and capacity needs for Potomac River crossings : part I of report on traffic volumes and capacity requirements for Potomac River bridges and the Inner Traffic Loop
Subject
The topic of the resource
Bridges--Washington (D.C.)
Potomac River
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Wilbur Smith and Associates
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
November 1954
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Documents
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
Archival Box 11
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/7f6d20b98449b58c08eb78ef2b391e0e.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=BeWXBQ3qlhRuuEVu8-14ClGMNvU0%7E%7EOXHiwADlhA5zSQVY9xIqkyqLPq6fZMFWSI5HJ9aBpxhjiuBi1qQmbuHjZ3UuX1BZjRIB6GVp2sWd5Nynbz91JZRnp4g0LcuJp6HygjB7YnOhvqFaB2cvZboGQZ7gcV5XcA6ba8NScL78IoFtqkWIpkl-X9z8mQAVpg%7EZuxdt%7Et9mbEbf6AZ8ibABq62rXFxVjqT5vDNI0HZHiFGY3SIwMsJQ2QBClR1xhYwzNNwc0aHX23zi0jbsdK1LAWGdpvUFLBgsmeYuktWj-ZcJAMz%7E90WZfmgsEz-W6nwmHu4V6i2B93oYlzyWR4nQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
7a5afb62638cc03592a782d87264b214
PDF Text
Text
REPORT
TO THE
COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS
UNITED STATES SENATE
CONCERNING
NAVIGATIONAL CLEARANCES
IN HIGHWAY BRIDGES ACROSS
THE POTOMAC RIVER
ABOVE HAINS POINT
WASHINGTON, D. C.
��TABLE OF CONTENTS
SUBJECT
PAGE
CONCLUSIONS
1
INTRODUCTION
k
Purpose o f R e p o r t
Question of Navigation Clearances f o r Bridges
Waterway User
6
METHOD OF STUDY
Review o f A v a i l a b l e Data
A d d i t i o n a l Data
DESCRIPTION OF NAVIGATION PROJECT
6
HIGHWAY BRIDGE AMD NAVIGATIONAL DATA
8
Number o f E x i s t i n g Highway B r i d g e s
B r i d g e Openings f o r N a v i g a t i o n
10
VESSELS REQUIRING BRIDGE OPENINGS
Miscellaneous Users
Smoot Sand and G r a v e l Company
American O i l Company
Comments Concerning AMOCO Views
TUNNEL VERSUS BRIDGE AT CONSTITUTION AVENUE
18
RIPARIAN RIGHTS AND NAVIGATIONAL RIGHTS
19
PHOTOGRAPHS
19
F e b r u a r y 8, 1957
��APPENDICES
APPENDIX NO. I .
Footnotes
APPENDIX NO.
II.
F i n d i n g o f F a c t Dated August 23,
APPENDIX NO.
III.
Copy o f P e r m i t I s s u e d B y N a t i o n a l Park S e r v i c e ,
Department o f The I n t e r i o r , To American O i l
Company
1955
APPENDIX NO. I V .
Copy o f L e t t e r From Smoot Sand and G r a v e l
C o r p o r a t i o n To D i s t r i c t E n g i n e e r , Corps o f
E n g i n e e r s , Dated 1$ October 1956
APPENDIX NO. V.
Copy o f L e t t e r From American O i l Company To
D i s t r i c t E n g i n e e r , Corps o f E n g i n e e r s , Dated
October 16,
1956
APPENDIX NO. V I .
Statement B y G e n e r a l C o u n s e l , Bureau o f P u b l i c
Roads, Department of Commerce, On R i p a r i a n
R i g h t s and N a v i g a t i o n a l R i g h t s
APPENDIX NO. V I I .
Photographs
��CONCLUSIONS
I t i s concluded t h a t f i x e d span highway b r i d g e s
on the Potomac
R i v e r above Hains P o i n t , h a v i n g a v e r t i c a l c l e a r a n c e o f 2 l i . 6 f e e t above
mean h i g h w a t e r , would not u n d u l y i n t e r f e r e w i t h the i n t e r e s t s
o f up-
stream commercial concerns w h i c h p r e s e n t l y n a v i g a t e t h i s r e a c h of
r i v e r , f o r the f o l l o w i n g
1.
Only two
reasons:
commercial concerns p r e s e n t l y used t h i s
of the r i v e r f o r n a v i g a t i o n .
and G r a v e l C o r p o r a t i o n
2.
The e x i s t i n g
the
reach
These a r e the Smoot Sand
and the American O i l Company.
and f u t u r e o p e r a t i o n s
of Smoot Sand
and
G r a v e l C o r p o r a t i on Ccin bs a d e q u a t e l y accommodated under
such b r i d g e s b y h a v i n g the company a d j u s t i t s o p e r a t i o n s
so as t o use land-based equipment f o r o c c a s i o n a l dredging
operations
i n the v i c i n i t y of the docks, and b y r o u t i n e
replacement o f equipment p r e s e n t l y capable o f o p e r a t i n g
under the e x i s t i n g b r i d g e s i n c l o s e d p o s i t i o n .
3.
The American O i l Company can be s a t i s f a c t o r i l y accommodated
w i t h the e x i s t e n c e o f such b r i d g e s b y i n s t a l l a t i o n o f two
t e n - i n c h p i p e l i n e s extending
between Four M i l e Run
near
Washington N a t i o n a l A i r p o r t and t h e i r i n s t a l l a t i o n i n
Rosslyn.
As a p o s s i b l e a l t e r n a t i v e ,
AMOCO and i t s c o n t r a c t
c a r r i e r might f u r t h e r s t u d y the f e a s i b i l i t y o f
shifting
AMOCO waterway t r a n s p o r t a t i o n movements from s e l f - p r o p e l l e d
- 1 -
�t a n k e r s t h a t a r e c h a r t e r e d t o o p e r a t e d on c o a s t a l
and
i n l a n d w a t e r s t o s i m i l a r v e s s e l s w h i c h would o p e r a t e
s o l e l y i n t h e i n l a n d w a t e r s between the AMOCO r e f i n e r y
i n Yorktown, V i r g i n i a , and i t s i n s t a l l a t i o n i n R o s s l y n .
T h i s may r e q u i r e the d e s i g n and c o n s t r u c t i o n of s p e c i a l
t a n k e r s , which f i t i n t o the o v e r a l l economy of the
t o s e r v e t h i s need.
I t a l s o may n e c e s s i t a t e
area,
installation
a t R o s s l y n o f s t o r a g e f a c i l i t i e s beyond t h o s e contemplated
by AMOCO under i t s e x p a n s i o n program.
1;.
The p r o d u c t s of t h e American O i l Company a r e
competitive
w i t h p r o d u c t s marketed b y o t h e r p r o d u c e r s and a l s o s h i p p e d
to t h e Washington a r e a b y w a t e r t r a n s p o r t a t i o n .
Irrespective
of any added expenses w h i c h AMOCO may b e a r i n the
transporta-
t i o n of t h o s e p r o d u c t s , i t i s not t o the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t
t o f a v o r i t s a c t i v i t i e s under c i r c u m s t a n c e s w h i c h would not
b e n e f i t the g e n e r a l p u b l i c through a r e d u c t i o n i n commodity
prices.
On t h e b a s i s o f comparative c o s t a l o n e , the D i s t r i c t o f Columbia
and the B u r e a u o f P u b l i c Roads f u r t h e r conclude t h a t the d i f f e r e n c e
i n c o s t between a s i x - l a n e b r i d g e , i n c l u d i n g approaches, and a
s i x - l a n e t u n n e l , i n c l u d i n g approaches, does not w a r r a n t t h e cons i d e r a t i o n of a t u n n e l .
A l s o , because o f the g r a d i e n t , a t u n n e l
would not accommoaate t r a f f i c a s a d e q u a t e l y as a b r i d g e .
a l s o was
g i v e n t o the c o n s t r u c t i o n o f v e r t i c a l l i f t
bascule-type bridges.
type b r i d g e s .
Consideration
spans i n l i e u o f
Such s t r u c t u r e s might be c o m p e t i t i v e
with
However, a t C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue a v e r t i c a l l i f t
- 2 -
bascule-
bridge
�d e f i n i t e l y would not harmonize w i t h t h e composition o f t h e a r e a ,
a t llrbh S t r e e t and Roaches Run, t h e r e a l s o i s the q u e s t i o n o f h a v i n g
b r i d g e towers i n t e r f e r e w i t h t h e g l i d e angle a t t h e Washington
National Airport.
The Corps o f E n g i n e e r s d i d not p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h i s
p a r t of t h e s t u d y .
- 3 -
�INTRODUCTION
Purpose of R e p o r t .
T h i s report i s prepared f o r submission to
the Committee on P u b l i c Works, U n i t e d S t a t e s S e n a t e , i n r e s p o n s e t o a
l e t t e r from Honorable Dennis Chavez, Chairman of the Committee, d a t e d
J a n u a r y 16,
1957.
The Committee's l e t t e r s t a t e d t h a t a q u e s t i o n
r a i s e d i n a r e c e n t h e a r i n g a s t o the economic j u s t i f i c a t i o n of
drawspan b r i d g e s t o accommodate v e s s e l t r a f f i c
upstream from the l i ^ t h S t r e e t B r i d g e .
F e b r u a r y 15,
1957,
was
providing
on the Potomac R i v e r
I n requesting
a report
by
the l e t t e r c o n t i n u e d :
"The Committee d e s i r e s t h a t a s t u d y be made of the
economics of p r o v i d i n g draw or l i f t span b r i d g e s
a c r o s s the Potomac R i v e r as c o n t r a s t e d w i t h the
c o n s t r u c t i o n of f i x e d span b r i d g e s .
The Committee
would a l s o l i k e t o have i n f o r m a t i o n on the a l t e r n a t i v e of a t u n n e l . I n t h i s c o n n e c t i o n i t would be
h e l p f u l to the Committee i f d e t a i l e d i n f o r m a t i o n
were a v a i l a b l e r e l a t i v e to the v a l u e of n a v i g a t i o n a l
f a c i l i t i e s t o t h o s e persons or f i r m s now e x e r c i s i n g
them, t h e damage w h i c h would a c c r u e from the t e r m i n a t i o n of s u c h f a c i l i t i e s and the c o s t t o s u c h persons
or f i r m s of m o d i f y i n g n a v i g a t i o n a l equipment so as
to e l i m i n a t e the n e c e s s i t y of drawspans."
Q u e s t i o n of N a v i g a t i o n a l C l e a r a n c e s
for Bridges.
The
question
of n a v i g a t i o n a l c l e a r a n c e s f o r b r i d g e s a c r o s s t h e r e a c h of Potomac R i v e r
above Hains P o i n t was
i n i t i a l l y r a i s e d a t an A p r i l 10,
1955
hearing
t h e Corps of E n g i n e e r s , w h i c h preceded a p p r o v a l of l o c a t i o n and
for
of
plans
the proposed C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue B r i d g e as a f i x e d s t r u c t u r e w i t h a
- k
-
�h o r i z o n t a l c l e a r a n c e o f 125 f e e t and a v e r t i c a l c l e a r a n c e o f 2i|.6 f e e t
above mean high w a t e r
' T h i s question a l s o i s of c u r r e n t i n t e r e s t w i t h r e s p e c t t o the
d e s i g n and c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a replacement s t r u c t u r e f o r t h e o l d ( s o u t h 2
bound) l l r t h S t r e e t B r i d g e .
I t i s o f f u t u r e i n t e r e s t a s the b r i d g e
c l e a r a n c e problem r e l a t e s t o t h e proposed Roaches Run B r i d g e , w h i c h i s
i n c l u d e d i n t h e D i s t r i c t ' s long-range highway program.
D i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e c o s t o f t h e f o r e g o i n g b r i d g e s , based upon
f i x e d spans v s . movable spans-, a s w e l l a s t h e added c o s t o f m a i n t a i n i n g
and o p e r a t i n g e x i s t i n g movable span highway b r i d g e s on t h i s r e a c h o f
t h e Potomac R i v e r , a r e d i s c u s s e d e l s e w h e r e i n t h i s r e p o r t .
Waterway U s e r s .
O n l y two commercial concerns c u r r e n t l y o p e r a t e
on t h i s r e a c h o f t h e Potomac R i v e r .
Corporation
Of t h e s e , t h e Smoot Sand and G r a v e l
owns and o p e r a t e s v e s s e l s t h a t h a u l sand and g r a v e l
obtained
from downstream dredging s i t e s t o i t s d i s t r i b u t i o n p l a n t i n Georgetown.
The American O i l Company has a c o n t r a c t w i t h Spentonbush F u e l
Transport
S e r v i c e f o r h a u l i n g p e t r o l e u m p r o d u c t s from AMOCO r e f i n i r i e s i n Yorktown,
V i r g i n i a , t o i t s dock i n R o s s l y n .
Elsewhere
i n t h i s r e p o r t , d e t a i l s show
how t h e r e s p e c t i v e i n t e r e s t s o f t h e s e c u r r e n t waterways might be a f f e c t e d
by c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue B r i d g e i n c o n f o r m i t y w i t h t h e
n a v i g a t i o n a l c l e a r a n c e s a s a l r e a d y approved b y t h e C h i e f o f E n g i n e e r s
and t h e S e c r e t a r y o f t h e Army, and t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e other s t r u c t u r e s
mentioned above w i t h s i m i l a r n a v i g a t i o n a l c l e a r a n c e s .
^ F o o t n o t e s a r e l i s t e d i n Appendix I .
A copy o f t h e F i n d i n g o f F a c t s ,
dated August 2 3 , 1955, i n support o f a p p r o v a l o f these c l e a r a n c e s by
the S e c r e t a r y o f t h e Army i s a t t a c h e d h e r e t o a s Appendix I I .
�METHOD OF STUDY
Review of A v a i l a b l e D a t a .
Following
r e c e i p t o f t h e Committee's
l e t t e r , the D i s t r i c t o f Columbia a r r a n g e d f o r t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t
of a
t a s k f o r c e , c o n s i s t i n g o f r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f t h e Government o f t h e
D i s t r i c t o f Columbia; o f t h e Bureau o f P u b l i c Roads, Department o f
Commerce; and o f t h e Washington, D. C , D i s t r i c t O f f i c e , Corps o f
Engineers,
Department o f t h e Army.
The r e p r e s e n t a t i v e
o f the Govern-
ment o f t h e D i s t r i c t o f Columbia was d e s i g n a t e d a s chairman o f t h i s
force.
task
T h i s r e p o r t r e f l e c t s t h e j o i n t e f f o r t s o f t h e s e a g e n c i e s , as
w e l l as t h e c o o p e r a t i o n r e c e i v e d from the U. S. Coast Guard, Department
of the T r e a s u r y , t h e Maritime A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , Department o f Commerce,
and t h e N a t i o n a l P a r k S e r v i c e , Department o f t h e I n t e r i o r .
At t h e o u t s e t o f the s t u d y , the t a s k f o r c e r e v i e w e d a l l a v a i l a b l e
3
documentary d a t a on t h e s u b j e c t .
Additional Data.
The t a s k f o r c e r e c o g n i z e d t h a t a d d i t i o n a l
i n f o r m a t i o n would be needed f o r as thorough s t u d y o f t h e problem as
time l i m i t s would p e r m i t .
The i n f o r m a t i o n was o b t a i n e d from v a r i o u s
h
sources.
DESCRIPTION OF NAVIGATION PROJECT
The
r e a c h o f t h e Potomac R i v e r between Hains P o i n t and Key B r i d g e ,
g e n e r a l l y known as the V i r g i n i a
Channel, has an a u t h o r i z e d
c h a n n e l 2k f e e t
deep a t mean low w a t e r and UOO f e e t w i d e , w i t h t h e w i d t h o f the c h a n n e l
- 6 -
�b e i n g i n c r e a s e d , where n e c e s s a r y , to p r o v i d e c r o s s s e c t i o n s o f 2^,000
square f e e t a t mean low w a t e r .
The mean range o f t i d e i n t h i s
channel
i s 2.9 f e e t .
Based on the p r e s e n t requirements
o f v e s s e l s o p e r a t i n g i n the
V i r g i n i a Channel, t h i s s e c t i o n o f the Washington Harbor p r o j e c t i s
maintained
water.
t o a w i d t h o f 200 f e e t and a depth o f 20 f e e t a t mean low
The head o f commercial n a v i g a t i o n , as w e l l as the upstream l i m i t
of t h e a u t h o r i z e d F e d e r a l p r o j e c t , i s a t Key B r i d g e i n Georgetown.
Except
f o r a commercial w a t e r f r o n t a r e a , about one m i l e l o n g , on the D i s t r i c t
o f Columbia s i d e o f t h e Channel i n Georgetown, both banks o f t h e
V i r g i n i a Channel a r e F e d e r a l l y owned f o r a d i s t a n c e o f f i v e m i l e s o r
more and a r e designated
as p a r k a r e a s , o r a r e occupied by Government
establishments.
I n p a s t y e a r s , t e r m i n a l s o f the Georgetown w a t e r f r o n t handled t h e
b u l k o f waterborne commerce o f t h e Washington a r e a , which i n c l u d e d such
i t e m s as c o a l , gas o i l , lumber, pulpwood, cement, b u i l d i n g m a t e r i a l s ,
q u a r r y s t o n e , and sand g r a v e l .
I n r e c e n t y e a r s t h e o n l y commercial u s e r s
o f the V i r g i n i a Channel f o r waterway t r a n s p o r t a t i o n a r e t h e Smoot Sand
and G r a v e l C o r p o r a t i o n and the American O i l Company.
On t h e V i r g i n i a s i d e o f the r i v e r , the w a t e r f r o n t a c t i v i t y i s
l i m i t e d t o t h e American O i l Company t e r m i n a l a t R o s s l y n ,
downstream from Key B r i d g e .
immediately
The t e r m i n a l c o n s i s t s o f a f l o a t i n g
steel
b a r g e , a b r e a s t o f two d o l p h i n s and a f l e x i b l e p i p e l i n e c o u p l i n g w h i c h conn e c t s two e i g h t - i n c h undergound p i p e l i n e s w h i c h d i s c h a r g e i n t o s t o r a g e
- 7 -
�t a n k s on company p r o p e r t y i n R o s s l y n , 1,800 f e e t d i s t a n t from t h e
f l o a t i n g dock.
The t e r m i n a l and p i p e l i n e s a r e on F e d e r a l P a r k P r o p e r t y ,
the u s e o f which was a u t h o r i z e d b y the N a t i o n a l P a r k S e r v i c e i n a
r e v o c a b l e p e r m i t , dated June 8, 19a3.^
HIGHWAY BRIDGE AND NAVIGATIONAL DATA
Number o f E x i s t i n g Highway B r i d g e s .
There p r e s e n t l y a r e t h r e e
highway b r i d g e s a c r o s s t h i s r e a c h o f the Potomac R i v e r .
new
These a r e t h e
(northbound) l a t h S t r e e t B r i d g e ; the o l d (southbound) lath S t r e e t
B r i d g e ; and the A r l i n g t o n Memorial B r i d g e ,
A f o u r t h b r i d g e , owned by
the P e n n s y l v a n i a R a i l r o a d , i s l o c a t e d immediately
northbound l a t h S t r e e t B r i d g e .
downstream from t h e
A l l o f t h e s e s t r u c t u r e s have movable
spans w h i c h p e r m i t u n l i m i t e d v e r t i c a l n a v i g a t i o n a l c l e a r a n c e s when opened.
When the spans a r e c l o s e d , the v e r t i c a l n a v i g a t i o n a l c l e a r a n c e s under
t h e f o u r b r i d g e s i n the o r d e r o f t h e i r l o c a t i o n s a r e 18.2 f e e t , 2a.6 f e e t ,
18.2 f e e t , and 30.7 f e e t , above mean h i g h w a t e r .
B r i d g e Openings f o r N a v i g a t i o n .
During t h e p a s t t h r e e c a l e n d a r
y e a r s , the l a t h S t r e e t B r i d g e s have been opened 662 t i m e s .
openings and i d e n t i f i e d u s e r s , a r e shown i n T a b l e 1 .
- 8-
These
�TABLE 1 .
ANNUAL TOTAL
Year
OPENINGS PER IDENTIFIED USER
AMOCO
Tanker
SMOOT SAND
AND GRAVEL
MISCELLANEOUS^
USERS
Tug-Barge
195u
301
268
8
6
19
1955
186
150
3
18
15
1956
175
153
6
12
h
Total
662
571
17
36
38
% of
Total
100$
3yr.
(a)
892 -
5.6%
5.4%
T h i s i n c l u d e s Coast Guard buoy maintenance v e s s e l s ; the
N a t i o n a l Park S e r v i c e Bandstand which docks a t the Watergate f o r summer
c o n c e r t s ; the D i s t r i c t o f Columbia f i r e b o a t ; and o c c a s i o n a l
craft.
recreation
�VESSELS REQUIRING BRIDGE OPENINGS
Miscellaneous Users.
The number of b r i d g e openings f o r passage o f
the v e s s e l s l i s t e d under " M i s c e l l a n e o u s " i n T a b l e 1 a r e not s u f f i c i e n t
t o w a r r a n t movable spans i n new b r i d g e s .
The N a t i o n a l P a r k S e r v i c e
bandstand i s c o n s t r u c t e d on a f l a t b a r g e .
The s u p e r s t r u c t u r e c a n be
dismounted so as t o p e r m i t passage under f i x e d b r i d g e s .
At t h e A p r i l
1955 p u b l i c h e a r i n g , a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f the U n i t e d S t a t e s C o a s t Guard
s t a t e d t h a t t h e C o a s t Guard v e s s e l s w h i c h r e q u i r e b r i d g e openings
a c t u a l l y s e r v i c e f i v e buoys t h a t a i d n a v i g a t i o n .
By s h i f t i n g t o l i g h t e r
buoys, t h e C o a s t Guard c o u l d s e r v i c e t h e buoys w i t h a s m a l l b o a t t h a t
c o u l d p a s s under a f i x e d b r i d g e .
The Coast Guard e s t i m a t e d t h a t replacement
o f the buoys and added maintenance o f t h e l i g h t e r buoys would i n c r e a s e i t s
c o s t s about f 1 , 0 0 0 a n n u a l l y .
I n f o r m a t i o n i s not a v a i l a b l e on t h e c h a r a c t e r -
i s t i c s of other v e s s e l s i n t h i s
grouping.
Smoot Sand and G r a v e l Company.
At the A p r i l 1 1 ,
1955 h e a r i n g o f t h e
Corps o f E n g i n e e r s , t h e Smoot Sand and G r a v e l Company r e p r e s e n t a t i v e
s t a t e d ( l ) t h a t t h e Smoot tugs and b a r g e s a r e d e s i g n e d
t o go under t h e
Potomac R i v e r b r i d g e s i n c l o s e d p o s i t i o n a t low w a t e r and o r d i n a r y h i g h
w a t e r ; ( 2 ) t h a t the Company owns two l i g h t e r s w i t h "A-frames" w h i c h r e q u i r e
about hO f e e t v e r t i c a l c l e a r a n c e and w h i c h a r e u s e d t o deepen the dock a r e a
a t Georgetown; and ( 3 ) t h a t t h e Company stops i t s o p e r a t i o n s when f l o o d
s t a g e s go o v e r i t s dock, w h i c h i s e s t i m a t e d t o be 7 f e e t above mean low
water.
The Smoot f i r m a l s o i s concerned about b e i n g a b l e t o g e t i t s t u g s
and.barges downstream b e l o w the b r i d g e s d u r i n g f r e s h e t s .
Smoot contends
t h a t such movements might n o t be p o s s i b l e i f f i x e d b r i d g e s w i t h 21*.6
- 10 -
�foot v e r t i c a l clearance
above mean h i g h w a t e r s h o u l d be
constructed.
By l e t t e r dated 15 October 1956, the Smoot Sand and G r a v e l Corpor a t i o n furnished additional information
t o t h e D i s t r i c t E n g i n e e r , Wash-
i n g t o n D i s t r i c t , Corps o f E n g i n e e r s , r e l a t i v e t o c e r t a i n
conditions
a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e d e l i v e r y o f sand and g r a v e l t o t h e i r Georgetown
p l a n t , and t o o t h e r m a t t e r s w h i c h t h e y c o n s i d e r t o be p e r t i n e n t t o a
d e t e r m i n a t i o n as t o whether o r not a bridge o v e r t h e Potomac R i v e r i n
the v i c i n i t y o f C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue s h o u l d be p r o v i d e d w i t h a drawspan.^
The
f i r m c a l l e d a t t e n t i o n t o the f a c t t h a t d e p l e t i o n
g r a v e l from l o c a l d e p o s i t s
o f sand and
w i l l soon r e q u i r e t h e d e l i v e r y o f aggregates
t o t h e i r Georgetown p l a n t from more d i s t a n t p o i n t s , by "open w a t e r " t u g s
and b a r g e s w h i c h w i l l be g r e a t e r i n h e i g h t t h a n t h e h e i g h t l i m i t o f 2U.6
f e e t above mean h i g h w a t e r proposed i n the C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue
Bridge.
They i n d i c a t e d t h a t i f sand and g r a v e l were not a v a i l a b l e t o r e a d y mixed
c o n c r e t e customers i n Georgetown, t r u c k i n g o f aggregates through t h e c i t y
from t h e i r p l a n t on t h e A n a c o s t i a R i v e r would c o s t from $ . 9 3 t o $ 1 . 2 5 more
p e r c u b i c y a r d and t h a t on t h e b a s i s o f avergage a n n u a l s a l e s t h e p u b l i c
would be r e q u i r e d t o pay an a d d i t i o n a l $579,000 p e r y e a r f o r sand and g r a v e l .
I n considering
t h e v i e w s o f the Smoot f i r m , i t i s a s s u r e d t h a t
future
o p e r a t i o n s a t more d i s t a n t d e p o s i t s would s t i l l be w i t h i n t h e l i m i t s o f
the Potomac R i v e r .
I f t h i s be the c a s e , i t i s not apparent t h a t
deliveries
of sand and g r a v e l t o the Georgetown a r e a would be a f f e c t e d by f a i l u r e t o
o b t a i n towing and d e l i v e r y equipment c a p a b l e o f o p e r a t i n g
w a t e r s o f t h e l o w e r Potomac and a l s o capable o f p a s s i n g
i n t h e open
under a f i x e d
h e i g h t o f 2U.6 f e e t above mean h i g h w a t e r as now p r o v i d e d under t h e c l o s e d
- 11
-
�drawspan o f t h e new northbound l l r t h S t r e e t B r i d g e and a s approved by t h e
S e c r e t a r y o f the Army f o r t h e f i x e d c h a n n e l span i n t h e proposed C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue B r i d g e .
Towboats h a v i n g a maximum h e i g h t o f 22 f e e t above
the w a t e r l i n e a r e now being s u c c e s s f u l l y used i n b a r g i n g petroleum
products
from P i n e y P o i n t , Maryland, t o Washington and s i m i l a r o p e r a t i o n s w i t h low
c l e a r a n c e equipment on o t h e r i n l a n d waterways a r e a m a t t e r o f r e c o r d .
P r e s e n t equipment used by t h e Smoot Company i n d e l i v e r i n g sand and g r a v e l
t o t h e i r Georgetown p l a n t c o n s i s t s o f tugs and barges h a v i n g a maximum
h e i g h t above t h e w a t e r l i n e o f 17 f e e t .
Other m a t t e r s c o n s i d e r e d b y the Smoot f i r m t o be p e r t i n e n t t o t h e
m a t t e r i n c l u d e maintenance dredging and t h e d i s p o s a l o f i c e i n s e c t i o n s
o f the r i v e r upstream o f the b r i d g e s i t e and the f a c t t h a t c e r t a i n w a t e r f r o n t p r o p e r t y owners i n t h e Georgetown a r e a were n o t a d v i s e d o f a p u b l i c
hearing to consider plans f o r a f i x e d bridge.
The m a t t e r s o f maintenance dredging a n d i c e were g i v e n thorough cons i d e r a t i o n by t h e Corps o f E n g i n e e r s p r i o r t o t h e a p p r o v a l o f p l a n s f o r
the f i x e d b r i d g e over the Potomac R i v e r a t C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue and t h e s e
problems were n o t c o n s i d e r e d t o be o f s u f f i c i e n t importance
the p r o v i s i o n o f a drawspan i n t h e proposed b r i d g e .
as t o j u s t i f y
The p u b l i c n o t i c e
r e q u e s t i n g attendance a t a p u b l i c h e a r i n g was sent t o a l l known i n t e r e s t e d
persons.
I t was t h e s u b j e c t o f news a r t i c l e s i n the l o c a l papers and t h e
p u b l i c n o t i c e concluded w i t h t h e statement:
" I t i s r e q u e s t e d t h a t you
communicate t h e f o r e g o i n g i n f o r m a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g t h e proposed b r i d g e t o
any p e r s o n known by you t o be i n t e r e s t e d and who not b e i n g known t o t h i s
o f f i c e , do not r e c e i v e a copy o f t h i s n o t i c e " .
- 12 -
�American O i l Company.
As shown i n Table 1 , the g r e a t e s t number o f
drawspan openings a r e r e q u i r e d to accomodate t a n k e r s h a u l i n g p e t r o l e u m
p r o d u c t s to AMOCO's dock a t R o s s l y n .
According t o i n f o r m a t i o n r e c e n t l y
r e c e i v e d from AMOCO and i t s c o n t r a c t c a r r i e r , the Spentonbush F u e l T r a n s p o r t S e r v i c e , b r i d g e openings a r e not r e q u i r e d f o r upstream movement o f
l a d e n o i l b a r g e s and t u g s ; but b r i d g e openings are r e q u i r e d f o r downstream
movement o f the empty barges because the f i x e d p r o j e c t i o n s o f the
v e s s e l s extend above the u n d e r c l e a r a n c e s
o f the b r i d g e s .
light
However, both
AMOCO and Spentonbush p o i n t out t h a t i t would be i m p r a c t i c a l t o use
o i l b a r g e s and t u g s i n s t e a d o f the t a n k e r .
They s t a t e t h a t the s m a l l e r
v e s s e l s cannot s a f e l y n a v i g a t e the open w a t e r s o f Chesapeake Bay
adverse
the
during
weather.
These v i e w s were s t a t e d i n an October 1 6 , 1956 l e t t e r from AMOCO
7
to the D i s t r i c t Engineer,
Corps o f E n g i n e e r s ,
and r e i t e r a t e d i n a r e c e n t
c o n f e r e n c e w i t h t h i s t a s k f o r c e , i n c i d e n t a l t o the p r e p a r a t i o n of t h i s
report.
The
s a l i e n t p o i n t s p r e s e n t e d b y AMOCO i n the above-mentioned l e t t e r
and a t the c o n f e r e n c e a r e :
1.
C o n s t r u c t i o n o f a f i x e d b r i d g e w i t h a 2U.6
above mean h i g h w a t e r
foot v e r t i c a l
clearance
would deny AMOCO use o f t h e r i v e r w i t h s e l f -
p r o p e l l e d motor t a n k e r s , w h i c h r e q u i r e a v e r t i c a l c l e a r a n c e o f
about 70 f e e t , to p a s s h i g h masts on the v e s s e l s .
I f the masts
c a n be l o w e r e d , a 50 f o o t v e r t i c a l c l e a r a n c e would be s a t i s f a c t o r y .
2.
The waterway r o u t e between the AMOCO r e f i n e r y a t Yorktown and
R o s s l y n makes use o f s m a l l e r t y p e s o f v e s s e l s i m p r a c t i c a l .
- 13 -
�3.
D e n i a l o f t h e r i v e r t o s e l f - p r o p e l l e d t a n k e r s would n e c e s s i t a t e t r u c k movements o f AMOCO p e t r o l e u m products from B a l t i m o r e ,
a t a c o s t o f 26 c e n t s p e r b a r r e l above p r e s e n t waterway t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c o s t s , o r a n a d d i t i o n a l c o s t o f $700,000 t o $750,000
annually.
According t o AMOCO, t h i s i s based upon a 1956 waterway
movement o f 2 , 2 5 1 , 0 0 0 b a r r e l s o f p e t r o l e u m p r o d u c t s , as w e l l a s
a p r o j e c t e d i n c r e a s e o f such movements t o 3 , 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 b a r r e l s i f
a d d i t i o n a l storage i s provided a t Rosslyn.
U.
W i t h such a change i n o p e r a t i o n s and c o s t s , t h e R o s s l y n p l a n t ,
w h i c h c o v e r s about hi a c r e s and r e p r e s e n t s a n i n v e s t m e n t o f over
$ 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 , would cease t o be o f u s e t o AMOCO, and would n e c e s s i t a t e r e s a l e o f the p r o p e r t y a t a l o s s e s t i m a t e d b y AMOCO o f more
than $600,000.
C l o s u r e o f the R o s s l y n p l a n t , AMOCO contends,
a l s o would l e a d t o d i s m i s s a l o f about 150 employees h a v i n g a
p a y r o l l o f about $675,000 a n n u a l l y .
The AMOCO l e t t e r a l s o mentions t h e n a t u r e o f i t s tenancy on F e d e r a l
p r o p e r t y under t h e j u r i s d i c t i o n o f t h e N a t i o n a l P a r k S e r v i c e .
A t the
c o n f e r e n c e , AMOCO agreed t h a t t h e r e v o c a b l e p e r m i t i s s u e d b y t h e N a t i o n a l
P a r k S e r v i c e ( s e e Appendix I I I ) f u l l y d e s c r i b e s a l l t h e r i g h t , t i t l e and
i n t e r e s t AMOCO has i n the w h a r f , and i n i t s r i g h t t o l o c a t e i t s p i p e l i n e s
on F e d e r a l p r o p e r t y p a r a l l e l t o and under George Washington Memorial Parkway.
I t i s noted t h a t AMOCO pays t o t h e N a t i o n a l C a p i t a l P a r k S e r v i c e a
r e n t a l o f $50 p e r y e a r f o r t h e use o f t h i s
property.
As t h e p r i n c i p a l u s e r o f v e s s e l s w h i c h r e q u i r e a p p r o x i m a t e l y 89%
o f t h e openings o f movable spans i n b r i d g e s a c r o s s t h i s r e a c h o f the
Potomac R i v e r , t h e Company i s o f t h e o p i n i o n t h a t i t has t h e r i g h t t o
- 1U -
�r e q u i r e an expenditure
o f p u b l i c funds t o t a l l i n g a p p r o x i m a t e l y
$5,000,000,
f o r the c o n s t r u c t i o n o f movable spans i n f u t u r e highway b r i d g e s a c r o s s t h e
Potomac, and an e x p e n d i t u r e
o f $112,000 a n n u a l l y t o m a i n t a i n and o p e r a t e
the drawspans on such b r i d g e s and o t h e r e x i s t i n g b r i d g e s .
These c o s t s do
not i n c l u d e t h e added c o s t t o m o t o r i s t s r e s u l t i n g i n v e h i c u l a r d e l a y s
during
"ohe opening o f each b r i d g e , f o r accomodation o f any one v e s s e l as i t moves
upstream o r downstream.
The amount o f such a d d i t i o n a l v e h i c u l a r c o s t would
depend upon t h e number o f openings during t h a t y e a r .
F o r e s t i m a t i n g pur-
p o s e s , t h i s added v e h i c u l a r c o s t may v a r y from $10,000 a n n u a l l y t o $l|0,000
f o r t h e f o u r highway b r i d g e s .
Comments Concerning AMOCO V i e w s .
A l l o f the f o r e g o i n g c o s t s c a n be
saved t h e g e n e r a l p u b l i c through c o n s t r u c t i o n o f f i x e d highway b r i d g e s i n
c o n f o r m i t y w i t h t h e n a v i g a t i o n a l c l e a r a n c e s a s a l r e a d y approved b y t h e
S e c r e t a r y o f t h e Army f o r t h e proposed C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue B r i d g e .
With
r e s p e c t t o AMOCO v i e w s , as s t a t e d i n i t s l e t t e r and summarized above, the
following observations
1.
a r e made:
The e n t i r e waterway r o u t e from Yorktown, V i r g i n i a , t o R o s s l y n ,
9
V i r g i n i a , l i e s w i t h i n t h e i n l a n d w a t e r s o f the U n i t e d S t a t e s .
2.
The s t a t u t o r y r u l e s o f the road w i t h r e s p e c t t o running
on v e s s e l s n a v i g a t i n g the i n l a n d w a t e r s p e r m i t
lights
a substantially
l o w e r h e i g h t o f t h e f o r w a r d and a f t w h i t e l i g h t s than a r e
10
r e q u i r e d under the i n t e r n a t i o n a l r u l e s .
3.
The s e l f - p r o p e l l e d t a n k e r s w h i c h have been c a r r y i n g AMOCO p r o d u c t s
are l i c e n s e d b y t h e U. S. Coast Guard t o o p e r a t e c o a s t w i s e , where
the i n t e r n a t i o n a l r u l e s w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e running l i g h t s
Under these c i r c u m s t a n c e s ,
apply.
the above-mentioned 70 f o o t v e r t i c a l
c l e a r a n c e requirement w h i c h AMOCO and Spentonbush contend i s
- 15 -
�needed t o accomodate t h e i r v e s s e l s , may w e l l be the r e q u i r e d
height of the a f t l i g h t f o r v e s s e l s operating i n c o a s t a l w a t e r s .
However, such a v e r t i c a l c l e a r a n c e i s not r e q u i r e d f o r r u n n i n g
l i g h t s on the i d e n t i c a l v e s s e l when i t o p e r a t e s on the i n l a n d
waters.
A l s o , a s demonstrated by c o l l a p s i b l e masts on v e s s e l s
e l s e w h e r e , i t i s p o s s i b l e to hinge or t e l e s c o p e masts t o p e r m i t
passage o f v e s s e l s under b r i d g e s w h i c h would o t h e r w i s e
movement o f s u c h
restrict
vessels.^
T a b l e 1 shows t h a t d u r i n g c a l e n d a r y e a r 1956,
petroleum p r o d u c t s
tankers hauling
r e q u i r e d ±53 openings o f Highway B r i d g e .
These openings r e p r e s e n t e d r o u n d - t r i p movements.
Through
i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f the name, c a p a c i t y , and f r e q u e n c y o f openings
r e q u i r e d b y each o f t h e s e v e s s e l s d u r i n g 1956,
that —
assuming f u l l l o a d s —
i t was
determined
t h e v e s s e l s c a r r i e d between 900,000
b a r r e l s and t o 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 b a r r e l s o f petroleum products
to Rosslyn.
T h i s would i n d i c a t e t h a t a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1 , 2 5 1 , 0 0 0 b a r r e l s o f t h e
2 , 2 5 1 , 0 0 0 b a r r e l s r e p o r t e d b y AMOCO a s having been moved b y
waterway, e i t h e r were t r a n s p o r t e d by tug and barge from Yorktown,
V i r g i n i a , o r by t r u c k - t a n k from B a l t i m o r e , Maryland.
I n this
r e g a r d , o n l y s i x openings o f the Highway B r i d g e were r e q u i r e d
d u r i n g c a l e n d a r y e a r 1956 f o r accomodation of l i g h t tugs
and
o i l barges on t h e i r r e t u r n t r i p from R o s s l y n .
The d a t a r e v e a l e d i n t h e f o r e g o i n g p a r a g r a p h i n d i c a t e t h a t
t h e monetary e f f e c t on AMOCO o f f i x e d b r i d g e s a c r o s s the Potomac
R i v e r above Hains P o i n t , having n a v i g a t i o n a l c l e a r a n c e s i n conf o r m i t y w i t h those a l r e a y approved b y t h e S e c r e t a r y o f the Army
- 16 -
�f o r the proposed C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue B r i d g e , would be s u b s t a n t i a l l y l e s s t h a n $700,000 t o $750,000 a n n u a l l y , a s c l a i m e d by
the company.
Government and
There a l s o i s t h e q u e s t i o n o f h a v i n g the F e d e r a l
the D i s t r i c t o f Columbia u n d e r t a k e a c a p i t a l
i n v e s t m e n t o f about $ 5 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 and c o n t i n u i n g a n n u a l c o s t s o f
$ 1 1 2 , 0 0 0 , i n the form of p r o v i d i n g u n o b s t r u c t e d
navigational
c l e a r a n c e s i n p u b l i c l y owned highway b r i d g e s , t o p r o t e c t a
p r i v a t e i n v e s t m e n t of something more t h a n $ 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 w h i c h ,
a c c o r d i n g t o AMOCO, might d e p r e c i a t e t o about $1*00,000 i f the
s u b s t a n t i a l l y greater p u b l i c expenditures
a r e not made.
I f AMOCO should f i n d t h a t s u i t a b l e v e s s e l s a r e not c u r r e n t l y
a v a i l a b l e to move i t s p r o d u c t s by waterway from l o r k t o w n t o
Rosslyn,-,
a
s
a
c o n t i n u i n g o p e r a t i o n , the company can
give
f u r t h e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n t o i n s t a l l a t i o n of two t e n - i n c h p i p e
l i n e s , and pumping s t a t i o n s , between i t s p l a n t a t R o s s l y n
t h e Potomac R i v e r a t Four M i l e Run,
National A i r p o r t ,
and
j u s t below the Washington
l r e l i m i n a r y e s t i m a t e s i n d i c a t e t h a t such a n
i n s t a l l a t i o n would c o s t between $ 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 and
$1,500,000
i n c l u d i n g the c o s t o f f o u r pumping s t a t i o n s , two f o r each l i n e
Maintenance and o p e r a t i o n o f the pumping s t a t i o n s would c o s t
about $20,000 a n n u a l l y .
on F e d e r a l
The e n t i r e p i p e l i n e could be l o c a t e d
property.
As a p o s s i b l e a l t e r n a t i v e t o the above-mentioned p i p e l i n e ,
AMOCO o r i t s c o n t r a c t c a r r i e r may w i s h t o e x p l o r e f u r t h e r the
d e s i g n and c o n s t r u c t i o n o f one or more s e l f - p r o p e l l e d o i l
t a n k e r s w h i c h can be accommodated under t h e f i x e d b r i d g e s
- 17 -
bein
�contemplated h e r e .
A c c o r d i n g t o AMOCO and Spentonbush, such a
t a n k e r , w i t h a c a p a c i t y o f about l U , 5 0 0 b a r r e l s , would c o s t
between $1,800,000 and $ 2 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 .
T h i s c o s t e s t i m a t e h a s been
confirmed b y t h e U. S. M a r i t i m e A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , Department o f
Commerce, a s b e i n g r e a s o n a b l e , w h i c h a l s o p o i n t e d out t h a t
s p e c i a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n would have t o be g i v e n t o t h e d e s i g n and
c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a v e s s e l t o s e r v e t h i s need.
t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e , i t i s recognized
With r e s p e c t t o
that there i s a substantial
d i f f e r e n c e i n c a p i t a l i n v e s t m e n t between the c o s t o f such s p e c i a l l y
designed t a n k e r s and the c o s t o f t h e p i p e l i n e mentioned above.
A l s o , u s e o f such t a n k e r s might n e c e s s i t a t e f u r t h e r e x p a n s i o n o f
s t o r a g e f a c i l i t i e s a t t h e AMOCO p l a n t i n R o s s l y n beyond t h e
a d d i t i o n a l s t o r a g e f a c i l i t i e s the company i s c u r r e n t l y h o l d i n g
i n abeyance.
These and r e l a t e d problems, and t h e c o s t s i n v o l v e d ,
would r e q u i r e f u r t h e r s t u d y t o determine more c l e a r l y whether
there i s a r e a l merit to t h i s
alternative.
TUNNEL VERSUS BRIDGE AT CONSTITUTION AVENUE
T h i s p a r t o f t h e r e p o r t responds t o a r e q u e s t from t h e committee
t o r e p o r t upon t h e a l t e r n a t i v e o f a t u n n e l a t t h e same g e n e r a l s i t e o f a
b r i d g e i n t h e v i c i n i t y o f C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue.
The D i s t r i c t o f Columbia
and t h e Bureau o f P u b l i c Roads concur i n t h e e s t i m a t e s o f $2l|, 500,000 f o r
a s i x - l a n e b r i d g e and i t s approaches, and o f $ 5 2 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 f o r a s i x - l a n e
t u n n e l and i t s approaches a s r e p o r t e d i n A p r i l 7 , 1955 b y a S p e c i a l
- 18 -
�Committee o f the N a t i o n a l C a p i t a l P l a n n i n g Commission.
The approaches
i n c l u d e d i n t h i s e s t i m a t e cover t h e same areas and s e r v i c e a s those i n c l u d e d
i n t h e approved s i x - l a n e b r i d g e p l a n and e s t i m a t e .
The d i f f e r e n c e between
the approaches o f t h e s e types o f f a c i l i t i e s a r e p r i m a r i l y i n t h e
o f t h e approaches.
details
Because o f s u s t a i n e d steep g r a d i e n t s i n the t u n n e l
d e s i g n , t h e l a t t e r w i l l n o t accommodate t r a f f i c
a s a d e q u a t e l y as a b r i d g e .
These two r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s a l s o agree t h a t the c o s t o f m a i n t a i n i n g and o p e r a t i n g
a s i x - l a n e t u n n e l i s s u b s t a n t i a l l y g r e a t e r than the c o s t o f m a i n t a i n i n g and
operating a s i x - l a n e bridge.
RIPARIAN RIGHTS AND NAVIGATIONAL RIGHTS
A s t a t e m e n t , i d e n t i f i e d a s Appendix V I , p r e p a r e d by the
General
Counsel o f the Bureau o f P u b l i c Roads, Department o f Commerce, d i s t i n g u i s h e s
between r i p a r i a n r i g h t s o f landowners whose p r o p e r t y abuts a n a v i g a b l e
waterway, a s a compensable p r o p e r t y r i g h t w h i c h may n o t be t a k e n
except
by due p r o c e s s o f l a w , and the p u b l i c r i g h t o f n a v i g a t i o n , w h i c h i s a
noncompensable r i g h t belonging
t o t h e g e n e r a l p u b l i c and w h i c h can be
e x t i n g u i s h e d b y A c t o f Congress.
PHOTOGRAPHS
Photographs showing c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f d i f f e r e n t v e s s e l s , t h e
AMOCO dock a t R o s s l y n , and a s u b s t a n t i a l p o r t i o n o f the Georgetown Harbor
a r e a , a r e i n c l u d e d i n Appendix V I I .
Photograph No. 1 shows t h e Tanker "A. H. Dumont", operated b y
the Spentonbush F u e l T r a n s p o r t S e r v i c e , d i s c h a r g i n g cargo a t t h e AMOCO
dock.
A t t e n t i o n i s i n v i t e d t o t h e h e i g h t o f t h e p i l o t house on t h e
v e s s e l , t h e AMOCO f l o a t i n g dock, w i t h t h e two p i p e l i n e s i n t h e c e n t e r
- 19 -
�foreground,
and a l a r g e p o r t i o n o f t h e Georgetown Harbor a r e a i n t h e
background,.
Photograph No. 2 shows the dumb barge "Hydrade No. 8",
operated
by Spentonbush F u e l T r a n s p o r t S e r v i c e , d i s c h a r g i n g o i l a t the AMOCO dock
a t R o s s l y n , and shows the dock a r e a i n r e l a t i o n t o t h e George Washington
Memorial Parkway on t h e r i g h t , and to Theodore R o o s e v e l t I s l a n d i n t h e
upper background.
Photograph No. 3 shows " P o l i n g B r o s . No. 9", a s e l f - p r o p e l l e d
o i l t a n k e r w h i c h , w i t h i t s h i n g e d p r o j e c t i o n s t h a t e x t e n d above t h e
p i l o t house, c o u l d be n a v i g a t e d under the f i x e d highway b r i d g e
contemplated h e r e .
being
T h i s v e s s e l now o p e r a t e s t o o t h e r t e r m i n a l s i n the
Washington Harbor a r e a .
Photograph No. k shows the s e l f - p r o p e l l e d o i l t a n k e r " F . A.
Verdon", operated b y Spentonbush F u e l T r a n s p o r t S e r v i c e , a t the AMOCO dock.
I t a l s o p o i n t s out the p r o x i m i t y o f the dock t o Key B r i d g e .
- 20 -
�r
��APPENDIX I
1.
By P u b l i c Law 70li, 83rd Congress, Second S e s s i o n , approved
August 30, 1954, the c o n s t r u c t i o n of a b r i d g e i n t h e v i c i n i t y of
C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue was a u t h o r i z e d . I n 1955,
the Commissioners of
the D i s t r i c t of Columbia made a p p l i c a t i o n t o the Corps of E n g i n e e r s
f o r a p p r o v a l of p l a n s f o r t h e new b r i d g e . The p l a n s p r o v i d e d f o r a
f i x e d c h a n n e l span w i t h h o r i z o n t a l c l e a r a n c e of 125 f e e t between
f e n d e r s and v e r t i c a l c l e a r a n c e of 24.6 f e e t a t mean h i g h x^ater.
P u r s u a n t t o P u b l i c N o t i c e No. 1*68, i s s u e d by the Corps of
E n g i n e e r s under date of A p r i l 1 1 , 1955, a p u b l i c h e a r i n g was h e l d by
the D i s t r i c t E n g i n e e r on May 10, 1955 • '-The proposed l o c a t i o n and
c l e a r a n c e s f o r the new b r i d g e were a t t a c h e d t o the n o t i c e . A t t h i s
h e a r i n g , t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f the D i s t r i c t of Columbia p r e s e n t e d
some d a t a showing how t h e b e s t i n t e r e s t s of the g e n e r a l p u b l i c would
be s e r v e d through the s m a l l e r c o n s t r u c t i o n c o s t o f a f i x e d span.
They r e q u e s t e d t h a t t h e waterway i n t e r e s t s be r e q u i r e d t o show on the
r e c o r d of t h e h e a r i n g , an e q u a l or g r e a t e r s a v i n g s t o o f f s e t the c o s t
of a movable span.
A number of companies r e p r e s e n t i n g the n a v i g a t i o n i n t e r e s t s
l a t e r t e s t i f i e d a t the h e a r i n g and submitted f a c t s and c o s t d a t a w h i c h
t h e y c l a i m e d s u b s t a n t i a t e d t h e i r r e q u e s t f o r a movable span.
A f t e r t h e h e a r i n g , t h e Corps of E n g i n e e r s r e v i e w e d and cons i d e r e d a l l the f a c t s w h i c h i^ere brought out a t t h e h e a r i n g and l a t e r
p r e p a r e d a f o r m a l f i n d i n g of f a c t w h i c h concluded t h a t a f i x e d span
b r i d g e w i t h a v e r t i c a l c l e a r a n c e of 2U.6 f e e t above mean h i g h w a t e r ,
would not i n t e r f e r e unreasonably w i t h p r e s e n t or p r o s p e c t i v e n a v i g a t i o n
on t h e waterway. The l o c a t i o n and p l a n s f o r the b r i d g e were approved
by the S e c r e t a r y of the Army on August 2 3 ,
1955.
D u r i n g the 84th Congress, l e g i s l a t i o n was sought t o e f f e c t a
change i n t h e l o c a t i o n of the b r i d g e , so as t o p e r m i t t h e s t r u c t u r e
t o touch R o o s e v e l t I s l a n d . I n c o n g r e s s i o n a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n of t h i s
p r o p o s a l , a q u e s t i o n a s t o the need f o r a movable span i n the b r i d g e
was r a i s e d .
h i s q u e s t i o n was not r e s o l v e d , and t h e p r o p o s a l f a i l e d
of enactment.
i
2.
Funds a l r e a d y have been made a v a i l a b l e f o r t h e d e s i g n of t h i s
r e p l a c e m e n t s t r u c t u r e , and arrangements a r e underway t o undertake t h e
d e s i g n work. I n a d d i t i o n , S . 1 0 U 2 , 8 5 t h Congress, would g r a n t a u t h o r i t y
t o proceed w i t h the c o n s t r u c t i o n .
�APPENDIX I ,
3.
Page 2
The documentary d a t a i n i t i a l l y r e v i e w e d i n c l u d e d :
( a ) The t r a n s p o r t o f a p u b l i c h e a r i n g h e l d by t h e Corps
of E n g i n e e r s , Department of t h e Army, Tuesday, May 10,
1955, c o n c e r n i n g t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e Commissioners
of t h e D i s t r i c t of Columbia f o r a p p r o v a l o f p l a n s o f a
b r i d g e t o be c o n s t r u c t e d over t h e Potomac R i v e r , between
t h e f o o t o f C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue and t h e n o r t h e r n end of
Columbia I s l a n d .
( b ) The f i n d i n g s o f f a c t , p r e p a r e d by t h e Corps o f E n g i n e e r s ,
Department o f t h e Army, w h i c h accompanied t h e i n s t r u m e n t
of a p p r o v a l o f p l a n s o f t h e b r i d g e w i t h a v e r t i c a l
c l e a r a n c e of 21*.6 f e e t above mean h i g h w a t e r and a
h o r i z o n t a l c l e a r a n c e o f 125 f e e t .
( c ) Subsequent l e t t e r s w r i t t e n t o the D i s t r i c t E n g i n e e r ,
Corps o f E n g i n e e r s , one b e i n g from t h e Smoot Sand and
G r a v e l C o r p o r a t i o n , d a t e d October 15, 1956, and t h e
o t h e r b e i n g from t h e American O i l Company, d a t e d
October 16,
1956.
( d ) The r e c o r d s o f t h e D i s t r i c t o f Columbia c o n c e r n i n g t h e
f r e q u e n c y and number o f openings o f Highway B r i d g e f o r
accommodation o f v e s s e l s and an i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f t h e
v e s s e l s w h i c h r e q u i r e s u c h openings.
( e ) The a n n u a l tonnages of waterway t r a f f i c moving on t h i s
r e a c h o f t h e Potomac R i v e r i n r e c e n t y e a r s , based upon
a n n u a l r e p o r t s o f t h e Corps o f E n g i n e e r s .
( f ) Photographs o f v e s s e l s n a v i g a t i n g t h i s r e g i o n o f t h e
Potomac R i v e r , w i t h s p e c i a l r e f e r e n c e t o i d e n t i f y i n g
the v e s s e l s and t h e p r o j e c t i o n s on the v e s s e l s w h i c h
r e q u i r e openings o f t h e s e b r i d g e s , made a v a i l a b l e b y
the Corps o f E n g i n e e r s .
4.
The f o l l o w i n g a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n and o b t a i n e d from the
sources i n d i c a t e d .
( a ) A p e r m i t f o r p i p e l i n e s under George Washington Memorial
Parkway, dated June 8, 1943, was i s s u e d by t h e D e p a r t ment o f t h e I n t e r i o r t o t h e American O i l Company^
f u r n i s h e d by t h e N a t i o n a l P a r k S e r v i c e .
�APPENDIX I , Page 3
( b ) An a n a l y s i s of c o u r t d e c i s i o n s w h i c h i d e n t i f y the r i g h t s
o f p r o p e r t y owners whose i n t e r e s t s might be a f f e c t e d
by h a v i n g b r i d g e c l e a r a n c e s below such p r o p e r t i e s e s t a b l i s h e d below c l e a r a n c e s w h i c h e x i s t e d t h e r e t o f o r e ,
f u r n i s h e d by t h e Bureau of P u b l i c Roads.
( c ) I n f o r m a t i o n from t h e United S t a t e s Coast Guard, Department o f the T r e a s u r y , on the r u l e s of the r o a d w h i c h govern
the h e i g h t a t w h i c h l i g h t s on v e s s e l s must be e s t a b l i s h e d .
( d ) I n f o r m a t i o n from t h e Corps of E n g i n e e r s as to whether
t h e r e a r e a v a i l a b l e o t h e r t y p e s of v e s s e l s h a u l i n g
petroleum products w h i c h might be used t o s e r v e the needs
of the American O i l Company.
( e ) I n t e r v i e w s by the Task F o r c e w i t h r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f the
Americai O i l Company, and Spentonbush F u e l T r a n s p o r t
S e r v i c e , the waterway c o n t r a c t c a r r i e r of AMOCO petroleum
products.
( f ) I n f o r m a t i o n on t a n k e r c o s t s f u r n i s h e d by the
A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , Department of Commerce.
5.
A copy of t h e p e r m i t i s e n c l o s e d as Appendix I I I .
6.
A copy o f the l e t t e r , w i t h i t s a t t a c h m e n t s ,
Appendix I V .
7.
Maritime
i s enclosed as
A copy of the l e t t e r i s e n c l o s e d a s Appendix V.
8.
The e s t i m a t e d c o n s t r u c t i o n c o s t of $ 5 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 f o r movable spans
i n t h r e e highway b r i d g e s was a r r i v e d a t by a d j u s t i n g e s t i m a t e s of such
c o s t s , made i n A p r i l 1955* to t h e Bureau of P u b l i c Roads S t r u c t u r a l
C o n s t r u c t i o n C o s t I n d e x f o r the l a s t q u a r t e r of c a l e n d a r y e a r
1956.
A m o r t i z e d over a p e r i o d of a 70-year u s e f u l l i f e of the b r i d g e s a t
3s p e r c e n t (Inwood c o e f f i c i e n t of 2 6 . 0 0 3 ) t h i s 15,000,000 would r e q u i r e
an e x p e n d i t u r e of $192,000 a n n u a l l y .
The e s t i m a t e d c o s t of $112,000 a n n u a l l y f o r maintenance and
o p e r a t i o n o f the movable spans i n such b r i d g e s i s based upon $76,000
as the e s t i m a t e f o r D i s t r i c t of Columbia b r i d g e s and $ 3 6 , 0 0 0 f o r the
A r l i n g t o n Memorial B r i d g e w h i c h i s m a i n t a i n e d by the N a t i o n a l P a r k
S e r v i c e . On t h e b a s i s of the f o r e g o i n g f i g u r e s , the t o t a l a n n u a l c o s t
t o the p u b l i c e x c l u s i v e of the c o s t of v e h i c u l a r d e l a y s , would be
$304,000.
�APPENDIX 1 , Page h
9.
A c c o r d i n g t o t h e U. S. Coast Guard, tho boundary l i n e o f the
i n l a n d w a t e r s o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s a t t h e e n t r a n c e o f Chesapeake B a y
i s a l i n e drawn from Cape Henry L i g h t h o u s e t o Cape Henry J u n c t i o n
L i g h t e d W h i s t l e Buoy; thence t o Cape C h a r l e s L i g h t h o u s e . (33CPR82.30).
The w a t e r s i n s i d e o f t h i s l i n e a r e i n l a n d w a t e r s .
10.
A c c o r d i n g t o t h e U. S. Coast Guard, I n t e r n a t i o n a l R u l e s 2 , 1 0 ,
and 2 9 , i n summarized form, r e q u i r e s e p a r a t e r e d and green s i d e l i g h t s ;
a s e p a r a t e s t e r n l i g h t and two w h i t e l i g h t s a l o n g t h e c e n t e r l i n e o f t h e
v e s s e l . The f i r s t o f t h e s e t w o w h i t e l i g h t s , w h i c h must be l o c a t e d
f o r w a r d o f t h e beam, must be a t l e a s t twenty f e e t above t h e h u l l
( u s u a l l y i d e n t i f i e d a s t h e main d e c k ) . I f t h e beam i s more t h a n twenty
f e e t , t h e h e i g h t o f the f o r w a r d w h i t e l i g h t must be a t l e a s t e q u a l t o
t h e beam i n a l l c a s e s where t h e beam does n o t exceed f o r t y f e e t . Where
the beam does exceed f o r t y f e e t , the minimum h e i g h t o f t h e f o r w a r d
l i g h t i s hO f e e t above t h e h u l l . The a f t l i g h t must be back o f t h e
f o r w a r d l i g h t , a t l e a s t 15 f e e t h i g h e r , and a t l e a s t t h r e e times the
d i f f e r e n c e i n height behind the forward l i g h t .
Under A r t i c l e s 2 , 1 0 , and 29 o f t h e I n l a n d R u l e s , s i m i l a r l i g h t i n g ( s i d e l i g h t s and two w h i t e l i g h t s ) i s r e q u i r e d . However, t h e r e i s
an a p p r e c i a b l e d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e r e q u i r e d h e i g h t and s e p a r a t i o n o f t h e
w h i t e l i g h t s . I n t h i s r e g a r d , t h e r e i s no p r e s c r i b e d h e i g h t f o r t h e
f o r w a r d w h i t e l i g h t o t h e r t h a n a requirement t h a t i t must be c l e a r l y
v i s i b l e f o r a minimum d i s t a n c e o f f i v e m i l e s . The a f t e r w h i t e l i g h t
must be back o f t h e f o r w a r d w h i t e l i g h t and a t l e a s t 15 f e e t h i g h e r , b u t
no minimum h o r i z o n t a l s e t b a c k i s r e q u i r e d o t h e r t h a n t h a t t h e s e p a r a t i o n must be s u f f i c i e n t t o c r e a t e a range under t h e r u l e s .
Even though t h e i n l a n d r u l e s do n o t s p e l l o u t t h e minimum
h e i g h t o f t h e f o r w a r d w h i t e l i g h t , t h e r u l e s s t a t e elsewhere t h a t t h e
p o s i t i o n o f t h e l i g h t s should n o t i n t e r f e r e w i t h proper l o o k o u t o r
t h e o r d i n a r y p r a c t i c e o f seamen. Under t h i s g e n e r a l r u l e , t h e f o r w a r d
l i g h t must be above the l i n e o f v i s i o n which i s c o n t r o l l e d b y t h e
s t r u c t u r e o f the v e s s e l , p a r t i c u l a r l y t h e p i l o t house and i t s l o c a t i o n
and h e i g h t w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e bow. T h e r e f o r e , p r a c t i c a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s
r e q u i r e t h e f o r w a r d l i g h t t o be above t h e l i n e o f v i s i o n from t h e p i l o t
house. The a f t l i g h t must be 1$ f e e t h i g h e r t h a n t h e f o r w a r d l i g h t .
11.
The f e a s i b i l i t y o f h i n g i n g or t e l e s c o p i n g masts and other
p r o j e c t i o n s i s d i s c u s s e d i n t h e F e b r u a r y 1955 r e p o r t o f t h e Department
of Commerce, e n t i t l e d : N a v i g a t i o n a l C l e a r a n c e Requirements f o r Highway
and R a i l r o a d B r i d g e s , pp. 49-82. Other s o u r c e s o f s i m i l a r d a t a a l s o
are l i s t e d t h e r e i n .
���FINDINGS OF FACT
A p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e Commissioners, D i e t r i o t o f Columbia
f o r a p p r o v a l o f p l a n s o f a f i x e d b r i d g e to be oonstruoted
a o r o s s t h e Potomao R i v e r a t t h e f o o t o f C o n s t i t u t i o n
Avenue, N, W,, Washington, D. C.
1.
Law a u t h o r ! t i n g o o n s t r u o t i o n t
JO August 195L.
An Aot o f Congress approved
2. Proposed s t r u o t u r e : The p l a n s p r o v i d e f o r a f i x e d ohannel span,
l o c a t e d over t h e F e d e r a l p r o j e o t o h a n n e l , w i t h h o r i z o n t a l c l e a r a n c e of 125
f e e t between f e n d e r s and v e r t i o a l c l e a r a n c e s o f 27.5 f e e t a t mean low w a t e r
and 2i*.6 f e e t a t mean h i g h w a t e r f o r a w i d t h o f 80 f e e t *
3.
F e d e r a l p r o j e o t 1 The F e d e r a l P r o j e o t f o r t h i s s e o t i o n o f
Washington harbor whioh i n c l u d e s t h e Potomao R i v e r ( V i r g i n i a Channel)
between Giesboro P o i n t and Key B r i d g e p r o v i d e s f o r a ohannel 2b, f e e t
deep and 4OO f e e t w i d e .
4. S t a t u s o f F e d e r a l p r o j e o t 1
Because o f ohanged c o n d i t i o n s s i n c e
adoption o f t h e F e d e r a l P r o j e c t f o r Washington H a r b o r i n 1935
ohannel
has been m a i n t a i n e d t o a depth o f 20 f e e t f o r a w i d t h o f 200 f e e t .
These
dimensions have been s a t i s f a c t o r y f o r t h e type o f v e s s e l s u s i n g the V i r g i n i a
Channel. Commercial w a t e r f r o n t a c t i v i t i e s upstream from t h e s i t e o f t h e
proposed b r i d g e have remained s t a b l e s i n c e I9I4I4 and t h e r e h a s been no
i n d i c a t i o n t h a t g r e a t e r ohannel dimensions w i l l to r e q u i r e d f o r f u t u r e
activities.
Should i t develop t h a t dredging i s r e q u i r e d upstream from
t h e s i t e o f t h e proposed b r i d g e , i t i s c o n s i d e r e d t h a t s m a l l equipment
oould be u t i l i z e d a t moderate a d d i t i o n a l 0 0 s t .
t
5.
n
e
T r i b u t a r y Areat
(a)
The head o f oommeroial n a v i g a t i o n as w e l l a s t h e upstream
l i m i t o f t h e a u t h o r i z e d ohannel p r o j e o t i s a t Key B r i d g e , Georgetown,
D. C., 1.7 m i l e s upstream o f t h e b r i d g e under c o n s i d e r a t i o n . Both
banks o f t h e V i r g i n i a Channel f o r a d i s t a n c e o f 5 m i l e s downstream
o f t h e b r i d g e s i t e a r e F e d e r a l l y owned and a r e d e s i g n a t e d a s p a r k
a r e a s o r a r e o c c u p i e d by Government e s t a b l i s h m e n t s .
The F e d e r a l P a r k
a r e a e x t e n d s upstream from t h e b r i d g e s i t e on t h e V i r g i n i a s h o r e , a
d i s t a n c e o f 2 m i l e s , and on t h e D i s t r i o t o f Columbia s h o r e , a d i s t a n c e
o f o n e - h a l f m i l e where i t j o i n s t h e oommeroial w a t e r f r o n t o f Georgetown.
Only 3500 l i n e a l f e e t o f p r o p e r t y along t h e D i s t r i o t o f Columbia shore
a r e p r i v a t e l y owned. T h i s a r e a h a s been a v a i l a b l e f o r i n d u s t r i a l
improvement and use f o r many y e a r s b u t t h e r e have been no new developments
s i n o e l<?4l. I n p a s t y e a r s t e r m i n a l s on t h e one m i l e o f w a t e r f r o n t a t
Georgetown h a n d l e d t h e b u l k o f w a t e r b o r n e oommeroe f o r t h e Washington a r e a .
�The only waterfront a c t i v i t y i n Georgetown today i s the Smoot Sand and
Gravel plent whioh processes and d i s t r i b u t e s m a t e r i a l reoeived from
downstream r i v e r d e p o s i t s .
(b) The only other oommeroial waterfront a c t i v i t y upstream
of the bridge s i t e i s a t the American O i l Company terminal a t Rosslyn,
V i r g i n i a immediately downstream o f Key Bridge. The terminal c o n s i s t s of a
f l o a t i n g s t e e l barge abreast of dolphins and a f l e x i b l e pipe l i n e coupling
whioh connects to two 8-inch underground pipe l i n e s whioh discharge i n t o
storage tanks on company property i n Rosslyn, V i r g i n i a , 1800 f e e t d i s t a r t
from the f l o a t i n g dook. The terminal and pipe l i n e s are on Federal park
property, the use of whioh was authorized by the National Park Servioe
i n a revooable permit dated 8 June 19u3«
(o) R a i l oonnections serve the f r e i g h t requirements of the
Georgetown area from the main l i n e of the B it 0 R a i l r o a d , and the
Rosslyn area from the Pennsylvania R a i l r o a d . While water to r a i l
t r a n s f e r f a o i l i t i e s are a v a i l a b l e a t Georgetown there i s no record of
suoh t r a n s f e r s having been made a t e i t h e r l o c a t i o n .
6.
Nature and Extent of Present Navigationi
(a) Commeroet For the 10 year period from 1945 through 195^.
commerce passing the bridge s i t e has averaged 969*178 tons annually.
The minimum, 722, 661 tons was reported i n 1945. the maximum, 1,123,454
was i n I 9 4 8 . P r e l i m i n a r y estimates i n d i c a t e that commeroe i n 1954
&
1,049»225 tons of whioh 815,923 or 70 peroent was sand and g r a v e l , and
233»302 tons or 22 percent was petroleum produots as f o l l o w s !
w
Tons
Motor F u e l and Gasoline
Gas, O n , D i s t i l l a t e Fuel O i l
Total Petroleum
Sand, Gravel
Gallons
197.678
35.621;
1,426,248
217,465
59.902,420
9.134,358
233.302
1.643,733
69,036,778
1.643.733
69,036.778
815.923
1,049,225*
*
Bbls.(42 Gals)
8
P r e l i m i n a r y - 5/6/55
(b) VeBael T r a f f i o
The Smoot Sand and Gravel Corporation
operates s i x tug boats and a large number of barges, between Georgetown
and sand and g r a v e l deposits located i n the r i v e r i n the v i o i n i t y of
A l e x a n d r i a . Stacks and masts on tugs havo been hinged or designed to
pass under a height of I 7 . 0 f e e t . During the Calendar year 1954,
tugs
and barges made 977 t r i p s to the Georgetown p l a n t . S i x t r i p s were made
by l i g h t e r s .
�The American O i l Company t e r m i n a l i n R o s s l y n r e c e i v e s shipments
o f petroleum p r o d u c t s , w h i o h up t o 25 March 1955 were d e l i v e r e d from
N o r f o l k , V i r g i n i a i n s e l f - p r o p e l l e d t a n k e r s under c o n t r a c t w i t h t h e
Spentonbush F u e l T r a n s p o r t S e r v i c e . Subsequent t o March 1955 d e l i v e r i e s
have been made from N o r f o l k by low house tugs and b a r g e s , w i t h loaded
d r a f t s of.12 f e e t and maximum h e i g h t s o f 15 f e e t above t h e w a t e r l i n e .
Mast h e i g h t s o f t a n k e r s used rano-e from 1*0 t o 63 f e e t , and p i l o t houses
and s t a c k s on t h e same v e s s e l s range from 25 t o 1*0 f e e t .
One ohannel buoy has been e s t a b l i s h e d by t h e C o a s t Guard upstream
o f t h e proposed b r i d g e s i t e whioh r e q u i r e s a t e n d e r type v e s s e l w i t h h e i g h t
o f 1*2 f e e t f o r maintenance.
The Coast Guard has i n d i o a t e d t h a t t h i s buoy
can be r e p l a c e d w i t h a type t h a t can be s e r v i c e d w i t h a v e s s e l capable
o f p a s s i n g under t h e proposed b r i d g e .
The ^ i e t r i c t o f Columbia f i r e b o a t i s r e q u i r e d f o r w a t e r f r o n t
alarms i n t h e Georgetown a r e a a s w e l l as i n o t h e r p a r t s o f Washington
Harbor and f o r r e s c u e and s a l v a g e o f s t r a n d e d persons and v e s s e l s a d r i f t .
The f i r e b o a t i s i n need o f e x t e n s i v e r e p a i r s and c o n s i d e r a t i o n i s b e i n g
given t o a replacement whioh would pass under t h e proposed b r i d g e .
A p p r o x i m a t e l y 2500 r e c r e a t i o n a l o r a f t o f a l l t y p e s a r e r e g i s t e r e d
w i t h t h e Harbormaster,
Boating water f o r the l a r g e r r e c r e a t i o n a l o r a f t
i s l i m i t e d to a p o i n t about 2 m i l e s upstream o f t h e b r i d g e s i t e , above
w h i c h n a r r o w i n g c h a n n e l s , s w i f t c u r r e n t s and submerged rooks make b o a t i n g
hazardous.
Of t h e 25CO r e c r e a t i o n a l o r a f t , a p p r o x i m a t e l y one p e r c e n t
o f t h e i n b o a r d b o a t s have a h e i g h t g r e a t e r t h a n 25 f e e t . S a i l b o a t s use
w a t e r s downstream from t h e b r i d g e . Raoe courses f o r t h e P r e s i d e n t ' s
Cup R e g a t t a , C o l l e g i a t e s h e l l r a c e s and o t h e r a q u a t l o e v e n t s a r e l o c a t e d
i n an a r e a a p p r o x i m a t e l y 2 m i l e s below t h e proposed s i t e o f t h e b r i d g e .
The b r i d -e would t h e r e f o r e n o t o f f e r an unreasonable' o b s t r u c t i o n t o
reoreational oraft,
7.
Views o f I n t e r e s t e d Parties»
The Smoot Sand and G r a v e l C o r p o r a t i o n h a s t e s t i f i e d t h a t a r i v e r
stage o f 20 f e e t a t H a r p e r s F e r r y , W©Bt V i r g i n i a r e s u l t s i n a d o w n r i v e r
s t a g e whioh tops t h e bulkhead o f t h e f i r m ' s p l a n t a t Georgetown, a t
w h i c h time d e l i v e r i e s o f sand and g r a v e l a r e suspended. The e q u i v a l e n t
s t a g e a t t h e s i t e o f t h e proposed b r i d g e i s a p p r o x i m a t e l y 7 f e e t above
mean low w a t e r . The maximum h e i g h t o f t u g s owned by t h e Smoot Company
i s 17.0 f e e t . Assuming a s a f e t y f a o t o r o f two f e e t between t h e h i g h
p o i n t o f v e s s e l and underolearanoe of t h e b r i d g e f o r s a f e passage, a
f i x e d b r i d g e w i t h a minimum v e r t i c a l o l e a r a n o e o f 26.0 f e e t above
mean low w a t e r i n t h e ohannel span would n o t i n t e r f e r e w i t h t u g s and
barges now d e l i v e r i n g sand and g r a v e l t o t h e Georgetown p l a n t o f t h e
Smoot Sand and G r a v e l C o r p o r a t i o n . Two l i g h t e r s whioh t h i s f i r m b r i n g s
t o t h e Georgetown p l a n t on oooasions f o r s l i p dredging and dock r e p a i r s
3
�r e q u i r e a o l e e r h e i g h t o f 1*3 f e e t and 54 f e e t r e s p e c t i v e l y . Use made
o f t h i s equipment i s s i m i l a r t o c o n s t r u c t i o n a c t i v i t i e s performed a t
other l o c a t i o n s by l a n d based equipment mounted on barges o r p l a t f o r m s
or operated from r i v e r banks n o t a c c e s s i b l e t o heavy l i g h t e r s .
Approval
o f a f i x e d b r i d g e w i t h an underolearance o f l e s s than 1*3 f e e t above mean
high w a t e r , w h i l e r e s u l t i n g i n some inoonvenienoe i n t h i s r e s p e c t , would
not p r e c l u d e t h e performance o f suoh maintenance by l a n d based equipment
a v a i l a b l e i n the area.
The Amerioan O i l Company, whose s t o r a g e f a o i l i t i e s f o r g a s o l i n e
and h e a t i n g o i l s l o o a t e d a t R o s s l y n , V i r g i n i a , s e r v e s t h e m e t r o p o l i t a n
a r e a o f Washington, has s t a t e d t h a t t h e proposed b r i d g e would p r e c l u d e
t h e use o f s e l f - p r o p e l l e d t a n k e r s f o r d e l i v e r y o f f u e l t o t h e s e f a c i l i t i e s .
The mast h e i g h t s o f t h e s e t a n k e r s have r e p o r t e d h e i g h t s o f 1*0 t o 63 f e e t
above t h e water l i n e . P i l o t houses and s t a c k s on t h e same v e s s e l s range
from 25 t o I|0 f e e t . O p e r a t i n g o f f i c i a l s have i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e v e s s e l s
have been c o n s t r u c t e d f o r c o a s t w i s e t r a f f i c and t h a t t h e h i g h p o i n t s a r e
p a r t s o f permanent s t r u c t u r e s whioh can n o t be c u t down o r removed. I n
a d d i t i o n t o t h e use o f s e l f - p r o p e l l e d t a n k e r s , t h e American O i l Company
uses t u g s and barges f o r d e l i v e r y o f f u e l t o t h e i r f a o i l i t i e s a t R o s s l y n ,
V i r g i n i a . Company o f f i o i a l s have s t a t e d t h a t d e l i v e r i e s must be made by
s e l f - p r o p e l l e d t a n k e r s under adverse weather c o n d i t i o n s , assumed t o be
20 - 25 peroent o f t h e t i m e . C o n d i t i o n s under whioh tugs and barges oan n o t
be used have been desoribed by American O i l Company r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s as
i n c l u d i n g h i g h winds whioh, i n t h e open w a t e r s o f Chesapeake Bay and t h e
lower Potomao, a r e hazardous t o tho o p e r a t i o n o f low f r e e b o a r d barges and
t u g s j f o g r e q u i r i n g r a d a r equipment n o t p r a c t i c a l f o r use on s m a l l t u g s j
and i c e c o n d i t i o n s . Low tugs and barges whioh oan be used f o r about 75 ~
80 peroent o f t h e time have a maximum f i x e d h e i g h t o f 15 f e e t above t h e
w a t e r l i n e . The r i v e r stage above w h i c h tugs and barges oould n o t o p e r a t e ,
i s e s t i m a t e d t o be 7 f e e t above mean low w a t e r . Assuming a s a f e t y f a o t o r
o f two f e e t between t h e h i g h p o i n t o f v e s s e l and underolearanoe o f t h e
b r i d g e f o r s a f e passage, a f i x e d b r i d g e w i t h a minimum v e r t i c a l olearanoe *
o f 21* f e e t above mean low w a t e r i n t h e ohannel span would n o t i n t e r f e r e
w i t h t u g and barge o p e r a t i o n s ,
8,
Analysis of Costsi
D i s t r i c t o f Columbia o f f i o i a l s have i n d i o a t e d t h a t a drawspan
o f double l e a f basoule type oould be p r o v i d e d i n t h e proposed b r i d g e w i t h
a stone faoe a t an a d d i t i o n a l o o s t o f $1,900,000 o r $73,000 a n n u a l l y
amortized over 70 y e a r s a t *k p e r o e n t . The oost i s $400,000 l e s s f o r a
s t e e l s t r u c t u r e w i t h t h e same t y p e drawspan.
T h i s d l f f e r e n o e i n oost
i s n o t c o n s i d e r e d a j u s t i f i a b l e oharge t o t h e needs o f n a v i g a t i o n .
T h e r e f o r e , t h e t o t a l i n o r e a s e d a n n u a l oost o f p r o v i d i n g f o r t h e needs
of n a v i g a t i o n i s as f o l l o w s !
4
�Annual Cost
Added oost of movable span (11.500.000 amortized
e
over 70 years at ^ % )
Operation
Utilities
Maintenance
| 1+6,000
•3h,600
1.400
20,000
56,000
Total
#102,000
The American O i l Company has i n d i c a t e d that should a f i x e d
bridge be approved w i t h i n s u f f i c i e n t clearances f o r passage of the
tankers, t h e i r a d d i t i o n a l annual t r a n s p o r t a t i o n oost would be as followst
Annual Cost
Use of tugs and barges i n l i e u of tankers
(60% of the time;
Supplemental t r u c k i n g (20% of the time
from C u r t i s Bay, Baltimore, Maryland
to Rosslyn, Va.)
C a p i t a l investment ($50,000 for necessary
automotive equipment)
Total
4 1+0,000
55»ooo
5,000
•100,000
Therefore, the t o t a l annual oost of a movable span i s approximately equal
to the annual oost to navigation i n t e r e s t s should a low l e v e l f i x e d bridge
be c o n s t r u c t e d .
9. Conolusionsi Based on the following f i n d i n g s , i t i s conoluded
t h a t a f i x e d bridge with a v o r t i o a l clearance of 27.5 feet above mean
low water w i l l not i n t e r f e r e unreasonably with present or prospective
navigation on the waterway!
( a ) Commeroial waterfront a o t i v i t i e s upstream from the proposed
s i t e of the bridge have remained s t a t i o since 1914;*
(b) Extensive areas along the waterway upstream and downstream
from the proposed s i t e of the bridge are F e d e r a l l y owned and are designated
park areas or occupied by Government establishments.
(o) Development of the waterway upstream from the proposed s i t e
of the bridge does not appear to be l i k e l y .
(d) Maintenance of the Smoot Sand and Gravel Corporation f a o i l i t i e s
oan be performed by land based equipment.
�( e ) The u n l o a d i n g f a o i l i t i e s o f t h e American O i l Company a f e
l o c a t e d on F e d e r a l l y owned p a r k a r e a s under t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f a r e v o c a b l e
p e r m i t i s s u e d by t h e N a t i o n a l P a r k S e r v i o e .
( f ) The a d d i t i o n a l annual oost t o t h e American O i l Company i n
p e r f o r m i n g a l t e r n a t i v e o p e r a t i o n s r e s u l t i n g from a f i x e d bridge i s n o t
c o n s i d e r e d unreasonable i n t h e l i g h t o f t h e p u b l i o i n t e r e s t s i n v o l v e d .
6
�r
��PER-ilT F O R P I P E L I I ' L i S
George Washington i i e m o r i a l Parkway
WHEREAS, t h e N a t i o n a l C a p i t a l P a r k and P l a n n i n g Commission a c t i n g f o r
and i n b e h a l f of t h e United S t a t e s of A m e r i c a has a c q u i r e d t h e f e e t i t l e t o
c e r t a i n l a n d s i n A r l i n g t o n County, V i r g i n i a , c o m p r i s i n g an i r r e g u l a r
strip
l y i n g along t h e s o u t h e r l y bank of the Potomac R i v e r and t h e w e s t e r l y bank of
the L i t t l e R i v e r , e x t e n d i n g s o u t h e r l y from Key B r i d g e t o i-iemorial B r i d g e ,
w h i c h s a i d l a n d h a s been a c q u i r e d i n the development o f t h e N a t i o n a l C a p i t a l
parkway system and i n p a r t i c u l a r f o r t h e parkway to be known a s t h e "George
Washington Memorial Parkway", and
WHLREA.S, t h e j u r i s d i c t i o n and c o n t r o l of a l l parkways and l a n d s a c q u i r e d
f o r t h a t purpose i n A r l i n g t o n County, V i r g i n i a , i s v e s t e d i n t h e Department of
t h e I n t e r i o r under' and by v i r t u e of t h e a c t s of Congress approved June 6 , I 9 2 J 4
( 4 3 S t a t . 4 6 3 ) , December 22, 1928 (Ir? S t a t . 1 0 7 0 ) , F e b r u a r y 26, 1925 (1*3 S t a t .
9 8 3 ) , and May 2 9 , 1930 ( 4 6 S t a t . 1*82), and i x e c u t i v e Order No. 6166, dated
June 1 0 , 1 9 3 3 , i s s u e d pursuant
t o t h e A c t of Congress approved a r c h 3, 1 9 3 3 ,
r i
(1*7 S t a t . 1 5 1 7 ) ; and
v
WHEREAS, American O i l Company, a i iaryland c o r p o r a t i o n , h a v i n g
business
o f f i c e s a t B a l t i m o r e & S o u t h S t r e e t s , B a l t i m o r e , Maryland, has made a p p l i c a t i o n
f o r a r i g h t - o f - w a y e x t e n d i n g a l o n g and c r o s s i n g over t h e s a i d parkway l a n d s a s
i n d i c a t e d on p l a t
designated:
L o c a t i o n P l a n - Showing Proposed P i p e L i n e s
F o r American O i l Company
situate
George Washington Memorial Parkway
near R o s s l y n , V i r g i n i a . Dated May 7, 1943
f o r t h e purpose of i n s t a l l i n g , m a i n t a i n i n g and o p e r a t i n g not exceeding two
( 2 ) p i p e l i n e s , one ( 1 ) r i g i d c o n d u i t f o r e l e c t r i c a l c u r r e n t and mooring f l o a t
- 1 COPY
�and e n c l o s u r e f o r pumping u n i t and hose f o r t h e u n l o a d i n g and t r a n s p o r t a t i o n
of crude petroleum and/or t h e products and/or t h e by-products t h e r e o f ; and
WHEREAS, t h e g r a n t i n g o f p e r m i s s i o n , as h e r e i n a f t e r p r o v i d e d , f o r t h e
use of parkway l a n d s f o r s a i d p i p e l i n e s , c o n d u i t and mooring f l o a t w i l l n o t
s u b s t a n t i a l l y i n j u r e t h e i n t e r e s t s of t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s i n t h e s a i d l a n d s
a f f e c t e d t h e r e b y n o r w i l l i t be i n c o m p a t i b l e w i t h t h e p u b l i c i n t e r e s t , and
WHEREAS, t h e County of A r l i n g t o n and t h e S t a t e of V i r g i n i a c o n t r i b u t e d
o n e - h a l f t h e c o s t of t h e a c q u i s i t i o n of these l a n d s and entered i n t o a n a g r e e ment w i t h t h e N a t i o n a l C a p i t a l -fark and P l a n n i n g Commission dated June 2 3 , 1 9 3 h ,
p r o v i d i n g among o t h e r t h i n g s a s f o l l o w s :
" ( I i ) That t h e p a r t i e s t o t h i s agreement agree a s t o t h e l o c a t i o n
and development of a county w h a r f on t h e a r e a so d e s i g n a t e d on P l a n
No. 1 0 l i . 2 - l l | 2 , f i l e d and r.,ade a p a r t of t h i s agreement a s f o l l o w s :
"That whenever t h e County of A r l i n g t o n i s d e s i r o u s of d e v e l o p i n g a county wharf on t h e a r e a so d e s i g n a t e d , t h e N a t i o n a l Commission
pledges i t s e l f t o cooperate w i t h t h e County o f A r l i n g t o n , V i r g i n i a ,
and S t a t e o f V i r g i n i a i n s e c u r i n g t h e n e c e s s a r y l e g i s l a t i o n f o r t h i s
purpose, and a i d i n e v e r y o t h e r r e a s o n a b l e way i n making t h i s propert y a v a i l a b l e t o t h e County o f A r l i n g t o n f o r a county w h a r f , p r o v i d e d
t h a t t h e p l a n s f o r t h e development and o p e r a t i o n of s a i d w h a r f have
t h e j o i n t a p p r o v a l o f t h e N a t i o n a l Commission and the County Board
of A r l i n g t o n County o r t h e i r s u c c e s s o r s . " ; and
WHEREAS, s a i d mooring f l o a t w i l l be a t t a c h e d t o t h e p r o p e r t y s e t a s i d e
by t h i s agreement a s a county w h a r f ; and
WrIEREAS, t h e county of A r l i n g t o n does not d e s i r e to develop such wharf
at
this
time.
NOW, THEREFORE, T h i s i s to c e r t i f y t h a t t h e S e c r e t a r y o f the I n t e r i o r ,
under t h e a u t h o r i t y v e s t e d i n him by v i r t u e o f h a v i n g j u r i s d i c t i o n and control
over s a i d parkway l a n d s , and i n c o n s i d e r a t i o n of t h e immediate payment
of Seven Thousand Seven Hundred D o l l a r s ( $ 7 , 7 0 0 ) i n s t a l l a t i o n f e e , and r e n t a l
of F i f t y D o l l a r s ( $ 5 0 ) p e r y e a r t o be p a i d a n n u a l l y i n advance,
- 2 COPY
beginning
�A p r i l 1 , 19U3 hereby g r a n t s unto s a i d American O i l Company, i t s s u c c e s o r s
and a s s i g n s ( h e r e i n a f t e r sometimes r e f e r r e d to a s t h e " p e r m i t t e e " ) p e r m i s s i o n , r e v o c a b l e a t t h e w i l l of t h e S e c r e t a r y o f t h e I n t e r i o r , t o i n s t a l l ,
m a i n t a i n , o p e r a t e , r e p l a c e and remove noc e x c e e d i n g two ( 2 ) p i p e l i n e s o f
not more t h a n e i g h t ( 8 ) i n c h e s i n i n t e r n a l diameter, t o be p l a c e d i n c l o s e
p r o x i m i t y t o one a n o t h e r , one ( 1 ) r i g i d c o n d u i t f o r e l e c t r i c a l c u r r e n t , and
a mooring f l o a t f o r che u n l o a d i n g and t r a n s p o r t a t i o n of crude petroleum and/
or t h e p r o d u c t s and/or by-products t h e r e o f , a l o n g , thro.igh, under and a c r o s s
the s a i d parkway l a n d s above d e s c r i b e d a t t h e approximate l o c a t i o n i n d i c a t e d
on t h e s a i d p l a t h e r e i n b e f o r e r e f e r r e d be, p h o t o s t a t copy of which p l a t i s
a t t a c h e d and made a p a r t h e r e o f .
T h i s P e r m i t i s i s s u e d s u b j e c t t o the f o l l o w i n g c o n d i t i o n s :
1.
That t h e s a i d p i p e l i n e s and conduit s h a l l be l a i d and i n s t a l l e d a t
such depth t h a t t h e t o o of t h e p i p e s w i l l not be l e s s t h a n t h r e e ( 3 ) f e e t
below t h e s u r f a c e of t h e ground, except where a l e s s e r depth has been approved
by the D i r e c t o r of t h e N a t i o n a l l a r k S e r v i c e or h i s a u t h o r i z e d r e p r e s e n t a t i v e .
2.
T h a t t h e i n s t a l l a t i o n , o p e r a t i o n and maintenance of s a i d pipe l i n e s ,
c o n d u i t and mooring f l o a t s h a l l be accomplished w i t h o u t c o s t or expense t o
t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s of A m e r i c a , under t h e g e n e r a l s u p e r v i s i o n and a p p r o v a l of
tho D i r e c t o r of t h e N a t i o n a l P a r k S e r v i c e or h i s a u t h o r i z e d r e p r e s e n t a t i v e .
3.
That any damage caused t o t h e p r o p e r t y o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s , or i t s
a s s i g n s , i n c i d e n t t o t h e i n s t a l l a t i o n , o p e r a t i o n and maintenance of s a i d p i p e
l i n e s , c o n d u i t and mooring f l o a t s h a l l be promptly r e p a i r e d by t h e P e r m i t t e e
a t i t s expense o r i n the event such damage i s n o t r e p a i r a b l e the P e r m i t t e e
w i l l reimburse t h e U n i t e d s t a t e s t h e r e f o r . Any such r e p a i r work t o be p e r formed by the P e r m i t t e e s h a l l be accomplished s u b j e c t t o t h e g e n e r a l superv i s i o n and a p p r o v a l of t h e D i r e c t o r of t h e N a t i o n a l P a r k S e r v i c e or h i s
authorized representative.
1±.
That t h e P e r m i t t e e s h a l l s u p e r v i s e and i n s p e c t the pipe l i n e s and
c o n d u i t r e g u l a r l y and s h a l l immediately r e p a i r any l e a k s found t h e r e i n . Upon
c o m p l e t i n g t h e i n s t a l l a t i o n of s a i d p i p e l i n e s and c o n d u i t or making any
r e p a i r s t h e r e t o , t h e ground s h a l l be immediately r e s t o r e d by t h e r e m i t t e e
i n s o f a r as i s p o s s i b l e t o the same c o n d i t i o n a s t h a t i n w h i c h i t e x i s t e d
p r i o r t o the commencement of such 1 on;. Any t i m b e r or o t h e r l a n d s c a p e f e a t u r e
-
3
COPY
�s c a r r e d or damaged by t h e P e r m i t t e e s h a l l be removed, trimmed up or r e s t o r e d
as n e a r l y as p o s s i b l e t o i t s o r i g i n a l c o n d i t i o n a t t h e expense of t h e P e r m i t tee i n a manner s a t i s f a c t o r y t o the D i r e c t o r of t h e N a t i o n a l P a r k S e r v i d e or
his authorized representative.
5.
That t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s s h a l l not be r e s p o n s i b l e f o r any i n j u r i e s t o
persons or damage t o p r o p e r t y w h i c h may a r i s e i n c i d e n t t o the i n s t a l l a t i o n ,
maintenance and o p e r a t i o n of s a i d p i p e l i n e s , c o n d u i t and mooring f l o a t and
t h e i e r m i t t e e s h a l l save the United S t a t e s harmless frcm any and a l l s u c h
claims.
6.
T h a t the use and occupancy of s a i d parkway l a n d s i n c i d e n t t o the i n s t a l l a t i o n , maintenance and o p e r a t i o n of s a i d p i p e l i n e s , c o n d u i t and mooring
f l o a t s h a l l be s u b j e c t to such r u l e s and r e g u l a t i o n s as the S e c r e t a r y of the
I n t e r i o r or h i s duly a u t h o r i z e d r e p r e s e n t a t i v e may from time to time p r e s c r i b e .
7. T h a t i n the event t h a t i n the c o n s t r u c t i o n of s a i d parkway the s a i d
p i p e l i n e s and conduit as l o c a t e d s h a l l , a t any p o i n t o r p o i n t s , not conform
t o t h e grade or grades e s t a b l i s h e d f o r ohe d r i v e or roadway t o be l o c a t e d
t h e r e o n , or s h a l l i n any other r e s p e c t i n t e r f e r e w i t h the c o n s t r u c t i o n of
s a i d parkway, t h e P e r m i t t e e s h a l l upon w r i t t e n r e q u e s t of the D i r e c t o r of the
N a t i o n a l P a r k S e r v i c e , or h i s a u t h o r i z e d r e p r e s e n t a t i v e , and a t i t s own e x pense, l o w e r the p o r t i o n of t h e p i p e l i n e s and conduit a f f e c t e d to s uch e s t a b l i s h e d grade o r grades i n t h o s e cases where the l i n e s as l o c a t e d w i l l not conform t h e r e t o , o r , i n the case of other i n t e r f e r e n c e , r e l o c a t e the p o r t i o n of
t h e l i n e s a f f e c t e d to a n o t h e r s u i t a b l e l o c a t i o n on s a i d l a n d s .
8. T h a t the e n c l o s u r e f o r the housing of pumping u n i t , and f o r the hose
when not i n u s e , s h a l l be so c o n s t r u c t e d a s t o be below t h e l e v e l of the ground,
and s h a l l not exceed the f i n i s h e d grade f o r the parkway.
9.
T h i s p e r m i t i s i s s u e d s u b j e c t t o the above-mentioned agreement between
the N a t i o n a l C a p i t a l P a r k and P l a n n i n g Commission, A r l i n g t o n County, and the
Commenwealth of V i r g i n i a , dated June 23, 193U, w i t h r e g a r d t o d e v e l o p i n g a
county w h a r f on the a r e a covered thereby, and w i t h the d i s t i n c t u n d e r s t a n d i n g ,
t h a t i t may be t e r m i n a t e d by the S e c r e t a r y of t h e I n t e r i o r , i n whole or i n p a r t ,
whenever the County of A r l i n g t o n i s w i l l i n g and ready to develop a county w h a r f
as p r o v i d e d i n s a i d agreement,
10.
A l l c o n s t r u c t i o n p l a n s s h a l l be submitted t o and approved by the D i r e c t o r of the N a t i o n a l P a r k S e r v i c e or h i s a u t h o r i z e d r e p r e s e n t a t i v e i n advance
of c o n s t r u c t i o n ,
11.
T h i s p e r m i t i s i s s u e d i n accordance w i t h the i n t e n t s t a t e d i n p a r a graph 9 h e r e o f , and w i t h the u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h a t the f a c i l i t i e s of the p i p e
l i n e and mooring f l o a t w i l l be made a v a i l a b l e by t h e P e r m i t t e e t o other u s e r s
a t any p o i n t approved by t h e S e c r e t a r y of the I n t e r i o r , up t o the p o i n t where
the p i p e l i n e e n t e r s t h e American O i l Company's p r o p e r t y l i n e , on the b a s i s
of charges f o r l i k e f a c i l i t i e s c o n s i d e r e d c u r r e n t and standard a t the time by
t h e i n d u s t r y , s u b j e c t , however, t o a p p r o v a l by the S e c r e t a r y of t h e I n t e r i o r .
- 4
COPY
�12.
T h a t the p r i v i l e g e s hereby granted may be d e c l a r e d f o r f e i t e d and
a n n u l l e d and t h i s p e r m i t may be t e r m i n a t e d by the S e c r e t a r y of the I n t e r i o r
a t any time upon reasonable n o t i c e t o the P e r m i t t e e i f the S e c r e t a r y of the
I n t e r i o r s h a l l determine t h a t such occupancy i n t e r f e r e s w i t h the use or s a l e
of the premises or any p a r t t h e r e o f by the U n i t e d S t a t e s , or f o r f a i l u r e ,
n e g l e c t or r e f u s a l by the P e r m i t t e e f u l l y and promptly t o comply w i t h any or
a l l of the c o n d i t i o n s or p r i v i l e g e s of t h i s p e r m i t .
I n the event of the nonu s e of parkway l a n d s by t h e P e r m i t t e e f o r a continuous p e r i o d of two (2) c o n s e c u t i v e y e a r s , t h i s permit s h a l l cease and d e t e r m i n e .
13.
That upon the e x p i r a t i o n of t h i s p e r m i t or i n the event e i t h e r of the
t e r m i n a t i o n or the annulment and f o r f e i t u r e of t h i s p e r m i t , t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s
s h a l l have the o p t i o n , upon r e a s o n a b l e n o t i c e t o the i e r m i t t e e , t o r e q u i r e t h e
P e r m i t t e e a t i t s expense and w i t h i n such time as the S e c r e t a r y of the I n t e r i o r
may d i r e c t , to remove the i n s t a l l a t i o n s from the s a i d l a n d s and to r e s t o r e the
same to a c o n d i t i o n s a t i s f a c t o r y to t h e D i r e c t o r of the N a t i o n a l l a r k S e r v i c e
or h i s a u t h o r i z e d r e p r e s e n t a t i v e .
I n the event the P e r m i t t e e s h a l l f a i l , n e g l e c t or r e f u s e to remove t h e i n s t a l l a t i o n s and r e s t o r e the premises as d i r e c t e d ,
the U n i t e d S t a t e s s h a l l have t h e o p i n i o n e i t h e r t o t a k e over t h e i n s t a l l a t i o n s
a s the p r o p e r t y of the U n i t e d S t a t e s w i t h o u t a d d i t i o n a l compensation or c o n s i d e r a t i o n t h e r e f o r , or of c a u s i n g the i n s t a l l a t i o n s t o be removed and the l a n d s
to be so r e s t o r e d a t t h e expense of the P e r m i t t e e and i n no event s h a l l the
P e r m i t t e e have any c l a i m f o r damages a g a i n s t the U n i t e d S t a t e s , i t s o f f i c e r s
or a g e n t s , on account of the t a k i n g over of the i n s t a l l a t i o n s or on account of
t h e i r removal.
WITNliSS my hand and the s e a l of the Department of t h e I n t e r i o r t h i s 3 t h
day of
June
1 U3.
Q
(Sgd)
Approved t h i s 1 s t day of
June , 19L,3.
(Sgd)
J . S . G r a n t , 3rd
Chairman, N a t i o n a l C a p i t a l l a r k
and P l a n n i n g Commission.
Note:
P l a t dated i4ay 7, 19U3 not
attached.
- 5 COPI
Harold I . Ickes
S e c r e t a r y of the
Interior
��r
r
��THE
SMOOT SAND & GRAVEL CORPORATION
October 1 5 , 1956
C o l o n e l George B. Sumner
Corps o f E n g i n e e r s , U. S. Army,
D i s t r i c t Engineer,
Washington D i s t r i c t ,
F i r s t and Douglas S t r e e t s , N. W . ,
Washington 2 5 , D. C.
Re:
F i l e No. 823 C o n s t i t u t i o n
Dear Mr. Sumner:
B r i d g e (NAWGW)
Ave.
I n r e p l y t o your l e t t e r o f h October, 1956, r e q u e s t i n g d e t a i l e d i n f o r m a t i o n on the items brought up i n our d i s c u s s i o n i n your o f f i c e 20 September, 1956, we w i s h t o submit
the f o l l o w i n g i n f o r m a t i o n as p e r t i n e n t t o a d e t e r m i n a t i o n by
the S e c r e t a r y o f the Army whether or not a b r i d g e i n the
v i c i n i t y o f C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue s h o u l d have a draw span i n i t .
The d e p l e t i o n o f sand and g r a v e l from l o c a l d e p o s i t s
a v a i l a b l e t o t h i s market has been a t such a pace as t o b r i n g
i n t o focus the f o r e s e e a b l e end o f the use o f the type o f equipment p r e s e n t l y s e r v i c i n g our d i s t r i b u t i o n p l a n t s i n Washington.
S i n c e 1900 t h i s company and i t s p r e d e c e s s o r s have produced and
s o l d l o c a l l y i n e x c e s s o f 5 0 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 tons o f sand and g r a v e l , a
l a r g e percentage o f which has gone i n t o F e d e r a l and D i s t r i c t o f
Columbia c o n s t r u c t i o n p r o j e c t s , - the magnitude o f which your
o f f i c e i s aware.
D e p l e t i o n alone has not been the s o l e f a c t o r r e s u l t i n g
i n the c l o s i n g out o f nearby d e p o s i t s , as the U. S. Government
has t a k e n from us v a l u a b l e d e p o s i t s a t Roaches Run f o r t h e
Mount V r n o n B o u l e v a r d ; a t Abingdon f o r the N a t i o n a l A i r p o r t ;
a t D a i n g e r f i e l d I s l a n d f o r the Mount Vernon B o u l e v a r d ; and a t
Deep Hole P o i n t f o r the S i g n a l Corps U. S. Army. I n a d d i t i o n
t o t h e s e l o s s e s , we a r e a d v i s e d t h a t our d e p o s i t a t Oxon H i l l
i s i n the l i n e s o f a proposed Woodrow W i l s o n B r i d g e , w h i c h w i l l
c r o s s the Potomac from A l e x a n d r i a , Va.
e
The l o s s o f t h e s e d e p o s i t s from condemnation, t o g e t h e r
w i t h those t h a t we d e p l e t e d and i n process o f d e p l e t i o n , w i l l
r e q u i r e us i n the v e r y near f u t u r e t o go t o g r e a t e r d i s t a n c e s
d o w n - r i v e r from our d i s t r i b u t i o n p o i n t s . T h i s i n t u r n w i l l r e q u i r e the u s e o f tugs and barges o f the s i z e s t h a t a r e used i n
"open w a t e r s " , w h i c h a r e g r e a t e r t h a n the h e i g h t l i m i t o f 2b,.6
f e e t proposed i n the C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue B r i d g e .
I f sand and g r a v e l were not a v a i l a b l e t o our r e a d y mixed
c o n c r e t e customers a t our Georgetown p l a n t , the u s e r s , both
Government and p r i v a t e , would be r e q u i r e d t o pay from $ . 9 3 t o
$1.25 more per c u b i c y a r d f o r c o n c r e t e a s i s evidenced by
C O P Y
�S h e e t No. 2 - October 15,
1956
C o l o n e l George B. Sumner,
Corps of E n g i n e e r s , U. S. Army.
E x h i b i t "A"
Concrete).
and E x h i b i t "B" - ( L e t t e r s from Super and Maloney
The o t h e r a l t e r n a t i v e would be t o u t i l i z e our
Georgetown p l a n t by t r u c k i n g m a t e r i a l s f o r c o n c r e t e , e t c ,
from our S o u t h e a s t P l a n t , as t h e r e i s no l i m i t a t i o n as to
the h e i g h t of s u p e r s t r u c t u r e on w a t e r bourne equipment s e r v i c i n g t h a t p l a n t , and the l a r g e r barges c o u l d be docked a t
that point.
Schedule "C" shows the s a l e s t o customers over the
p e r i o d 1951-55 through our Georgetown P l a n t . Using an
average of 681,1463 tons - E x h i b i t "C" - of sand and g r a v e l
s o l d y e a r l y f o r t h i s p e r i o d , and m u l t i p l y i n g by the p r e s e n t
c o n t r a c t t r u c k i n g r a t e from our S o u t h e a s t P l a n t to our Georgetown P l a n t ( $ . 8 5 per ton) would g i v e $>579)2li3 as the a d d i t i o n a l c o s t t h a t would have t o be p a i d by the p u b l i c y e a r l y f o r
sand and g r a v e l needs from our Georgetown P l a n t .
T r a f f i c c o n d i t i o n s would a l s o be c o n s i d e r a b l j a f f e c t e d
by the t r a n s p o r t a t i o n of n e a r l y 700,000 tons of sand and g r a v e l
from S o u t h e a s t t o Georgetown a n n u a l l y .
While i t was thoroughly covered i n the P u b l i c H e a r i n g
of May 10, 1955,
we would l i k e t o a g a i n b r i n g t o your a t t e n t i o n the danger t o l i f e and equipment t h a t would a r i s e i n the
times of f l o o d and i c e wnich o f t e n o c c u r s s i m u l t a n e o u s l y .
To
be unable t o remove equipment, nor r e l i e v e jammed i c e above
the proposed b r i d g e because of no draw span, could be d i s a s t r o u s
t o Georgetown w a t e r f r o n t i n d u s t r y . I c e b r e a k e r s , such as have
come from N o r f o l k t o keep the Potomac R i v e r open t o t r a f f i c ,
would no l o n g e r be a b l e to perform t h i s s e r v i c e f o r the p u b l i c
and might w e l l r e s u l t i n a s h o r t a g e of f u e l f o r Washington consumers, as was e x p e r i e n c e d i n r e c e n t y e a r s . R a i l and t r u c k
s e r v i c e a r e not adequate t o s u p p l y a l l the f u e l o i l used h e r e .
A t t e n t i o n i s i n v i t e d t o the p r e s e n t t r e n d to move cargo
by w a t e r . I t i s p u b l i c p o l i c y where w a t e r i s a v a i l a b l e t o move
as much f r e i g h t as i s p o s s i b l e by w a t e r t o save t r a n s p o r t a t i o n
c o s t s . Witness the S t . Lawrence Waterway as an example. I t
i s s u p e r f l u o u s f o r t h i s company t o p o i n t out the amounts of
p u b l i c funds expended a n n u a l l y t o keep commercial waterways
open, i n s t e a d o f , as i n t h i s c a s e , p r o h i b i t i n g the p o s s i b i l i t y
of expansion of the o n l y i n d u s t r i a l w a t e r f r o n t i n the Georgetown c h a n n e l .
COPY
�Sheet No. 3 - October 15,
1956
C o l o n e l George B. Sumner
Corps of E n g i n e e r s , U. S. Army.
R e f e r e n c e i s made to " F i n d i n g s of F a c t " compiled by
the O f f i c e of the D i s t r i c t E n g i n e e r , Washington D i s t r i c t ,
r e g a r d i n g the a p p l i c a t i o n of the Commissioners of the D i s t r i c t
of Columbia f o r the f i x e d span b r i d g e .
I n the comparison of
c o s t s ( p . 5) no mention of any a d d i t i o n a l sums was i n c l u d e d i n
t h o s e c o s t s by r e a s o n of " e x t e n s i v e c o s t l y d i s m a n t l i n g and r e assembling o f dredges a t v a r i o u s s i t e s . There a r e no e x i s t i n g
dredges capable of performing such dredging whose r e q u i r e d
c l e a r a n c e does not g r e a t l y exceed 18 f e e t . " ( N a t i o n a l A s s o c i a t i o n
of R i v e r and Harbor C o n t r a c t o r s l e t t e r of 10 May, 1955).
The
q u e s t i o n here i s the maintenance of a 2h' c h a n n e l depth above
the proposed b r i d g e l o c a t i o n . I f t h e r e i s t o be channel maintenance f o r i n d u s t r y and r e c r e a t i o n , such a d d i t i o n a l c o s t s
s h o u l d be i n c l u d e d i n f a v o r of the b r i d g e h a v i n g a draw span,
e l s e Georgetown w i l l u l t i m a t e l y f i n d i t s e l f i n a c o n d i t i o n
s i m i l a r t o t h a t of the former p o r t s of B l a d e n s b u r g , Dumphries,
and P o r t Tobacco.
While the O f f i c e of the D i s t r i c t E n g i n e e r i s concerned
w i t h p r e s e n t u s e r s o f the waterway under d i s c u s s i o n , and took
s t e p s to i n s u r e proper r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f i n t e r e s t e d p a r t i e s ,
t h e r e were omitted from t e s t i f y i n g a t the h e a r i n g 10 May,
1955,
many of the w h a r f f r o n t owners whose p r o p e r t i e s might be a f f e c t e d
by the c o n s t r u c t i o n of a f i x e d span b r i d g e a t C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue.
L e t t e r s from two such owners a r e enclosed h e r e w i t h .
Testimony
from such p a r t i e s s h o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d and made p a r t of the
r e c o r d . E x h i b i t "D" - E x h i b i t "E".
We r e s p e c t f u l l y ask t h a t the i n f o r m a t i o n and f i g u r e s
h e r e i n c o n t a i n e d be made a p a r t of the r e c o r d o b j e c t i n g t o
the c o n s t r u c t i o n of a b r i d g e w i t h o u t a draw span i n the
v i c i n i t y of C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue, and t h a t the S e c r e t a r y of
the Army be a d v i s e d of t h i s a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n , so t h a t
i t may have proper c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n h i s f i n a l d e t e r m i n a t i o n .
Very t r u l y
THE
yours,
SMOOT SAND & GRAVEL CORPORATION
l * L
A. M.
AMP:emv
Encl.
C O P Y
Parker,
Secretary
�EXHIBIT
"D"
MALONEY CONCRETE COMPANY, INCORP.
September 1 8 t h , 1956
Mr. A. M. P a r k e r , S e c r e t a r y
The Smoot S n d and G r a v e l C o r p o r a t i o n ,
3020 K S t r e e t , N. W ,
Washington 7, D C.
a
c
t
Dear Mr,
Parker:
The r i v e r f r o n t a g e , ground and improvements l o c a t e d
a t t h e South West c o r n e r o f 31st and "K" S t r e e t s , N. W, Washi n g t o n , D. C, d e s c r i b e d as L o t 8 0 2 , Square 1174 i s under my
c o n t r o l and has been used by my company f o r t h e p a s t twentyfive years.
I was not a d v i s e d by t h e D i s t r i c t Corps of E n g i n e e r s ,
of a P u b l i c H e a r i n g on the proposed c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a b r i d g e
w i t h o u t a draw span over the Georgetown Channel o f t h e Potomac
R i v e r . A b r i d g e over t h e r i v e r w i t h o u t a draw span would be
a s e v e r e hindrance t o me ever u s i n g t h i s p r o p e r t y f o r R i v e r
Shipment and w i l l s e r i o u s l y e f f e c t t h i s p r o p e r t y .
Yours v e r y
CPM:b,jp
truly,
/ s / C h a r l e s P, Maloney,
C O P Y
�EXHIBIT
"E»
Washington, D.
C.
September 18,
1956
Mr. A. M. P a r k e r , S e c r e t a r y ,
The Smoot Sand & G r a v e l C o r p o r a t i o n ,
3020 K S t r e e t , N.
W.,
Washington 7, D. C.
Bear Mr.
Parker:
I c o n t r o l the t r a c t of ground and i t s improvements s i t u a t e d a t the S. E . Corner of Wisconsin Avenue
and K S t r e e t , N. W., Washington, D. C.
T h i s p r o p e r t y has b o t h r a i l r o a d s i d i n g and wharf
f a c i l i t i e s , and d e r i v e s p a r t of i t s v a l u e because i t i s
l o c a t e d on r a i l and w a t e r .
C o n f i r m i n g our r e c e n t c o n v e r s a t i o n , I w i s h t o
a d v i s e t h a t as an owner o f w h a r f f r o n t a g e on the Georgetown Channel, I was not a d v i s e d by the D i s t r i c t E n g i n e e r ,
Corps of E n g i n e e r s , U. S. Army, of any P u b l i c Hearing on
the proposed c o n s t r u c t i o n of a b r i d g e w i t h o u t a draw span
i n Georgetown Channel.
Such a b r i d g e would a d v e r s e l y a f f e c t by h o l d i n g s
a t the above l o c a t i o n , and I f e e l t h a t I s h o u l d be g i v e n
an o p p o r t u n i t y t o e x p r e s s an o p i n i o n .
Very t r u l y yours,
( J . W.
C O P Y
Longhnam)
����AMOCO
AMERICAN OIL COMPANY
711
F O U R T H NTH
ST., N.W.
WASHINGTON i, 0 . C.
H. R. NHimr, DIVISION MANAGER
0otOb*T 16, 195&
Colonel George B, Sumner
Corp* of Engineers
Office of D i s t r i o t Inglneor
F i r s t & Douglas Streets, I . V.
Washington, D. 0.
lour F i l e l o . 823 Constitution Are. Bridge (BAWQV)
Dear Colonel S o n a r t
This has reference to your l e t t e r of October 8th regarding the
proposed Constitution Avenue Bridge over the Petonme River,
The facta presented i n our l e t t e r dated May 6, 1955, indicated
that we oould nova petroleum products up the Potomac River with tugs and
dumb barges instead of tankers eighty peroent of the tine a t an additional
oost of $40,000,00 per annua, supplemented by trucking from Curtis Bay,
Baltimore, Maryland, to Rosslyn, Virginia, twenty peroent of the t i n e a t an
additional oost of #55,000.00, with amortiaation of the investment for the
additional trucks required to handle the trucking movement amounting t e
$ 5 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 per annum, equivalent to a t o t a l additional cost of $100,000,00
per annua by withdrawing from service the preferred tanker type of Teasel
for whioh the proposed fixed-span Constitution Avenue Bridge would have
i n s u f f i c i e n t clearance,
At the tine the foregoing information was submitted the tug and
dumb barge movement had only been i n service for a few souths on an experimental basis and the coats given i n l e t t e r of Nay 6, 1955, were based upon
the experience which we had gained during that short t i n e . Later, during
the summer, f a l l and winter season i t developed that the tug and dumb barge
operation was not p r a c t i c a l due to delays during periods of unfavorable
weather oonditions, since t h i s type of oraft i s forced to t i e up during
periods of moderately heavy to severe winds and, not being equipped with
radar, cannot novo through fog and the resultant delays amounted to as
much aa ten days per t r i p en route from lorfolk t e Rosslyn, Virginia*
During these periods of delay a l l product had to be trucked frost our
Curtis Bay, Maryland Terminal and our operation became so handloepped
because of these delays that we were eventually forced to abasdoa the tug
and dumb barge method and return to the use o f tankers. Since returning
to the tanker movement we have experienced no delays whatsoever.
�- Page 2 In the f i n a l paragraph of your l e t t e r of October 8th you request
that we submit revised cost estimate based upon existing conditions and
assuming that a fixed-span bridge over the Potomac River i n the v i c i n i t y
of Constitution Avenue having a horizontal clearance of 125 feet and a
v e r t i c a l clearance of 2A.6 feet above mean high water* I t would be
d i f f i c u l t to give an accurate estimate at t h i s time without much study,
although at the time of the proposed hearing we w i l l submit a complete
report including cost. In the meantime, the following data I s offered
based upon our opinion of the situation:
I t i s our estimate that the tug and dumb barge equipment could
only be u t i l i s e d for the movement of petroleum products up the Potomac
River to our Rosslyn, Virginia Terminal approximately f i f t y percent of
the time. Considering the Investment i n t h i s type of craft and the
expense of maintaining a crew consisting of approximately fourteen men,
i t would not be feasible to continue r i v e r movement at a l l . The only
alternative would be to deliver our entire volume by truck direct from
our Curtis Bay, Maryland Terminal to the storage of our customers. Such
an operation would be very costly to us inasmuch as the price of petroleum
products i n the Washington area i s predicated upon water rate, a medium of
transportation available to our principal competitors. I t would also
e n t a i l a costly increase i n storage at our resale and consumer locations
i n order to accommodate truckload deliveries and would oreate a credit
problem for such large quantities of product. I f such a change i n our
method of operation should become necessary, our Rosslyn, Virginia Terminal
i n which we have an investment i n excess of $1,000,000.00, would cease to
be of use to us and this property i s purely a "one use" f a c i l i t y depending
upon the water movement of petroleum products for i t s existence and i f i t
was put up for sale as surplus we oould r e a l i s e only upon the land value
and would be obliged to bear a tremendous loss on our Investment. Furthermore, approximately one hundred and f i f t y persons are employed at t h i s
point and due to conflicting labor arrangements none of these employees
could be transferred to our Curtis Bay Terminal i n the event conditions
necessitated our delivering into the area from that point. Consequently,
the lay off of these people would result i n a payroll loss to the community
of approximately 1675,000.00 per annum and the majority of these employees
have been i n our service for more than f i f t e e n years, thus being at an age
at which the finding ef new employment would prove extremely d i f f i c u l t .
Subsequent to public hearing on this matter held on May 10, 1955,
the Office of the D i s t r i c t Engineer issued a Findings of Fact, Paragraph 5,
Section (b) of whioh reads i n part as follows!
"The only other commeroial waterfront a c t i v i t y upstream
of the bridge s i t e l a at the American O i l Company Terminal at Rosslyn, Virginia
The Terminal and pipe lines are on Federal Park property,
the use of which was authorised by the National Park
Service i n a revocable permit dated 8 June 19A3"«
�- Page 3 Inasmuch as t h i s paragraph does not completely r e f l e c t the status of our
Company a tenancy on the Federal Park property, we wish to submit the
following c l a r i f y i n g information, v i s .
1
When the land i n question was originally acquired by the Federal
Government for the development of the National Capital Parkway system f i f t y
percent of the cost thereof was borne j o i n t l y by the State of Virginia and
the County of Arlington, subject to a reservation by the State of Virginia
and the County of Arlington that a t such time as Arlington County desired
to develop a County wharf on a portion of the area I t would have the
support and cooperation of the appropriate agency of the Interior Department i n securing the necessary legislation to make a certain portion of
the property (as designated i n the agreement i n connection with the
original acquisition) available for the establishment of a County wharf*
Therefore, the State of Virginia and Arlington County have certain vested
rights therein, and the American O i l Company's f a o i l i t i e s are located on
the portion of the property reserved by Arlington County for the future
establishment of a County wharf and with the express permission of Arlington
County,
Please be assured that i t l a our wish to cooperate i n every way
possible i n your current review of t h i s matter and i f additional information i s desired, you have but to "call upon us,
lours very truly,
AMERICAN OIL COMPANY
N. R j ^ S B L N T T
����DEPARTMENT OF COWERC^
BUREAU OF PUBLIC WORKS
Washington 25
February
8 , 1957
STATEMENT CONCERNING RIGHTS OF NAVIGATION I N RELATION
TO BRIDGE CLEARANCES
Any
s t u d y concerning
the r e l a t i o n s h i p o f n a v i g a t i o n a l r i g h t s o f
waterway u s e r s o f the Potomac R i v e r and b r i d g e c l e a r a n c e s a c r o s s the
Potomac R i v e r above Hains P o i n t must r e c o g n i z e
the g e n e r a l l y accepted
d i s t i n c t i o n between t h e r i p a r i a n r i g h t s o f landowners a b u t t i n g the w a t e r way
and t h e p u b l i c r i g h t o f n a v i g a t i o n .
Summarized b r i e f l y , r i p a r i a n r i g h t s g i v e t o t h e owner o f l a n d con-
t i g u o u s t o a n a v i g a b l e waterway:
1.
The r i g h t t o reasonable
use o f w a t e r p a s s i n g h i s p r o p e r t y ;
2.
The r i g h t t o t h e f l o w o f w a t e r p a s t h i s p r o p e r t y s u b j e c t t o r e a s o n -
able u s e by o t h e r r i p a r i a n owners; and
3.
The r i g h t o f a c c e s s t o t h e waterway i n c l u d i n g t h e u s e o f h i s banks
and t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f wharves.
The f o r e g o i n g
paramount r i g h t —
right.
r i g h t s are property r i g h t s .
They a r e s u b j e c t t o a
t h e p u b l i c r i g h t o f n a v i g a t i o n , w h i c h i s not a p r o p e r t y
The concept i d e n t i f i e d a s t h e " p r i o r r i g h t o f n a v i g a t i o n " o r t h e
"inherent r i g h t of navigation" applies to the superior r e l a t i o n s h i p which
n a v i g a t i o n has over t h e ownership o f t h e bed o f a stream and t h e u s e o f
the l a n d f o r purposes o t h e r t h a n n a v i g a t i o n .
I n the p a s t , t h i s concept
has b e e n extended t o convey t h e thought t h a t n a v i g a t i o n has a "paramount,"
" s u p e r i o r " o r " i n h e r e n t " r i g h t over o t h e r forms o f s u r f a c e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n .
No e v i d e n c e has been found w h i c h would suggest a c o n s t i t u t i o n a l b a s i s t o
support such an e x t e n s i o n o f t h i s concept.
�- 2 -
The
r i g h t of n a v i g a t i o n , i n s o f a r as i t a f f e c t s o t h e r forms o f
surface transportation, i s a r e l a t i v e r i g h t .
the 1 9 t h C e n t u r y , q u e s t i o n s
and o v e r l a n d
During the l a t t e r h a l f of
c o n c e r n i n g the r e l a t i o n s h i p of
navigation
t r a n s p o r t a t i o n were r a i s e d i n t h e c o u r t s , w i t h s p e c i a l
r e f e r e n c e t o the s u b j e c t of n a v i g a t i o n a l c l e a r a n c e s i n b r i d g e s .
f i r s t of
these c a s e s t o reach the Supreme Court of the U n i t e d
involved a bridge constructed
an unreasonable o b s t r u c t i o n to
and ordered i t s removal o r a l t e r a t i o n .
Bridge
1852,
The
navigation
( P e n n s y l v a n i a v s . Wheeling
10
S t a t . 110,
112)
e x e c u t e d Congress by law ( A c t of
d e c l a r e d the b r i d g e t o be a l a w f u l
s t r u c t u r e i n i t s then e x i s t i n g p o s i t i o n .
Upon r e v i e w of i t s e a r l i e r
d e c i s i o n as a f f e c t e d by t h i s enactment, t h e Supreme Court d e c l a r e d
the enactment was
and
Company, 13 Howard 5>l8 ( 1 8 5 2 ) ) .
B e f o r e the Court decree was
August 3 1 ,
States
a c r o s s the Ohio R i v e r a t Wheeling.
Court r u l e d t h a t t h e b r i d g e was
Bridgeport
The
that
a c o n s t i t u t i o n a l e x e r c i s e o f power to r e g u l a t e commerce
and t h a t the l e g i s l a t i o n superseded t h e p r i o r judgment o f the C o u r t .
( P e n n s y l v a n i a v s . Wheeling and B r i d g e p o r t
59 u .
S. 435
Bridge Company, 18 Howard 1*21,
(1856)).
The C o u r t a l s o d e c i d e d t h a t a b r i d g e a c r o s s the S c h u y l k i l l R i v e r ,
a u t h o r i z e d by the S t a t e of P e n n s y l v a n i a , was
a l a w f u l s t r u c t u r e even though
i t had a l i m i t e d v e r t i c a l c l e a r a n c e w h i c h p r e v e n t e d the passage o f v e s s e l s
having m a s t s .
( G i l m a n v s . P h i l a d e l p h i a , 70 U. S. 713
(1865)).
r e v e a l e d t h a t the S c h u y l k i l l R i v e r l i e s w h o l l y i n P e n n s y l v a n i a ,
c o n s t r u c t i o n of
and p r o d u c t i v e
The
facts
and
that
1
the b r i d g e would reduce the income o f c c n o l a i n a n t s
property
render that property
valuable
( a w h a r f and dock) above t h e s i t e of t h e b r i d g e
less valuable.
and
�- 3 I n the Gilman c a s e , t h e Court s t a t e d ( a t pages 729 and 7 3 2 ) :
" I t must n o t be f o r g o t t e n t h a t b r i d g e s , w h i c h a r e connecting p a r t s
o f t u r n p i k e s , s t r e e t s , and r a i l r o a d s , a r e means o f commercial t r a n s p o r t a t i o n ,
as w e l l a s n a v i g a b l e r i v e r s , and t h a t t h e commerce w h i c h p a s s e s over a b r i d g e
may be g r e a t e r t h a n would e v e r b y t r a n s p o r t e d on t h e w a t e r i t o b s t r u c t s . I t
i s f o r the m u n i c i p a l power t o weigh t h e c o n s i d e r a t i o n s w h i c h belong t o t h e
s u b j e c t , and t o decide w h i c h s h a l l be made s u b s e r v i e n t t o t h e o t h e r . The
S t a t e s have always e x e r c i s e d t h i s power, and from the n a t u r e and o b j e c t s o f
the t wo systems o f government t h e y must always c o n t i n u e t o e x e r c i s e i t ,
s u b j e c t , however, i n a l l c a s e s , t o t h e paramount a u t h o r i t y o f Congress, whene v e r t h e power o f t h e S t a t e s s h a l l be e x e r t e d w i t h i n t h e sphere o f t h e comm e r c i a l power w h i c h belongs t o t h e n a t i o n .
" I t i s f o r Congress t o determine xfhen i t s f u l l power s h a l l be brought
i n t o a c t i v i t y , and as t o the r e g u l a t i o n s and s a n c t i o n s w h i c h s h a l l be p r o vided
U n t i l t h e dormant power o f t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n i s awakened and made
e f f e c t i v e , by a p p r o p r i a t e l e g i s l a t i o n , t h e r e s e r v e d power o f t h e S t a t e i s
p l e n a r y , and i t s e x e r c i s e o f good f a i t h cannot be made t h e s u b j e c t o f r e v i e w
by t h i s c o u r t . "
Some y e a r s l a t e r , t h e Supreme
Court a l s o u p h e l d t h e l e g a l i t y o f a
b r i d g e a c r o s s t h e E a s t R i v e r , w h i c h was a u t h o r i z e d by a c t s o f t h e New Y o r k
legislature
(1883)).
and t h e Congress.
( M i l l e r v s . Mayor o f New Y o r k , 109 U. S. 385
The l a t t e r enactment r e q u i r e d a p p r o v a l
o f t h e p l a n s f o r the b r i d g e
by the S e c r e t a r y o f War t o i n s u r e t h a t t h e b r i d g e would n o t o b s t r u c t ,
or i n j u r i o u s l y
and
modify n a v i g a t i o n of t h a t r i v e r .
the b r i d g e , c o n s t r u c t e d
impair,
Such a p p r o v a l was o b t a i n e d
i n s u b s t a n t i a l compliance w i t h t h e requirements
o f the S e c r e t a r y o f War, p r o v i d e d a 135-foot v e r t i c a l n a v i g a t i o n a l
clearance
above h i g h w a t e r .
The p l a i n t i f f , who was t h e l e s s e e o f c e r t a i n warehouses on t h e banks
o f t h e r i v e r above the p o i n t o f the proposed b r i d g e , contended t h a t t h e
b r i d g e would be a n u i s a n c e and o b s t r u c t , i m p a i r and i n j u r i o u s l y
modify i n t e r -
s t a t e and f o r e i g n commerce; t h a t t h e expense o f s t r i k i n g masts w h i c h exceed
135-foot h e i g h t t o p e r m i t passage o f t h e v e s s e l s under t h e b r i d g e would be so
g r e a t a s t o d e s t r o y h i s warehouse b u s i n e s s .
�- k I n upholding
t h e l e g a l i t y of the b r i d g e t h e Court s t a t e d ( a t pages
39U-395):
"The b r i d g e being c o n s t r u c t e d i n accordance w i t h the l e g i s l a t i o n of
b o t h t h e S t a t e and f e d e r a l governments must be deemed a l a w f u l s t r u c t u r e .
I t cannot, a f t e r such l e g i s l a t i o n , be t r e a t e d a s a p u b l i c n u i s a n c e ; and howe v e r much i t may i n t e r f e r e w i t h t h e p u b l i c r i g h t of n a v i g a t i o n i n t h e E a s t
R i v e r , and t h e r e b y a f f e c t t h e p r o f i t s or b u s i n e s s of p r i v a t e p e r s o n s , i t
cannot, on t h a t ground, be the s u b j e c t o f complaint b e f o r e t h e c o u r t s . The
p l a i n t i f f i s not d e p r i v e d of h i s p r o p e r t y nor of the enjoyment o f i t ; nor
does he from t h a t cause s u f f e r any damage d i f f e r e n t i n c h a r a c t e r from t h e
r e s t of the p u b l i c . He a l l e g e s t h a t h i s b u s i n e s s o f a warehouse-keeper on
t h e banks of t h e r i v e r above the b r i d g e w i l l be i n some degree l e s s e n e d by
the d e l a y a t t e n d i n g t h e passage under i t of v e s s e l s w i t h h i g h m a s t s .
The
i n c o n v e n i e n c e and p o s s i b l e l o s s o f b u s i n e s s from t h i s cause a r e not d i f f e r e n t from t h a t w h i c h o t h e r s on the banks o f the r i v e r above the b r i d g e may
s u f f e r . E v e r y p u b l i c improvement, w h i l s t adding t o t h e convenience of t h e
people a t l a r g e , a f f e c t s more or l e s s i n j u r i o u s l y t h e i n t e r e s t s of some. A
new channel of commerce opened, t u r n i n g t r a d e i n t o i t from o t h e r c o u r s e s ,
may a f f e c t t h e b u s i n e s s and i n t e r e s t s o f persons who l i v e on t h e o l d r o u t e s .
A new mode of t r a n s p o r t a t i o n may r e n d e r of l i t t l e v a l u e o l d conveyances.
E v e r y r a i l w a y i n a new c o u n t r y i n t e r f e r e s w i t h t h e b u s i n e s s of s t a g e coaches
and side-way t a v e r "t; and i t would not be more absurd f o r t h e i r owners t o
complain of and o b j e c t t o i t s c o n s t r u c t i o n t h a n f o r p a r t i e s on t h e banks of
t h e E a s t R i v e r t o complain of and o b j e c t t o the improvement w h i c h connects
t h e two g r e a t c i t i e s on t h e harbor of New York."
I n i t s d e c i s i o n on somewhat s i m i l a r c a s e , decided i n 1883,
upholding
r e g u l a t i o n s i s s u e d by the C i t y of Chicago to r e s t r i c t openings o f movable
span b r i d g e s a c r o s s the Chicago R i v e r d u r i n g c e r t a i n d a y l i g h t hours,
the
Supreme Court of the U n i t e d S t a t e s r e i t e r a t e s i t s p r e v i o u s l y s t a t e d v i e w t h a t
u n t i l Congress a c t s on t h e s u b j e c t , the power of the S t a t e over b r i d g e s a c r o s s
i t s n a v i g a b l e streams i s p l e n a r y .
679
(Escanaba Company v . Chicago, 107 U.
S.
(1883).
The f o r e g o i n g d e c i s i o n s coupled w i t h the c o n f l i c t t h a t r e p e a t e d l y a r o s e
whenever n a v i g a b l e waterways were being c r o s s e d by b r i d g e s , l e d to the e n a c t ment by Congress o f s e p a r a t e l a w s a u t h o r i z i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n of b r i d g e s a c r o s s
navigable waterways.
Some o f t h e s e l a w s s e t f o r t h the h o r i z o n t a l and
vertical
�- 5
n a v i g a t i o n a l c l e a r a n c e s t o be r e q u i r e d .
Other enactments p r o v i d e d t h a t
c o n s t r u c t i o n of the b r i d g e s a u t h o r i z e d t h e r e i n s h o u l d conform w i t h r e g u l a t i o n s approved by the S e c r e t a r y of War
f o r the S e c u r i t y of n a v i g a t i o n .
At
the t u r n of the c e n t u r y , Congress enacted g e n e r a l l e g i s l a t i o n on t h i s subj e c t , w h i c h has s i n c e been i n c o r p o r a t e d , w i t h amendments and a d d i t i o n s , i n
the U. S. Code, S e c t i o n s 4OI-4O6; hS 1-502; and
512-534.
I n numerous i n s t a n c e s Congress, by law, has d e c l a r e d c e r t a i n r e a c h e s
(See 33 U.S.C.
of i n t r a s t a t e or i n t e r s t a t e waterways to be n o n - n a v i g a b l e .
21 e t . seq.)
The a f f e c t e d r e a c h e s of waterways u s u a l l y have been s h o r t .
I n a few i n s t a n c e s , the waterway d e c l a r e d non-navigable was
a l t e r n a t e c h a n n e l which a f f o r d e d i n c r e a s e d n a v i g a b i l i t y .
the C o n g r e s s i o n a l
a c t i o n has p e r m i t t e d
I n other
395* 396
and 1234,
high-
i n law but w h i c h
were b e i n g used f o r n a v i g a t i o n o n l y s l i g h t l y or not a t a l l .
e x t e n s i o n of a s t r e e t .
an
cases,
c o n s t r u c t i o n of l o w - l e v e l f i x e d
way b r i d g e s a c r o s s c h a n n e l s p r e v i o u s l y deemed n a v i g a b l e
the l e g i s l a t i o n p e r m i t t e d
r e p l a c e d by
I n a few
cases,
f i l l i n g of the c h a n n e l f o r commercial usage or f o r
F o r r e c e n t examples, see Senate R e p o r t s Nos.
8 4 t h Congress, 1 s t s e s s i o n and House Report No.
Congress, 1 s t s e s s i o n , w h i c h r e p o r t on l e g i s l a t i o n t h a t d e c l a r e d
258,
907,
84th
certain
waterways n o n - n a v i g a b l e .
No c o u r t d e c i s i o n has been found w h i c h would r e q u i r e the payment of
j u s t compensation to upstream landowners i n any c a s e where e i t h e r :
1.
2.
A waterway i s d e c l a r e d non-navigable by A c t of Congress; or
A b r i d g e , as c o n s t r u c t e d , p r o v i d e s
c l e a r a n c e s than were t h e r e t o f o r e
s u b s t a n t i a l l y lower n a v i g a t i o n a l
available.
�- 6 On the o t h e r hand, t h e Supreme Court d e c i s i o n s c i t e d above, e s p e c i a l l y
Gilman v . P h i l a d e l p h i a , and M i l l e r v . Mayor of New
propriety—under
Y o r k , c l e a r l y support t h e
modern s u r f a c e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c o n d i t i o n s — o f
reasonable
r e s t r i c t i o n s upon waterway t r a n s p o r t a t i o n t h r o u g h e s t a b l i s h m e n t
of b r i d g e
clearances:
1.
Which t a k e i n t o account t r a n s p o r t a t i o n economics;
2.
Which may
a d v e r s e l y a f f e c t upstream p r o p e r t i e s ;
3.
Which may
r e q u i r e a l t e r a t i o n or m o d i f i c a t i o n
so t h e y can be accommodated under the b r i d g e s ;
It.
Which may
of c e r t a i n v e s s e l s
and
n e c e s s i t a t e a s h i f t i n the f o r m of movement of c e r t a i n
commodities from waterway t r a n s p o r t a t i o n t o o t h e r a v a i l a b l e means, such as
r a i l , highway or p i p e l i n e .
Such r e s t r i c t i o n s on b r i d g e c l e a r a n c e s a r e r e g u l a t i o n s of commerce
aimed a t s e r v i n g the o v e r a l l p u b l i c i n t e r e s t .
They do not r e q u i r e payment
of j u s t compensation e i t h e r t o the upstream landowners or t o the owners of
affected vessels.
The Department of Commerce, w o r k i n g i n c o l l a b o r a t i o n w i t h Department
of Defense a g e n c i e s ( e s p e c i a l l y the Corps of E n g i n e e r s ) , the U. S. Coast
Guard, Department o f t h e T r e a s u r y , and the Tennessee V a l l e y A u t h o r i t y ,
d r a f t e d l e g i s l a t i o n t o modernize e x i s t i n g b r i d g e c l e a r a n c e l a w s .
b i l l was
s u b m i t t e d t o t h e Congress on J a n u a r y 18,
y e t been i n t r o d u c e d
of
1957*
has
The d r a f t
The p r o p o s a l has
not
i n the form of a b i l l i n e i t h e r the Senate or t h e House
Representatives.
/s/
C. W.
ENFIELD
C. W. ENFIELD
G e n e r a l Counsel
�����Dumb barge " H y g r a d e No. 8 " d i s c h a r g i n g at A m e r i c a n O i l C o . dock at R o s s l y n , V a . ,
16 June 1955. G e o r g e Washington M e m o r i a l P a r k w a y and L i t t l e R i v e r at r i g h t ;
T h e o d o r e R o o s e v e l t I s l a n d , c e n t e r top; V i r g i n i a C h a n n e l , P o t o m a c R i v e r , left.
C o u r t e s y of U. S. C o r p s of E n g i n e e r s
D e p a r t m e n t of the A r m y
" P o l i n g B r o s . No. 9 " o i l b a r g e .
C o u r t e s y of U. S. C o r p s of E n g i n e e r s
D e p a r t m e n t of the A r m y
��Photograph No. U. The s e l f - p r o p e l l e d o i l
tanker "F. A. Verdon", operated by Spentonbush
F u e l Transport S e r v i c e , a t the AMOCO dock. I t
a l s o p o i n t s out the proximity of the dock to
Key Bridge.
����
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Report to the Committee on Public Works United States Senate concerning navigational clearances in highway bridges across the Potomac River above Hains Point
Subject
The topic of the resource
Bridges--Washington (D.C.)
Potomac River
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
Archival Box 12
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
February 8, 1957
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
United States Senate Committee on Public Works
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Documents
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/11a662d77150d4c1f916190189ba1e05.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=MICCC0zOIV0Viktic1TVR1ZRLfpGxq1bHKIkBzJfI7kq%7EyEFyUuHvCRP3OZhT9ROD7RpHtR1ZrVaP1VQ42axLsWu7oGL%7EvBr1dWNe27N0sZC5yCDe2OfKEddBZTXEhVCBMjxQMVO8iy%7EMS9SG31NxsHcyJL8kAsRdy-U38igvKk0TNIR9SbvCah7jwYGOPg%7ET%7E3Ps36Mg3q0qV%7E3TmNs8FkePfc7iwU2yY9rR9RvaXbHQ6unhnMcfV1ayThpNcfOk7MhqXj9QKcIJhUux1IiDyLEQMHbM8B9k5h6PUJNefMwRXhO7suss03X-LFBAj9UzcDmwQzEp01EPCmC%7EeRoTw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
2a619ba7352102b3840bef1e73166e0d
PDF Text
Text
TAFT BRIDGE LIONS:
ARCHITECTURAL ASSESSMENT
Prepared for:
D.C. Department of Public Works
Design, Engineering and Construction Administration
Bureau of Transportation and Construction Services
2000 14th Street, N.W., 5th Floor
Washington, D.C. 20009
DeLeuw Cather, Inc.
1133 15th Street N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005
Prepared by:
Parsons Engineering Science, Inc.
10521 Rosehaven Street
Fairfax, Virginia 22030
February 1996
�T A B L E OF CONTENTS
1
2
2
8
12
14
�LIST OF PLATES
Plate 1.
3
Plate 2.
3
Plate 3. Connecticut Avenue Bridge, ca. 1908, with Lions
5
Plate 4. Connecticut Avenue Bridge, ca. 1910, with Lions
5
�1
Taft Bridge Lions: Architectural Assessment
Executive Summary
The Lions, located on the William Howard Taft Bridge on Connecticut Avenue over Rock
Creek Park, have deteriorated and must be replaced. The District of Columbia Department of
Public Works has requested Parsons Engineering Science, Inc. to prepare a report recommending
a course of action in the replacement of the statues.
The existing lions, which date from 1908, are made of concrete to resemble limestone.
Concrete was a new medium for sculpture in 1908 and was received with considerable interest
by artists and engineers. Sculptor Roland Hinton Perry, although familiar with other materials,
appears to have chosen to sculpt his Lions in concrete to complement the Taft Bridge, at that
time the longest concrete bridge in the world.
It is the recommendation of this report that the Lions be re-cast in concrete using modern
technology that would incorporate fiberglass, or some equally durable material, in the mixture
that would enable the statues to withstand the debilitating forces that eroded Perry's original
Lions. Replacing the existing lions with lions made of concrete, or secondarily with those made
of limestone, would be in keeping with the sculptor's original intent.
�2
Taft Bridge Lions: Architectural Assessment
Introduction
The Taft Bridge Lions, four sculptures situated on the William Howard Taft Bridge on
Connecticut Avenue over Rock Creek Park, are presently in a deteriorated condition and
measures must be taken to replace them. This report will assist the Department of Public Works
in deciding whether the lions shall be replaced in kind to maintain their historic integrity or
whether they may be replaced by lions executed in a different medium. I f they are to be
replaced by lions sculpted in a different medium, what material would be better? This report
will explore various alternatives, and recommend a course of action that best reflects the
sculptor's original intent.
Historic Context
The concrete-arched William Howard Taft Bridge carries Connecticut Avenue in a
roughly north-south direction across Rock Creek Park in Northwest Washington, D.C. The
bridge originally was called the Connecticut Avenue Bridge, or more popularly, the Million
Dollar Bridge (Plates 1 and 2). It was authorized by Congress in the March 3, 1897,
appropriations act for the District of Columbia. In a competition for the best design, three civil
engineers were invited to submit designs, and prizes were offered for the top three designs.
New York engineers W. H. Breithaupt and L . L . Buck each submitted two designs. George S.
Morison, of Chicago, submitted one (Engineering News, January 27, 1898:54).
The bridge was to be located prominently on a wide avenue lined with fine residences,
and would be visible from both Rock Creek Park and the National Zoological Park. Because
of its prominent visibility, it was decided that the bridge should be a monumental span to
"comport with the dignity of the thoroughfare of which it was a part" (Engineering News, June
1, 1905). Breithaupt's and Buck's designs were for Melan arch and steel arch spans, with
masonry piers and abutments. George Morison's design, which was the one selected, consisted
of full-centered masonry arches. Morison prepared cost estimates for the bridge using granite,
some unspecified cheaper stone, and concrete. While concrete may have been chosen because
it was the least expensive alternative, cost of the bridge does not seem to have been the overriding consideration. Breithaupt's and Buck's designs for the steel arches and the Melan arches
were all, except for one, less expensive than Morison's concrete span (Engineering News,
January 27, 1898:54).
Morison was a firm believer in the use of masonry for memorial bridges. As he wrote
in an 1898 paper, entitled "Masonry":
It is the one material which is available for really permanent work. It should be
massive and it must be well done. It is the most expensive form of good
construction; it belongs to the class of works which are commonly associated with
architecture rather than with engineering. . . . The one material adapted to
�Connecticut Boulevard Bridge,
The Largest Concrete Bridge in the World,
Washington.
P l a t e 1 . C o n n e c t i c u t Avenue Boridge
Connecticut Avenue Bridge, Washington
P l a t e 2.
C o n n e c t i c u t Avenue Bridge
�4
monumental work is masonry; honest substantial masonry; not a veneering of cut
stone which covers a skeleton and gives a massive external appearance
. . . (quoted
in Bird 1991).
Although the ancient Romans had used concrete as a building medium, the technique had
been lost. The modern re-discovery of the material was a nineteenth-century phenomenon.
However, one nineteenth-century problem with using concrete in arched bridges was that its
behavior under live loads was unknown. From 1890 to 1895, the Austrian Society of Engineers
and Architects performed extensive experiments on full-sized concrete arches. The results of
these experiments were widely reported in engineering journals throughout Europe and the
United States, where they were received with considerable interest (Spero 1994: 134-135). Civil
engineer, Edwin Thacher, expressed this growing excitement over the medium for bridgebuilding in an 1899 Engineering News article,
They are more beautiful and graceful in design, architectural ornamentation can be
applied as sparingly or as lavishly as desired; they have vastly greater durability, and
generally greater ultimate economy; they are comparatively free from vibration and
noise; they are proof against tornadoes, high water or fire; the cost of maintenance
is confined to the pavements, and is no greater than for any other part of the street;
home labor is employed in building i t . . . and its cost as a rule does not much, if
any, exceed that of a steel bridge carrying a pavement . . . where the people have
been more thoroughly educated up to it, there has been no lack of confidence in it
for some years . . . . We hear nothing now from intelligent men about mud bridges
(quoted in Spero 1994:136).
Concrete offered all of the advantages of masonry without the disadvantages of other
forms of masonry such as stone and brick. Stone and brick masonry were expensive and labor
intensive. " . . . Each element of a masonry bridge was subject to distinct internal stresses. If
one unit failed, the entire structure was endangered. Concrete, however, was inexpensive and
the monolithic nature of concrete construction made the bridge one structural unit . . . (Bird
1991).
Construction of the Taft Bridge was begun in 1897, amid enthusiasm over the use of
concrete as a building medium. It was completed in 1907. Repeated difficulties in obtaining
necessary appropriations from Congress frequently delayed construction. At the time it opened
to traffic, it was the largest unreinforced concrete bridge in the world (Fawcett 1908:87). Such
decorative elements of the bridge as the arch rings, brackets, dentils, quoins, moldings, and
railings were precast concrete. Each piece was separately molded and set in place like cut stone.
The aggregate used in the concrete for these elements was made up of diorite, a granite-like
material, that was found in a bluff about 500 feet from the south end of the bridge (Engineering
News, June 1, 1905:572). Engineering News called the combination of molded concrete block
and monolithic concrete masonry "exceedingly rare" (June 1, 1905:571).
At each of the four corners of the bridge is a concrete lion resting on a granite base
(Plates 3 and 4). The lions were sculpted by Roland Hinton Perry. Perry, born in New York
on January 25, 1870, was a painter as well as a sculptor. He attended the Ecole des Beaux-Arts
�P l a t e 3.
C o n n e c t i c u t Avenue B r i d g e , c a . 1908, w i t h L i o n s
Connecticut Avenue Bridge, Showing Driveway, Washington. D. C.
P l a t e 4.
C o n n e c t i c u t Avenue B r i d g e , c a . 1910, w i t h L i o n s
�6
and the Academie Julian in Paris for four years from 1890 to 1894, where he studied under
Gerome, Delance, Callot, Chapu, and Puech (Opitz 1986:733). Perry returned to New York
in 1894, and began his career as a painter. In 1895, he was commissioned to execute four
octagonal medallions for the ceiling of the entrance pavilion at the Library of Congress. These
medallions were so well received that Perry was awarded a commission to sculpt the Court of
Neptune Fountain for the front of the library. He alternated between monumental Neoclassical
sculpture and portrait painting of fashionable notables and society ladies until 1920, when he
confined his work to painting (Goode 1974:585). Other works by Perry include the bronze
doors for the Buffalo, New York, Historical Society; Pennsylvania for the top of the dome of
the state capital at Harrisburg; the New York Civil War Memorial, Andersonville, Georgia; and
Primitive Man and Serpent, in Brookgreen Gardens, South Carolina, in addition to the Taft
Bridge Lions (Goode 1974:585). Perry died October 27, 1941.
Roland Perry was certainly familiar with other materials that could be used for casting
the statues. That he chose concrete at this time for these particular sculptures suggests that he
wanted them to complement the material used in the monolithic bridge. His concrete lions are
in two stances, one at rest and one roaring, for the opposite sides of each end of the bridge.
They attracted much attention from the engineering world when they were cast. Engineering
News, in an article describing the process of casting the lions, noted that "the molding of large
and intricate figures in concrete is a comparatively recent process, and even now is in the hands
of a few specialists, but the highly artistic effects that some of these gentlemen have been able
to procure makes it apparent that there is a wide field for this work" (Engineering News,
November 19, 1908:545).
Prior to casting the actual lions, Perry provided the Engineer Commissioner and the
Supervising Architect quarter-size models for their approval, and full-size models for the casting
contractor, the Erkins Company, of New York City. The lions are approximately nine feet high
and twelve feet long, and are of solid concrete. Within each lion are reinforcing metal rods in
each fore leg, in the curled tail, and on a horizontal plane at about the level of the mouth to
reinforce the head. Although the lions are currently believed to have been pre-cast in Perry's
studio, Engineering News in the 1908 article reported that each lion was cast in place on its
pedestal, using two plaster molds.
The models were shipped from Perry's Hoboken, New Jersey, studio to the Erkins
Company plant in New York, where the molds were made. The molds consisted of about 150
pieces, which ranged in size from 9 inches to 24 inches in thickness and interlocked to create
a strong backing. The longer pieces were reinforced with one-inch iron pipe and wooden strips.
The pieces were designed so that the last piece placed was a key that had to be taken out first
in removing the mold.
In the casting, rough forms were placed inside the mold, about five inches from the face
forms so that a surface coating could be cast first and later filled in. The surface layer was
approximately eight inches thick and first worked in well by hand, then rammed by small iron
rammers about two inches in diameter. A second ramming followed, using wooden mallets, and
�7
then a third, using sand bag rammers until no impression could be made in the concrete with the
hand. The surface of this first layer was then scratched with a nail or trowel so that the inner
concrete filling would bond. The work proceeded this way in two foot, three inch layers up to
the top until the keying was made in the head of the lion.
In describing the lions, the Engineer of Bridges for the District of Columbia reported that
the desired effect was that of limestone. The amount of material used in making one batch of
concrete for the facing layer consisted of:
2 cu. ft. Dexter Portland Cement
1 cu. ft. Blano Stainless Cement
6 cu. ft. Indiana limestone sand
5 qts. refined yellow ochre
1 qt. waterproofing
7-1/2 gals, water (Engineering News, November 19, 1908:545).
By 1930, years of alternate freezing and thawing, vibrations from traffic on the bridge,
as well, perhaps, as general neglect had seriously undermined the structure of the lions. In that
year, the Washington Star reported that the Taft Bridge lions were disintegrating and that the
disintegration was deeper than merely the surface layer, that the structure itself was affected.
The newspaper predicted that if repairs were not undertaken soon, in a few years the lions would
be "completely tailless, possibly headless." Criticizing the use of inferior concrete or natural
stone, the Star's recommendation was to replace them with lions cast in bronze (Washington
Star, April 25, 1930). Nevertheless, despite the reported disrepair of the lions in 1930, it does
not appear that any measures were taken to restore them at that time.
By the 1960s, however, large cracks had formed in the lions, the concrete was
crumbling, and chunks of concrete had fallen off. In 1965, the District government decided to
restore them. Bids for the work were invited, and the $10,000 contract was awarded to Italian
sculptor Renato Lucchetti. Lucchetti worked for several months to develop a concrete that
would match the texture and color of the original lions. He first removed all the loose concrete
from the lions and their pedestals. Concrete along the cracks was chiseled back several inches
to provide a large enough area for the new concrete to bond with the old. Once Mr. Lucchetti
had achieved a solid base, he applied the new concrete, reshaping the statues (Washington Post,
April 5, 1965). He began work on the first lion in April, 1965. By June 18, his work had been
inspected and accepted by the Commission of Fine Arts. The second letter of acceptance for
the second lion was dated July 29; the third on September 1; and the final lion was accepted on
October 6 (National Archives Record Group 66, Box 1).
For whatever reason, Mr. Lucchetti's restoration of the lions has not held up. Once
again, the Taft Bridge lions are in a deteriorated state, with cracked and crumbling concrete.
Stains have appeared on the surface, indicating that the interior metal reinforcing rods are rusting
(Save Outdoor Sculpture! survey 1992). Reportedly, the concrete in the second layer beneath
the exterior surface has softened (Renaldo Lopez, sculpture conservator, telephone interview,
�8
September 1995). The questions facing the District of Columbia, Department of Public Works
concern the most effective treatment for the statues. Many alternatives have been suggested.
Alternatives and Recommendations
The first suggestion, noted in the 1930 article in the Washington Star and still put forth
by some, is to replace the lions with statues cast in bronze. However, it seems clear from
descriptions in the contemporary Engineering News that the "use of concrete in the bridge was
a conscious decision on the part of its designer, George Morison, its architect, and the city
engineers responsible for its construction. Concrete was a relatively new material whose
introduction for works of art was creating intense interest among engineers and whose properties
were only then being appreciated in the construction of monumental bridges. Based on the
evidence in Engineering News, the use of concrete in sculpting the lions was also a new and
challenging medium that would extend the medium of the bridge to the decoration and
ornamentation applied to that structure. Those involved in the design of the bridge wanted the
sculptures to represent stone. Nowhere in the historical record is it indicated that any thought
was given to the use of bronze in the casting of the lions.
A second alternative is to carve new lions from blocks of limestone. Limestone,
according to Renaldo Lopez, the conservator; is long-lasting; it hardens over time; and it will
drain moisture, thereby alleviating the problem of the alternating freeze and thaw conditions that
have undermined the structural integrity of the original concrete lions. According to the citation
given in Engineering News by the Engineer of Bridges of the District of Columbia, who had
charge of the construction, the intent was to get a limestone effect, which was attained in the
original sculptures. Carved limestone for the statues is an alternative that would retain the
original artistic intention of the sculptor. However, limestones vary considerably in their
porosity. Loosely cemented limestones are more porous and do not weather as well as harder
limestone (Rosenfeld 1965:112). I f it is decided to carve new lions from limestone blocks, a
superior grade of limestone should be used to avoid rapid deterioration that might result from
the use of an inferior grade.
Richard Livingston, who is team leader for exploratory research in the Highway
Engineering Research and Development Department of the Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA), suggests that Indiana limestone would be a good alternative stone for replacement
statues, although he believes that Georgia marble would be better (telephone interview, January
31, 1996). He also suggests that, if molds are available, robotic carving, as developed by Saint
John's Divine in New York City, would cut the cost of the sculpture considerably.
Other experts in the field of conservation recommend the use of alternative stone if the
desired result is increased durability. Andrej Dajnowski, conservator with the Chicago Park
District, who is presently restoring the concrete Fountain of Time in that city, recommends the
use of granite or basalt if the decision is made to carve new lions from stone (telephone
interview January 31, 1996). He believes that limestone and marble would deteriorate more
rapidly than granite or basalt.
�9
Also suggested is the use of stainless steel or aluminum that would resemble pewter
(telephone conversation with Charles Atherton, Commission of Fine Arts, September 1995).
Either of these materials would be viable options if color were the only consideration. However,
in keeping with the artist's original intent, they would probably not replicate the texture of stone
or concrete. Moreover, if the object is to adhere to Perry's original design and to re-create the
lions in the image he conceived, it makes more sense to use stone or concrete rather than attempt
to make metal look like stone or concrete. An additional consideration to weigh in this case is
the reception that would be received from the people of the District of Columbia who use the
bridge and who have become attached to their lions. Would stainless steel or aluminum inspire
the same attachment?
Renaldo Lopez, sculptor and conservator, believes that concrete technology today has
advanced, so that sculptures could be made that would last longer than those created in the first
decade of the twentieth century. It should be remembered also that Perry's lions, although
deteriorated, seem to have lasted for 57 years, from 1908 to 1965, before they required
restoration. According to Lopez, fiberglass added to the concrete mixture would provide greater
stability and longer life. Other additives also have been suggested. Andrej Dajnowski, of the
Chicago Park District, believes that acrylic, if properly emulsified, would produce a long-lasting
concrete. However, the difficulty with acrylic, according to Dajnowski, is that if it is not
completely emulsified, it may delaminate in-the future. Finally, a caveat raised by Richard
Livingston, at FHWA, is that the use of such additives in concrete is relatively new, so there
is no long-term experience with them that would allow scientists to predict with assurance the
durability of these mixtures.
Livingston reports on the use of pozzolan as an additive to concrete that creates a better,
more durable material. In his investigations of the concrete used extensively as mortar in the
Hagia Sophia in Istanbul, which has lasted 1500 years, Livingston found that rather than the
usual carbonated lime mixture, a pozzolanic mixture, using ground brick dust as the pozzolan,
made a stronger concrete. Modern pozzolans include silica fume from ferrosilicon refineries,
slag from steel blast furnaces, and fly ash from coal-fired electric power plants. The problem
inherent in pozzolanic concretes is that they take much longer to cure than Portland cement
concrete (Livingston 1993).
All the experts contacted agreed that concrete is a complex material, particularly for
sculpture. Because of its complicated requirements, it is rarely ever used for that purpose today.
Concrete requires a pH of at least 11 or 12; a pH of 10 or less signifies carbonation, a process
by which carbon dioxide in the air penetrates the concrete and converts it to carbonate
compounds. This indicates that the concrete is deteriorating. Livingston reported that once
concrete dries, the pH balance on the exterior, where it comes into contact with the air, drops
to a pH of about 8.5, while on the interior the pH may remain at 12. However, experts disagree
on the use of materials to coat a concrete statue to slow the carbonation process and increase the
longevity of the concrete. Dajnowski recommends coating a newly cast concrete sculpture with
a water repellent material, such as Siloxane Plus. He also reported on a limewash procedure
used in Europe, although apparently not yet used in the United States. In this process, lime is
�10
mixed with water to create a thick paste about the consistency of sour cream. The paste is
liberally applied to the sculpture and allowed to dry before it is removed; then the process is
repeated. The limewash penetrates the .concrete, raising the pH level, and making the concrete
stronger. The process, according to Dajnowski, has been used on sculptures in Germany with
some beneficial results, although it does make the concrete lighter in color.
Livingston has reported on a similar process used" since the Middle Ages in which
limestone is washed with a solution of calcium carbonate and water. When the solution dries,
some calcite remains in the pores of the stone. However, the calcite can be washed out when
it rains, so this process does not constitute a permanent treatment, but is rather, in Livingston's
words "a sacrificial coating." Nevertheless, if the process is repeated often enough that more
calcite remains than is washed out by rain, the procedure can protect the sculpture (Livingston
1986:318).
As for the application of some kind of plastic coating to make the concrete waterproof,
Livingston warns that these may do more harm than good. They can trap moisture and salts at
the interface, thus leading to accelerated deterioration. They also create a hard surface that
reacts differently from the underlying material to the freeze-thaw cycles, creating interfacial
stress that can result in spalling (Livingston 1994:25).
Opinions differ also on whether a hollow statue is better than one cast solid. Renaldo
Lopez believes that a hollow concrete statue, cured in humidity, would withstand better the
alternate freeze-thaw conditions that have been so detrimental to Perry's solid concrete lions.
Hollow forms would not require the metal reinforcing rods that have rusted and leeched, and
that destroy the concrete from within (Lopez:personal communication, September 1995;
Dajnowski:personal communication, January 1996). Richard Livingston recommends casting
solid statues either without reinforcing rods altogether or, if reinforcing rods are necessary,
using stainless steel or titanium reinforcing rods, which would not corrode. However, he
acknowledges that both materials are expensive (Livingston.-personal communication January
1996). Andrej Dajnowski maintains that there are problems with either alternative. Hollow
forms may collapse, or moisture may penetrate the concrete or condense on the inside, thereby
presenting a different set of problems.
A final alternative to be considered is that of restoring the existing statues. Mr. Lopez
believes that this could be done, although, he states, it would be very expensive. The existing
metal rods would have to be removed and replaced with new rods of copper or stainless steel
that would not rust. The outer layer of the statues is hard, and with repair, could be re-used.
If the lions had not been restored in 1965, with large parts of their original concrete chipped
away and new concrete sculpted by Mr. Lucchetti, this would be the recommended procedure.
It would accord with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Rehabilitation,
which require that "distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of
craftsmanship that characterize a historic property shall be preserved," "the historic character
of a property shall be retained and preserved," and "deteriorated historic features shall be
repaired rather than replaced." However, much of the sculpture of the lions today appears to
�11
be the work of Mr. Lucchetti and dates from 1965. It is no longer exclusively the work of
Roland Perry, done in 1908. To the extent that the lions have been re-sculpted by Mr.
Lucchetti, it may be said they no longer retain their historic integrity.
The recommendation of this report, therefore, is, first, that the lions be recast in a
modern, more durable, form of concrete in keeping with the artist's original intent and design.
Secondly, if modern concrete does not appear to be cost-effective over the long term, to sculpt
the new lions from limestone, because limestone will last longer than even the most durable
concrete. It is not recommended that the lions be cast in stainless steel, aluminum, or bronze.
�12
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Atherton, Charles. Personal communication, September 1995.
Bird, Betty. "Connecticut Avenue Bridge," National Register of Historic Places Registration
Form, November 1991.
Burch, Gary A. and Steven M. Pennington, ed. Civil Engineering Landmarks of the Nation's
Capital. Washington, D . C : Committee on History and Heritage of the National Capital
Section, American Society of Civil Engineers.
"Casting the Concrete Lions for Connecticut Ave. Bridge, Washington, D . C , " Enginering
News, November 19, 1908, pp. 545-546.
"Competitive Designs for the Connecticut Avenue Viaduct, Washington, D . C , " Engineering
News, January 1898, p. 54.
"The Connecticut Avenue Bridge at Washington, D.C." Engineering News, March 26, 1908,
pp. 327-328.
"The Connecticut Avenue Concrete Arch Bridge at Washington, D . C , Engineering News, June
1, 1905, pp. 571-575.
Dajnowski, Andrej. Personal communication, January 1996.
Department of Highways and Public Roads Administration. Washington's Bridges: Historic and
Modern, 1948, p. 35.
"Disintegrating Doo-Dads," Evening Star, April 25, 1930.
Emery, Frederick A. "Washington's Historic Bridges," in Records of the Columbia Historical
Society, Washington, D . C , Vol. 39 (1938), pp. 49-70.
Fawcett, Waldon. "The Largest Concrete Bridge in the World," American Exporter, 1908, pp.
87-89.
Goode, James M. The Outdoor Sculpture of Washington, D.C.
Smithsonian Institution Press, 1974.
Washington, D . C : The
Horwitz, Elinor Lander. "The Man Who Fixed the Lions," Washington Star Magazine, March
6, 1966.
Livingston, Richard. Personal communication, January 1996.
�13
Livingston, Richard A. "Architectural Conservation and Applied Mineralogy," The Canadian
Mineralogist, Vol. 24 (1986), pp. 307-322.
. "Materials Analysis of the Masonry of the Hagia Sophia Basilica, Istanbul," in
C. A. Brebbia and R. J . B. Frewer, eds., Structural Repair and Maintenance of Historic
Buildings, 111. Southampton, U . K . : Computational Mechanics Publications, 1993.
. "Transferring Technology from Conservation Science to Infrastructure Renewal,"
Public Roads, Summer, 1994.
Lopez, Renaldo. Personal communication, September 1995.
McKee, Bradford. "Classical Span: Tales from the Life and Rebirth of William Howard Taft
Bridge," City Paper, March 10-16, 1995.
Montagna, Dennis. Personal communication, September 1995.
Myer, Donald Beekman. Bridges and the City of Washington. Washington, D . C : U.S.
Commission of Fine Arts, 1974.
Opitz, Glenn B . , ed. Mantle Fielding's Dictionary of American Painters, Sculptors, and
Engravers. Poughkeepsie, N.Y.: Apollo, 1983.
Pierce, Charles D. "Lions to Get New Faces," Evening Star, September 20, 1964.
"Plans for the Bridge," Washington Post, April 17, 1904.
Record Group 66, National Archives and Records Administration.
Record Group 328, National Archives and Records Administration.
Rosenfeld, Andree.
Nicolson, 1965.
The Inorganic Raw Materials of Antiquity. London: Weidenfeld and
Save Outdoor Sculpture! Survey Questionnaire, January 15, 1992.
Spero, P. A. C. & Co. and Louis Berger and Associates, Inc. "Historic Bridges in Maryland:
Historic Context Report", Maryland State Highway Administration, September 1994.
Sprat, Zack. "Rock Creek Bridges," in Records of the Columbia Historical Society,
Washington, D . C , Vol. 53-56, p. 122.
"Taft Bridge Lions Find Friend in Sculptor," Washington Post, April 8, 1965.
�LIST OF PERSONNEL
Project Manager
Elizabeth Crowell, Ph.D.
Principal Investigator
Alice Crampton, M.A.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Taft Bridge Lions : architectural assessment
Subject
The topic of the resource
Perry, Roland Hinton, 1870-1941
Statues--Washington (D.C.)
Description
An account of the resource
Photographs of the rehabilitation and restoration of the <a href="https://ddotlibrary.omeka.net/items/show/312" target="_blank" rel="noopener" title="Perry Lions">Perry Lions</a> found on the William Howard Taft Bridge (also known as the Connecticut Avenue Bridge) are available.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
Archival Box 12
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
February 1996
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
District of Columbia. Department of Public Works
DeLeuw Cather, Inc.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Documents
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/0cc2a0a61b434047cbdf72ed21aca133.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=BLiy9F0dlzyViyeRH8PxPLiR2AKOQN-16Pbw1D7u3AO6li6ZLzkTjDGeRgADJYe-FVruodwCENXArOqUwWJJLQxHiOw1G0Y0jGh7S2uif8lM96jRxI%7ExQbRqYx2lfp84knJgQa4O8T4TK1pV5Zo%7EMWr7Hn-JRHjvuoCiTle4sAsAeQpMkNX8QTbr-3c0VcfZzQWPnKLDUhp0vTK3ZOOgzihhxGICbH3gtVpbDXjJUXxcVCZPPQUkYynyREALcm6u-nJ-CSEHjn%7EZK1hCpZ0Ef4vGdM4ecAmCACuifbzSi46Q5tCzgKq2p%7EK0APOK3Q4wRIWdbIE-UeXCBFfMRGZofg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
a04e6fc61cbe867600a569c58ed0567e
PDF Text
Text
I
I
R E P O R T ON
T R A F F I C V O L U M E S AND C A P A C I T Y R E Q U I R E M E N T S
FOR
P O T O M A C R I V E R B R I D G E S AND INNER T R A F F I C L O O P
Prepared for
National Capital Planning C o m m i s s i o n
by
Wilbur Smith and A s s o c i a t e s
265 Church Street
New Haven, Connectic
1955
LIBRARY GOPY
RETURN TO
OFFICE I F PLANNING AND PROGRAMMING
DEPT. OF HIGHWAYS AND TRAFFIC
GOVT. Of THE USTRICf OF COLUMBIA
FILE NO:
05 5
�libit
cS>mdli
and,
cdj^cciatej
TRAFFIC • PARKING
• TRANSIT
• HIGHWAYS
255
CHURCH STREET
June H i ,
1955
Mr. Harland Bartholomew, Chairman
National C a p i t a l Planning Commission
Washington 2 5 , D. C.
Dear Mr. Bartholomew:
We are pleased to transmit to you our report on t r a f f i c volumes
and capacity requirements f o r Potomac River bridges and the proposed
Inner T r a f f i c Loop. This study was authorized by the National C a p i t a l
Planning Commission i n an agreement dated June 2 6 , l°51i.
I t i s evident from the analyses and i n v e s t i g a t i o n s that a d d i t i o n a l
Potomac River crossings w i l l be required to adequately accommodate
future t r a f f i c . The recommended system of crossings includes both new
c e n t r a l and p e r i p h e r a l bridges, as w e l l as improved e x i s t i n g bridges.
Approach and connector roads must be c a r e f u l l y integrated with bridge
plans to provide e f f i c i e n t d i s t r i b u t o r f a c i l i t i e s .
The Inner Loop should be developed as a high capacity multi-lane
expressway. A s u b s t a n t i a l portion of t h i s route i s needed to accommodate t r a f f i c which would desire to use new bridges. Improvements to
north-south roadways serving southwest Washington must provide capacity
increases between the expressway and Constitution Avenue.
I n d e r i v i n g t r a f f i c requirements, we made exhaustive studies of
a l l f a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g t r a f f i c growths and d e s i r e s . Consideration was
given to population and v e h i c l e ownership trends i n the D i s t r i c t of
Columbia and i t s metropolitan area i n V i r g i n i a and Maryland; proposals
f o r redevelopment plans, f o r d i s p e r s a l of governmental a c t i v i t i e s , and
for the removal of temporary buildings; and f i n a l l y , the need f o r
s t a b i l i z i n g and d i r e c t i n g the growth of the c e n t r a l business d i s t r i c t
as recommended i n the Comprehensive Plan. The scope of the study was
such that lire were able to use previously c o l l e c t e d data, p r i n c i p a l l y
t h a t developed from the 19U8 o r i g i n - d e s t i n a t i o n study i n our report on
Highway Transportation f o r the Metropolitan Area of V i r g i n i a .
I n reviewing the report, you w i l l note that we have attempted to
evaluate the roadway needs i n terms of peak-hour t r a f f i c requirements.
This i s a sound highway planning approach; however, we r e a l i z e that
such close evaluation of needs must be reconciled or adapted to budgeta r y and timing f a c t o r s . A completely d e s i r a b l e s o l u t i o n i s u n l i k e l y .
Also, management controls cannot be overlooked as a p o t e n t i a l means of
modifying peak-hour needs.
NEW
HAVEN, CONN.
C O L U M B I A , S.
C.
RICHMOND,
VA.
�June H i , 1955
Mr. Harland Bartholomew
2.
We have assumed that the automobile w i l l not be d r a s t i c a l l y changed
i n f u n c t i o n a l design and r e l a t i v e cost before 1970. Here, again, we
r e a l i z e that a b a s i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t v e h i c l e might a l t e r the estimates of
t r a f f i c needs on which our recommendations are based.
Trends i n present modes of t r a v e l have been assumed to continue
u n t i l 1970. New and competing forms of t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , and marked
changes i n preferences f o r p a r t i c u l a r modes of transportation would
a l t e r r e s u l t s we have a n t i c i p a t e d . While, these f a c t o r s are recognized
as very important, we do not b e l i e v e that changes i n them can be
a c c u r a t e l y enough forecast to permit t h e i r use i n the c a l c u l a t i o n of
future t r a f f i c patterns f o r the Washington Metropolitan Area.
Throughout the course of our studies we have been i n close contact
with the Department of Highways of the D i s t r i c t of Columbia as w e l l as
the s t a f f of the National C a p i t a l Planning Commission. We are g r a t e f u l
for a l l of the valuable help furnished during the conduct of the work.
I n a d d i t i o n , we appreciate the splendid a s s i s t a n c e and cooperation of
the many other governmental agencies w i t h i n V i r g i n i a , the D i s t r i c t of
Columbia, and Maryland.
We hope that our work w i l l point the way toward an e a r l y s o l u t i o n
of a most important problem.
R e s p e c t f u l l y submitted,
WSStnkm
�R E P O R T ON
T R A F F I C V O L U M E S AND C A P A C I T Y R E Q U I R E M E N T S
FOR
P O T O M A C R I V E R B R I D G E S AND INNER T R A F F I C L O O P
Prepared for
National Capital Planning C o m m i s s i o n
by
Wilbur Smith and Associates
265 Church Street
New Haven, Connecticut
1955
�TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
PART I - TRAFFIC AND CAPACITY NEEDS FOR POTOMAC RIVER CROSSINGS
1
INTRODUCTION
Population Factors
Land Use Trends
T r a f f i c Considerations
Previous Studies
Purpose and Scope
,
•
2
5
7
9
12
14
BASIC DATA
Origin-Destination Studies
S p e c i a l Studies
Development of Present and Future T r a v e l Desires
COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING PROPOSALS
General Considerations
Land Use and Generators i n the C e n t r a l C i t y .
Location of C e n t r a l Business D i s t r i c t
C i r c u l a t i o n System - Thoroughfare Plans
Possible E f f e c t s of Proposed Federal Highway L e g i s l a t i o n
on Route Planning
POTOMAC RIVER BRIDGES
14
15
16
19
19
20
22
24
27
29
E x i s t i n g Bridges
Future Bridge Needs
Accepted Proposed Bridges on Outer C i r c u m f e r e n t i a l
New Proposed R i v e r Crossings Considered
T r a f f i c P o t e n t i a l s of Potomac R i v e r Crossings
29
40
41
42
47
53
RECOMMENDATIONS
Inner Loop Expressway
Improvements to E x i s t i n g R i v e r Crossings and Approaches
New Potomac R i v e r Crossings
Schedule
53
53
56
59
PART I I - INNER TRAFFIC LOOP
INTRODUCTION
62
General Planning Considerations
T r a f f i c Considerations
i
63
64
�TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
THE INNER LOOP
67
T r a f f i c Usage
Land Requirements
67
69
P r i o r i t y of Development
72
DISTRIBUTION PROBLEMS from SOUTH and WEST
Present T r a f f i c Flows Across Mall
Southwest Redevelopment
Southwest Expressway
S t r e e t Capacity and Volumes
North-South Connectors
73
73
75
76
77
78
PART I I I - SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
82
R i v e r Crossings
The Inner Loop Expressway
82
84
<
ii
�TABLE OF FIGURES
PART I - TRAFFIC AND CAPACITY NEEDS FOR POTOMAC RIVER CROSSINGS
FIGURE
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.
Follows
Potomac River Crossings - Washington and V i c i n i t y
Population Trends
D i s t r i b u t i o n of Population - 1953 and 1970
T r a f f i c Volumes - Downtown Washington
Passenger Car R e g i s t r a t i o n 1920 - 1970
Origin-Destinations Zones and Stations
Major T r i p Desires - T y p i c a l 1953 Day
Trend of T o t a l D a i l y T r a f f i c Crossing the Potomac River
T o t a l Potomac R i v e r Crossings Generator by Zones
Major T r i p Desires - T y p i c a l 1970 Day
D i s t r i b u t i o n of Government Employment - 1954
D i s t r i b u t i o n of V i r g i n i a T r i p s i n Zero Sector of Central
Washington ,
Proposed Regional Thoroughfare Plan
E x i s t i n g Elements - Metropolitan Expressway System
Assumed Status - 1970 - Metropolitan Expressway System
Hourly T r a f f i c Variations - Highway Bridge
Present T r a f f i c Volumes - Highway Bridge and Approaches
Hourly T r a f f i c V a r i a t i o n s - Memorial Bridge
Present T r a f f i c Volumes - Memorial Bridge and Approaches
Hourly T r a f f i c Variations - Key Bridge
Present T r a f f i c Volumes - Key Bridge
Hourly T r a f f i c Variations - Chain Bridge
Trends i n In-bound Peak Hour Potomac River Bridge T r a f f i c ....
Trends i n Outbound Potomac R i v e r Bridge T r a f f i c
Trends i n D a i l y Potomac River Bridge T r a f f i c
Inner Loop Expressway and Potomac R i v e r Bridges ..
Present T r a f f i c D i s t r i b u t i o n Based on T r a n s r i v e r T r i p Desires.
Anticipated 1970 T r a f f i c D i s t r i b u t i o n - Potomac R i v e r
Crossings
1
3
4
7
7
14
16
17
17
17
21
22
25
27
27
30
30
31
31
32
32
33
37
38
38
43
48
52
PART I I - INNER TRAFFIC LOOP
29.
30.
31.
32.
3334.
Inner Loop Expressway as Related to Redevelopment Areas
Present T r a f f i c Volumes - Independence Avenue Sector T y p i c a l 1954 Day
Anticipated T r a f f i c Volumes - T y p i c a l 1970 Day
Present T r a f f i c Operations, North-South S t r e e t at
Constitution Avenue, T y p i c a l 1954 Day
Anticipated T r a f f i c Volumes, North-South S t r e e t s at
Constitution Avenue, T y p i c a l 1970 Day
Possible Future T r a f f i c Operations, North-South S t r e e t s at
Constitution Avenue
iii
64
67
68
73
77
79
�PART I
TRAFFIC AND CAPACITY NEEDS
FOR
POTOMAC RIVER CROSSINGS
�INTRODUCTION
The Potomac R i v e r traverses the Washington Metropolitan Area i n
a meandering course.
Below L i t t l e F a l l s i t becomes a broad waterway
affected by t i d a l waters.
Washington i s located at the head of t i d e -
water navigation; above the c i t y the Potomac i s a mere stream, below
i t r a p i d l y transforms i n t o an arm of Chesapeake Bay.
Crossings are
affected by the change i n r i v e r width and navigation.
While not dominant economic assets i n the c i t y ' s development,
the Potomac and Anacostia R i v e r s have g r e a t l y influenced the patterns
of development and planning of the metropolitan area.
Because of
Washington's role as a " c a p i t a l c i t y " , the banks of the Potomac have
been devoted p r i n c i p a l l y to park and r e c r e a t i o n a l rather than to commercial purposes.
The r i v e r has never been a formidable b a r r i e r to the development
of Greater Washington.
Bridges have spanned the Potomac since the
e a r l i e r periods of development and have diminished the b a r r i e r e f f e c t s
of the r i v e r .
Figure 1 shows how the present and proposed Potomac
R i v e r crossings r e l a t e to the land development and highway patterns
i n the Washington Metropolitan Area.
Increased Federal employment and extended use of the automobile
have been instrumental i n the expansion and d i s p e r s a l of Washington
i n the l a s t quarter century.
Strong i n t e r p l a y has occurred between
the population and settlement changes i n the metropolitan area, the
a v a i l a b l e Potomac R i v e r crossings, and t r a n s - r i v e r t r i p s .
The devel-
opment of the suburban areas i n the Washington Metropolitan Area has
accentuated the need f o r e f f e c t i v e interchange of movements across
the Potomac.
T h i s i s p a r t i c u l a r l y true since the p r i n c i p a l employment
centqrs are located i n the c e n t r a l area.
��Population Factors
The Washington Metropolitan Area as defined by the census encompasses the D i s t r i c t of Columbia, Prince Georges and Montgomery Counties
i n Maryland, A r l i n g t o n and F a i r f a x Counties i n V i r g i n i a and the separate
c i t i e s of Alexandria and F a l l s Church.
Metropolitan Washington i s g r o w i n g — i n the decade between 1940 and
1950 i t s population increased over 50 percent, to 1,464,292 persons.
Since 1940, a s i g n i f i c a n t portion of the land i n the metropolitan area
has been urbanized.
Population trends are apparent from the data shown
i n Table I .
The expansion of the c i t y of Washington into adjoining areas has
diminished the dominance of the c e n t r a l c i t y .
T h i s i s quite evident
from Figure 2 which g r a p h i c a l l y portrays the r e l a t i v e growths of the
various d i s t r i c t s .
I n 1940 the c e n t r a l c i t y contained 69 percent of the
t o t a l population; by 1950 t h i s value was reduced to 55 percent.
Between
1940 and 1950 populations increased over 200 percent i n F a i r f a x and
Arlington Counties, V i r g i n i a , and i n Prince Georges County, Maryland.
Population i n Montgomery County increased 96 percent; i n Alexandria,
the oldest community i n V i r g i n i a , population grew 84 percent.
The automobile has developed Arlington i n t o a dormitory community
of Washington.
since 1900.
I t has doubled i t s population more than four times
I t s 1953 population i s estimated at 155,500, giving i t a
population density exceeding 7,000 persons per square mile.
Over h a l f of the population increase i n the V i r g i n i a area from
1950 to 1953 took place i n F a i r f a x County.
Growth can be expected
�TABLE I
POPULATION TRENDS IN WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA
Years
Census Area
1950
1953
33,520
61,790
75,000
103,000
26,615
57,040
135,450
156,000
165,000
25,264
40,929
98,557
128,000
293,000
7,535
8,200
9,000
1900
1910
1920
1930
1940
14,528
15,329
18,060
24,150
6,430
10,321
16,040
18,580
20,536
21,943
1970
Virginia
Alexandria
A r l i n g t o n CountyF a i r f a x County
F a l l s Church
(Included i n F a i r f a x County u n t i l 1948)
39,538
46,186
56,043
76,029
131,489
303,332
367,200
570,000
278,720
331,070
437,570
486,870
663,090
802,180
819,500
910,000
Montgomery County
30,451
32,089
34,921
49,200
83,910
164,400
212,600
304,000
Prince Georges County
29,898
36,147
43,347
60,100
84,490
194,180
278,700
416,000
60,349
68,236
78,268
109,300
168,400
358,580
491,300
720,000
378,607
445,492
571,881
672,199
962,979
1,464,092
1,678,000
2,200,000
76.5
72.5
68.8
54.7
48.8
41.3
TOTAL
D i s t r i c t of Columbia
Maryland
TOTAL
TOTAL Washington
Metropolitan Area
C e n t r a l C i t y as
Percent of
Metropolitan Area
73.5
74-4
Note—1953 and 1970 population estimates include only urbanized portions of the
F a i r f a x , Montgomery and Prince Georges Counties as indicated i n Figure 3-
�POPULATION
NATIONAL
CAPITAL
1UIU
PLANNING
SmUL & J^cUtu
TRENDS
COMMISSION
FIGURE 2
�to continue i n t h i s area because of the a v a i l a b i l i t y of a t t r a c t i v e
vacant lands to absorb the c e n t r i f u g a l growth of the metropolitan
area.
Future Trends—Based on a v a i l a b l e population information there
were 1,678,000 persons l i v i n g i n the urbanized portions of the Washington
Metropolitan Area i n 1953.
This represents an increase of about 15
percent over the 1950 population f o r the e n t i r e census area.
Preliminary
estimates f o r 195-4 r e v e a l that approximately one and three-quarter
m i l l i o n persons r e s i d e i n metropolitan Washington.
I t i s anticipated
that by 1970 there w i l l be over 2,000,000 persons l i v i n g i n the urbanized
metropolitan area, delimited i n Figure 3.
The number of persons r e s i d i n g w i t h i n the D i s t r i c t of Columbia
should become s t a b i l i z e d at about 900,000 persons by t h i s year, ( i t
should be noted that i n the e a r l i e r d r a f t of t h i s report, an approximate
value of 700,000 was indicated. This population estimate was derived
a f t e r considerable research undertaken for the report on Highway Transportation i n the metropolitan area of V i r g i n i a .
I t has been increased
as a r e s u l t of subsequent conferences with Highway and Planning o f f i c i a l s . )
This s t a b i l i z a t i o n can be a t t r i b u t e d to the e a r l i e r maturity of the D i s t r i c t , and the greater a t t r a c t i o n of the suburbs.
I t should be noted
that there i s only a very l i m i t e d amount of land vacant w i t h i n the
District.
The l i k e l y development of a d d i t i o n a l school and playground
s i t e s , the d i s p e r s a l of Federal employment centers, urban redevelopment
w i t h controlled population d e n s i t i e s , and the construction of a major
highway net which w i l l require much land f o r rights-of-way a l l w i l l
l i m i t the increases i n population.
4
��Present and anticipated future population d i s t r i b u t i o n s w i t h i n
the various o r i g i n - d e s t i n a t i o n zones i n the metropolitan area are shown
i n Figure 3.
The large population increases i n p e r i p h e r a l suburban
areas are r e a d i l y apparent.
Land Use Trends
Washington i s the seat of the Federal Government.
The governmental
character of the National C a p i t a l Region^/ i s r e f l e c t e d i n the r e l a t i v e l y
large amount of land i n public use, the major portion of which i s
f e d e r a l l y owned.
use.
Other occupied land i s l a r g e l y devoted to r e s i d e n t i a l
There i s only a s c a t t e r i n g of heavy i n d u s t r i a l development, found
p r i n c i p a l l y along the waterfront and along r a i l r o a d l i n e s .
Areas of most intense development w i t h i n the metropolitan
region
include the D i s t r i c t of Columbia (only about 5 percent i s v a c a n t ) ;
older parts of Alexandria, most of Arlington County, F a l l s Church,
and Vienna, i n V i r g i n i a ; a small sector of Prince Georges County along
Baltimore Boulevard
(U. S. Route l ) , and the southernmost extremity of
Montgomery County, Maryland.
Accordingly, future r e s i d e n t i a l expansion
must mainly occur i n the three larger c o u n t i e s — F a i r f a x , Prince Georges,
and Montgomery—beyond present urban l i m i t s .
The c e n t r a l business d i s t r i c t of Washington i s c e n t r a l l y positioned
w i t h i n the National C a p i t a l Region.
Including most governmental and
p r i v a t e o f f i c e s and the p r i n c i p a l r e t a i l shopping areas, i t i s the major
a t t r a c t o r of persons from throughout the metropolitan area.
1/
Residential
Regional Aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. A portion of the Comprehensive Plan f o r the National C a p i t a l and I t s Environs. National
C a p i t a l Park and Planning Commission. Monograph No. 6, June 1950.
5
�development i n the D i s t r i c t i s r e l a t i v e l y dense, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the
old
city.
A s i z a b l e amount of the high density r e s i d e n t i a l d i s t r i c t s
are w i t h i n walking distance of employment centers.
Low density r e s i -
d e n t i a l areas are found i n the o u t s k i r t s of the c i t y .
Zoning f o r t r a f f i c and parking i s becoming an important step i n
the planned development of Washington.
Giving f u l l cognizance to the
e f f e c t of t r a f f i c generators on roadway and parking conditions, zoning
permits o f f - s t r e e t parking and access f a c i l i t i e s to become an i n t e g r a l
part of land development.
D i s p e r s a l of population has been accompanied by a corresponding
expansion of r e t a i l shopping and s e r v i c e f a c i l i t i e s ; t h i s appears to
be the most evident change i n the e x i s t i n g regional land use pattern.
Encouraged by the freedom and f l e x i b i l i t y of the automobile,
such
changes can be expected to continue.
Within the D i s t r i c t of Columbia, much a t t e n t i o n i s being given
to the e l i m i n a t i o n of blighted areas, and nonconforming land uses.
The Southwest Redevelopment Area and s i m i l a r p r o j e c t s may be effected
i n future y e a r s .
These, and other new developments, w i l l provide
p o s i t i v e population c o n t r o l .
I n V i r g i n i a , future increase i n r e s i d e n t i a l use i s expected to
take place i n the B a i l e y ' s Crossroad d i s t r i c t , at Annandale, and i n
the v i c i n i t y of F a l l s Church.
I n Alexandria, recent annexations have
g r e a t l y Increased the amount of land a v a i l a b l e f o r new development.
Present trends i n d i c a t e that most of the vacant property w i l l be used
for housing—both the single and m u l t i f a m i l y types.
6
�T r a f f i c Considerations
Key t r a f f i c w a y s converge on Washington.
The concentration of
t r a f f i c volumes i n the c e n t r a l business d i s t r i c t i s g r a p h i c a l l y
depicted i n Figure 4 .
The Potomac R i v e r Crossings c o n s t i t u t e the main
corridors f o r t r a v e l between the D i s t r i c t and southern and western
destinations, as w e l l as f o r commuters between the c e n t r a l c i t y and
the metropolitan area i n V i r g i n i a .
Transportation i n the metropolitan area i s oriented strongly
towards the use of p r i v a t e passenger v e h i c l e s ; v i r t u a l l y a l l the
recent suburban growth has been predicated on the automobile.
Under
present conditions, i t i s not l i k e l y that mass transportation w i l l
increase i t s importance as a means of suburban t r a v e l .
Automobile
r e g i s t r a t i o n s have increased r a p i d l y i n the region as shown i n Figure 5.
They w i l l continue to increase, because of the p r e v a i l i n g trend toward
higher v e h i c l e ownership and the expanding population of the National
C a p i t a l Region.
Growths i n t r a n s - r i v e r crossings have f a r outpaced the increases
i n population and v e h i c l e r e g i s t r a t i o n .
crossings have more than doubled.
Since 1940 the t o t a l r i v e r
T h i s i s r e a d i l y evident from Table I I
which summarizes bridge crossings i n recent y e a r s .
I n 1924,
approximately
12,000 v e h i c l e s per day crossed the Potomac R i v e r on the Highway Bridge;
today over 100,000 v e h i c l e s u t i l i z e the bridge d a i l y .
to an increase of over 700 percent.
This corresponds
��1920
NATIONAL C A P I T A L PLANNING
1930
COMMISSION
FIGURE
\
5
�Table I I
TRAFFIC GROWTHS
POTOMAC RIVER BRIDGES
Year
Chain
Bridge
Key
Bridge
Memorial
Bridge
Highway
Bridge
Total
Crossings
1940
1941
1942
1943
1944
1945
1946
1947
1948
1949
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954*
4,638
4,819
4,447
3,251
3,356
3,653
5,534
5,670
6,996
8,164
8,939
10,757
11,641
13,111
14,000
30,189
32,639
29,062
21,241
21,928
23,871
30,603
31,356
32,930
35,971
43,946
45,537
46,122
46,052
47,000
32,288
39,885
37,673
27,348
28,166
33,091
40,288
42,760
46,723
51,437
52,211
51,278
52,854
53,295
54,000
38,512
43,989
38,024
36,028
36,889
42,535
52,806
55,054
60,000
66,051
77,094
92,087
97,664
100,428
102,000
Annual
Percent
Increase
105,627
121,332
109,206
87,868
90,339
103,150
129,231
134,840
146,649
161,623
182,190
199,659
208,281
212,886
217.000
15
-10
-20
3
14
25
4
9
10
13
10
4
2
2
^ T y p i c a l days based on f i r s t eleven months - 1954.
I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note, too, that t r a f f i c crossing the Potomac
R i v e r has been increasing twice as r a p i d l y as movements across the
c e n t r a l business d i s t r i c t cordon. T y p i c a l comparative growths are
shown i n Table I I I .
8
�Table I I I
COMPARATIVE GROWTHS
C e n t r a l Business
D i s t r i c t Cordon
Vehicles
Potomac R i v e r
Index
Vehicles
1953 = 1.00
Index
1953 = 1 . 0 0
1947
635,195
O.84
135,000
0.63
1953
752,141
1.00
213,000
1.00
1970
(Ant. Normal
Growth)
940,000
1.25
328,000*
1.54
*Based on data contained i n Highway Transportation i n the Washington
Metropolitan Area of V i r g i n i a , Wilbur Smith and Associates, 1953.
Previous Studies
The need f o r a d d i t i o n a l t r a f f i c capacity across the Potomac R i v e r
has been recognized
f o r some time.
E a r l i e r s t u d i e s , such as the Origin-
Destination Survey of Central Crossings, August 1944, developed by the
D i s t r i c t Department of Highways i n cooperation with the Public Roads
Administration, gave primary consideration to improving the old Highway
( 1 4 t h S t r e e t ) Bridge.
Congressional
These studies became c r y s t a l l i z e d i n the 1945
Hearings,
2/
and r e s u l t e d i n the construction of an addi-
tional structure at this location.
The Metropolitan Area Origin-Destination Survey of 1948 has provided a f a c t u before theoBridge Subcommittee of the Committee onneeds r \J Hearings a l basis f r analyzing and evaluating the highway I n t e
s t a t e and Foreign Commerce, House of Representatives, Seventy-Ninth
Congress, F i r s t Session i n H.R. 5 4 1 , 1945.
�of the Metropolitan Area.2/
The survey was undertaken as a cooperative
project of the Board of Commissioners f o r the D i s t r i c t of Columbia, the
State of Maryland and the Commonwealth of V i r g i n i a acting through the
Advisory Committee of the Washington Metropolitan Area.
I t developed
basic information about the magnitude and d i s t r i b u t i o n of t r a v e l d e s i r e s .
I n 1952, the Advisory Committee of the Washington Metropolitan
Area Transportation Study submitted a d e t a i l e d program of Highway
improvements f o r the area.
Recommendations were based on the detailed
t r a f f i c studies, and on cost estimates.
The 194-8 o r i g i n - d e s t i n a t i o n data have been u t i l i z e d i n recent
analyses of Potomac R i v e r Crossings.
I n June 1952, A Report on Future
Bridge Crossings of the Potomac R i v e r , Washington, D. C. by Harland
Bartholomew and Associates was prepared for the National C a p i t a l Park
and Planning Commission, emphasizing planning aspects r e l e v a n t to new
r i v e r crossings. The report recommended the construction of an Inner
Ring Route, and f u r t h e r study of Intermediate and Outer Ring Routes,
including the Alexandria and Nebraska Avenue Bridges and the Southwest
Expressway.
The report f u r t h e r recommended against construction of an
"E" S t r e e t Bridge because of terminal d i f f i c u l t i e s on the D i s t r i c t side
of the r i v e r .
A Report on Potomac R i v e r Bridges, Washington, D. C ,
submitted to
the Board of Commissioners, D i s t r i c t of Columbia by Modjeski and Masters
w i t h Lloyd B. Reid, T r a f f i c Consultant, J u l y 1952, recommended the
3_/
See Washington Metropolitan Area Transportation Study, Volumes 1-4,
Regional Highway Planning Committee, 1952.
ij
A Recommended Highway Improvement Program f o r the Washington
Metropolitan Area, Regional Highway Planning Committee, 1952.
10
�construction of a c e n t r a l r i v e r crossing at "E" S t r e e t followed
promptly with the construction of an Alexandria crossing and l a t e r
with the Nebraska Avenue Bridge or "such other crossings as may
be
required f u r t h e r upstream".
Both the National C a p i t a l Planning Commission and the D i s t r i c t
of Columbia Highway Department have conducted f u r t h e r studies of r i v e r
crossing needs.
I n August 1954, the President of the United States signed H.R.
1980,
a b i l l authorizing the construction of two bridges over the Potomac
R i v e r , one from a point at or near Jones Point, V i r g i n i a , and the other
from the v i c i n i t y of Constitution Avenue i n the D i s t r i c t of Columbia
to the V i r g i n i a side.
The President recommended that l e g i s l a t i o n be
amended to preserve the s e t t i n g of the L i n c o l n Memorial and the Arlington
Memorial Bridge.
5/
I t i s the desire of the President that the Secretary
of the I n t e r i o r "keep control and j u r i s d i c t i o n over a l l park lands i n the
v i c i n i t y of the bridge except the a c t u a l bridge structure and the road
and s t r e e t surface between curbs necessary f o r maintenance by the
D i s t r i c t of Columbia.
The Secretary of the I n t e r i o r also should be
authorized to approve a l l plans f o r the bridge and approach roads at
both ends of the bridge since park s t r u c t u r e s and land are involved".
5/ "The b i l l , however contains serious defects which should be corrected
as soon as possible. C e r t a i n of the defects can be corrected by
executive a c t i o n i n the forms of i n s t r u c t i o n , whereas others w i l l
require amendment of the l e g i s l a t i o n . "
" T i t l e I of the enrolled
bill
f a i l s to provide s t a t u t o r y recognition and adjustment of
the r e l a t i o n s h i p of the bridge, together with i t s approaches and
connecting roads to e x i s t i n g and p o t e n t i a l improvements on park
lands. "
Statement by the President, August 30, 1954 •
11
�I n t h i s regard, the Fine Arts Commission opposed construction of the
bridge i n November 1954 on the basis that i t would detract from the
b e a u t i f u l s e t t i n g of the L i n c o l n Memorial.
by that body.
A tunnel was recommended
Studies have been subsequently i n i t i a t e d to determine
the f e a s i b i l i t y of a tunnel to meet the concern of the President
and
the Fine A r t s Commission.
The President also recommends that the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for the
construction, maintenance and operation of the Jones Point Bridge be
t r a n s f e r r e d from the Secretary of the I n t e r i o r to other agencies. 6/
Purpose and Scope
This report on T r a f f i c Volumes and Capacity Requirements f o r
Potomac R i v e r Bridges and the Inner T r a f f i c Loop was authorized by the
National C a p i t a l Planning Commission i n an agreement dated June 26,
Part I of the report reviews f a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g t r a f f i c operations
1954-
on
the e x i s t i n g Potomac R i v e r Crossings, and determines future bridge
requirements based on anticipated t r a f f i c and land use patterns.
Part I I
determines t r a f f i c needs of the Inner Loop Expressway, with e s p e c i a l
emphasis on the Southwest Expressway loop and north-south connector
s t r e e t s across the Mall.
The report makes c e r t a i n t r a f f i c analyses, f i n d i n g s , conclusions
and recommendations with respect to the Commission's plan f o r a Potomac
River bridge I n the v i c i n i t y of Roaches Run and an upper c e n t r a l area
crossing of the Potomac R i v e r .
6/
"There i s i n my opinion, no l o g i c a l basis for the performance of
these functions by that department since i t i s not a construction
agency and the bridge w i l l not p r i m a r i l y concern or serve areas
administered by that department." Statement by the President,
August 30, 195412
�The report determines the following:
1.
Volume c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of 24-hour and peak hour t r a f f i c
crossing the Potomac R i v e r r e l a t i v e to the l o c a t i o n of
e x i s t i n g and proposed f r e e bridges.
2.
The required t r a f f i c capacity and design standards f o r
the Inner Loop Expressway, and the t r a f f i c capacity of
surface s t r e e t s w i t h i n the Inner Loop commensurate with the
e x i s t i n g and proposed Potomac R i v e r bridge t r a f f i c volumes.
3.
The adequacy of the Southwest Expressway as proposed and
the north-south surface s t r e e t s as d i s t r i b u t o r s of Roaches
Run and Highway Bridge t r a f f i c to the c e n t r a l area, and
the
adequacy as evaluated i n the l i g h t of anticipated southwest
redevelopment.
4.
The recommended u s e f u l and economic t r a f f i c capacity
which would be desirable to develop over the Roaches Run
and Highway Bridges, and over the upper c e n t r a l area Potomac
R i v e r Bridges.
Capacity needs of integrated highway approach
systems serving these
bridges.
13
�Chapter I I
BASIC DATA
A thorough knowledge of e x i s t i n g t r a f f i c conditions and characteri s t i c s i s a p r e r e q u i s i t e to the solution of s p e c i f i c problems.
When
present t r a f f i c i s r e l a t e d to the land and population patterns and
trends, i t i s possible to derive anticipated t r a f f i c values.
For t h i s
report, comprehensive f i e l d studies were undertaken to augment and update the a v a i l a b l e t r a f f i c volume and o r i g i n - destination date.
Origin - Destination Studies
A p r i n c i p a l source of information used i n a l l studies made i n
the Washington area since 1950 i s the comprehensive 1948 home-interview
o r i g i n - d e s t i n a t i o n survey.
During the 5-year period immediately
following the survey, population i n the metropolitan
more than 50%.
Accordingly,
area increased by
a c a r e f u l zone by zone review of population
changes and automobile ownership increases was made to derive the patterns
of i n t e r n a l t r a v e l for 1953•
Factors which entered into up-dating the
1948 survey included t r i p frequencies, t r a v e l distances, and i n t e n s i t i e s
of t r a n s i t use.
S p e c i a l adjustments were applied to key t r a f f i c
generators such as business areas and governmental centers.
Zones of
o r i g i n and destination used i n t h i s study are indicated i n Figure 6;
i t should be noted that they include a s e r i e s of zones beyond the
o r i g i n a l l i m i t s of the 1948 survey area.
7/
The 1948 o r i g i n - d e s t i n a t i o n study established an a r b i t r a r y cordon
which delimited the urbanized Washington metropolitan area. The
area w i t h i n the cordon was divided i n t o "sectors", the c e n t r a l
business d i s t r i c t s being designated as sector "0". The sectors were
sub-divided i n t o 62 " d i s t r i c t s " , each being r e l a t i v e l y homogeneous.
14
��To a n t i c i p a t e 1970 r i v e r crossings, the 1953 o r i g i n - d e s t i n a t i o n
volumes have been projected to 1970 values. This has been accomplished
on the b a s i s of detailed estimates of population d i s t r i b u t i o n and
vehicle ownership, as affected by t r a v e l times, t r i p frequencies, and
competing modes of t r a v e l .
S p e c i a l Studies
Current t r a f f i c volume s t a t i s t i c s f o r bridges and a r t e r i a l highways
w i t h i n the studied area were obtained from the various governmental
agencies responsible f o r t r a f f i c control, r e g u l a t i o n and planning.
These were supplemented by s p e c i a l v e h i c u l a r volume counts taken
at key l o c a t i o n s .
The q u a l i t y of t r a f f i c operations on each of the bridges and
t h e i r approach road systems was determined, with emphasis being given
to the morning and evening rush periods when the greatest t r a f f i c
demands develop.
From these studies i t has been possible to i d e n t i f y
and evaluate the r e s t r i c t i v e features which c u r t a i l operational
efficiency.
Capacities on bridges and approaches were thus established
f o r use i n appraising each of the Potomac R i v e r crossings.
Speed and delay runs were conducted during both peak and off-peak
t r a f f i c conditions, so that the e f f i c i e n c y and f l u i d i t y of the p r i n c i p a l
s t r e e t s and highways which serve bridge t r a f f i c could be
determined.
These studies serve the dual purpose of i d e n t i f y i n g those conditions
which impede t r a f f i c flow, and of e s t a b l i s h i n g the r e l a t i v e ease of
access to each bridge from a l l places w i t h i n the metropolitan area.
Preliminary reconnaissance surveys were made to inspect possible
bridge s i t e s along the Potomac R i v e r and to determine the f e a s i b i l i t y
15
�of construction a t each.
Reconnaissance
studies included consideration
of e x i s t i n g land uses which would be a f f e c t e d by new bridge locations,
plus evaluation of terminal s t r e e t and highway connections a t both
ends of each s t r u c t u r e .
Development of Present and Future T r a v e l Desires
Major t r a n s - r i v e r t r i p desires f o r 1953 are g r a p h i c a l l y depicted
i n Figure 7. I n 1953 approximately 213,000 v e h i c l e s crossed the
Potomac R i v e r d a i l y .
The Washington c e n t r a l business d i s t r i c t was
found to a t t r a c t about 30 percent of the t o t a l crossing movement. The
h e a v i l y populated d i s t r i c t to the north of downtown Washington generates
another L4 percent of the t o t a l t r a n s - r i v e r t r i p s .
About three-fourths
of a l l 1953 crossings had o r i g i n s or destinations w i t h i n the D i s t r i c t
of Columbia.
The centroid of a l l t r a n s - r i v e r t r i p d e s i r e s , based on the o r i g i n destination study was found to be about an eighth of a mile to the
south of the Memorial Bridge, about a f i f t h of the way between the
Memorial and Highway Bridges.
I t i s evident that the greatest p u l l i s
to the north of the Mall on the Washington s i d e ; hence, i t follows that
the c e n t r o i d a l t r i p desire l i n e has a northeast to southwest o r i e n t a t i o n .
Increases i n the settlement and t r i p generating p o t e n t i a l s of F a i r f a x
County would l i k e l y
shift
the centroid to the north of i t s present
location.
The p r i n c i p a l through t r i p movements i n the Washington Metropolitan
Area are between U. S. Route 1 i n Maryland and the S h i r l e y Highway,
U. S. Routes 29-211, and U. S. Route 50. TJ. S. Route 24O i n Maryland
i s a secondary generator of through t r i p s .
16
The recent completion of
�MAJOR
ACROSS
TRIP
POTOMAC R I V E R
TYPICAL
NATIONAL
CAPITAL
PLANNING
COMMISSION
WJL,Smul&U^cUtu
DESIRES
1953 DAY
FIGURE 7
�the Balitmore-Washington
Parkway w i l l l i k e l y modify the through t r i p
distributions.
The trends i n t o t a l Potomac R i v e r crossings are shown i n
Figure 8.
I t i s expected that by 1970 there w i l l be approximately
328,000 v e h i c l e s crossing the Potomac R i v e r d a i l y .
This value
represents a 50 percent increase over the 1953 movement of 213,000
trips.
The types of t r i p s crossing the r i v e r i n 1970, and 1953 are
given i n Table IV.
I t i s a n t i c i p a t e d t h a t the through and e x t e r n a l
t r i p s w i l l be a s l i g h t l y more important part of the o v e r - a l l t r a f f i c
pattern i n 1970 than they are i n 1953Table I V
SOURCE OF
PASSENGER CAR AND TRUCK TRIPS
CROSSING THE POTOMAC RIVER*
1953
Number
Percent
Type T r i p
V i r g i n i a D i s t r i c t s of
Metropolitan Area
(to Metropolitan Washington
and e x t e r n a l Maryland Points)
1970
Number
Percent
195,700
91.9
299,000
91.1
External Virginia Trips
to Metropolitan Washington
9,200
4-3
16,000
4-9
Through T r i p s
8,100
3.8
13,000
4.0
213,000
INCREASE
100.0
328,000
100.0
1970:1953 = 50 percent
*Taken from data contained i n Highway Transportation i n the Washington
Metropolitan Area of V i r g i n i a .
�TREND
CAPITAL
PLANNING
COMMISSION
TOTAL
DAILY
TRAFFIC
THE
NATIONAL
OF
POTOMAC
RIVER
CROSSING
��MAJOR
ACROSS
TRIP
POTOMAC
TYPICAL
NATIONAL
CAPITAL
PLANNING
DESIRES
1970 DAY
RIVER
COMMISSION
*WJUS»nL&a„. i.u,
c
FIGURE 10
�T o t a l Potomac R i v e r crossings generated by zones of o r i g i n or
destination i n 1970 and i n 1953 are compared i n Figure 9.
The greatest
growths i n t r a n s - r i v e r crossings w i l l be generated i n F a i r f a x County.
T h i s county i s expected to develop the greatest population
i n the metropolitan area.
increases
The p r i n c i p a l t r a n s - r i v e r t r i p desires f o r
1970 are depicted i n Figure 10.
18
�Chapter I I I
COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING PROPOSALS
The planning of t r a f f i c and transportation f a c i l i t i e s must he
r e l a t e d to the general planning of land use and occupancy.
Accordingly,
i t i s e s s e n t i a l that o r i g i n - d e s t i n a t i o n data and other information which
form the b a s i s for most t r a f f i c studies be integrated with many other
planning considerations i n devising a sound and workable t r a f f i c plan
for the Washington Metropolitan Area.
Studies for the l o c a t i o n and
design of new bridges and highways must a n t i c i p a t e the future d i s t r i bution of populations and t h e i r sources of employment.
Plans for the
regulation of future land use and land occupancy should evolve i n
conjunction with the r e a l i s t i c extension of transportation f a c i l i t i e s
to integrate t r a v e l and movement of goods i n the e n t i r e area,,
Past developments of comprehensive plans have found c e r t a i n p r i n c i p l e s and concepts of transportation planning e s p e c i a l l y u s e f u l and
effective.
Such concepts are not s t a t i c .
they are p r e s e n t l y i n a state of change.
I n the f i e l d of urban t r a f f i c
I t i s important, t h e r e f o r e ,
to consider the possible changes i n basic concepts which might gain
wide-spread acceptance i n future years.
Hence, conventional t r a f f i c
analyses and t r a f f i c planning concepts have been augmented with cons i d e r a t i o n s of land use and occupancy which a f f e c t recommendations on
bridge locations and construction p r i o r i t i e s .
General Considerations
General aims of the National C a p i t a l Planning Commission's Comprehensive Plan include the creation of s a t i s f y i n g h e a l t h f u l
19
living
�conditions through the best possible arrangement of uses of land; the
encouragement of a stable a t t r a c t i v e c e n t r a l business area; the
r e s t o r a t i o n of l i v a b i l i t y to conservation and blighted r e s i d e n t i a l
areas; the achievement of orderly development on urban fringe and
outlying sections where the land i s s t i l l vacant; and the e f f i c i e n t
movement of persons and goods w i t h i n the metropolixan area.
I t i s evident that the National C a p i t a l c i t y must represent a symbol
of the a s p i r a t i o n s and accomplishments of the nation.
The o v e r a l l plans
have been based on f a c t u a l information and are constantly reviewed i n
l i g h t of objective values which are subject to change.
Land Uses and Generators i n the Central C i t y
Much a t t e n t i o n i n recent years has been given to the correct future
development of metropolitan Washington, with e s p e c i a l emphasis being
placed on the c e n t r a l c i t y area.
be given to future t r a f f i c
I n i t s planning, f u l l cognizance
should
requirements.
The governmental center i t s e l f I s due for a r e - a p p r a i s a l .
The
removal from the governmental area of temporary o f f i c e buildings erected
during the war I s a primary planning o b j e c t i v e . At present more than
4-0,000 government workers are housed i n these b u i l d i n g s . These workers
generate high peak hour t r a f f i c movements which frequently tax a v a i l a b l e
street capacities.
The re-housing of these workers must be made an
important consideration i n planning and should be integrated with
plans for the dispersion of governmental functions. Removal of the
temporary government buildings along the northwestern section of the
20
�M a l l w i l l somewhat reduce,street capacity and access requirements i n
the western downtown area.
Dispersed development of governmental employment centers i s
desirable not only from a s e c u r i t y or m i l i t a r y standpoint, but a l s o
as a means of reducing excessive concentration, and hence congestion i n the
c e n t r a l area.
Such plans impose a p r a c t i c a l c e i l i n g on the amount of
f e d e r a l employment i n the c e n t r a l area and thus tend to s t a b i l i z e i t ,
even though there might be some new construction of f e d e r a l buildings
i n the area.
A primary objective of the National C a p i t a l Plan i s a
c e i l i n g of 140,000 f e d e r a l employees west of the c a p i t o l .
Figure 11
shows the present d i s t r i b u t i o n of f e d e r a l employment i n c e n t r a l Washington;
i t should be noted that approximately one-third of a l l f e d e r a l employees
are c u r r e n t l y housed i n temporary b u i l d i n g s .
The need for reducing urban v u l n e r a b i l i t y i s becoming apparent
i n both p r i v a t e and o f f i c i a l quarters. At present the Atomic Energy
Commission recommends a 30 mile radius d i s p e r s a l distance as the d a i l y
minimum d i s p e r s a l for a l l f e d e r a l Executive Branch agencies.
Trends i n nongovernmental developments which are taking place a t
the present time are a l s o of import.
Washington i s becoming the head-
quarters f o r an ever-increasing number of business and p r o f e s s i o n a l
associations.
P r i v a t e construction of o f f i c e f a c i l i t i e s has provided
a great deal of new o f f i c e space w i t h i n the past ten years, much of i t
w i t h i n and near the c e n t r a l business d i s t r i c t i n blocks located between
the business center and the more e x c l u s i v e r e s i d e n t i a l areas to the
northwest.
The demands for new o f f i c e space by business and p r o f e s s i o n a l
21
�TOTAL
EMPLOYEES
APPROXIMATE
TYPE
OF
112,000
PERSONS
BUILDING
PERCENT
AREA
PERMANENT
TEMPORARY
TOTAL
A
DISTRIBUTION
OF
GOVERNMENT
10.2
3.4
B
7.9
0.5
8.4
1.0
12,0
18.4
C
II.0
D
13.6
NATIONAL
CAPITAL
PLANNING
COMMISSION
•tat**
0.2
0.0
19.4
19,4
F
1 8.3
3.9
22.2
G
E M P L O Y M E N T - 1954
16.2
E
0.6
H
4.4
1.0
70.6
29 4
0 6
5.4
100
FIGURE
II
�organizations i s focused on the downtown area.
These f a c i l i t i e s w i l l
generate new demands for the movement and storage of automobiles>
Within the past few years, r e g i o n a l type shopping centers,
s p e c i f i c a l l y oriented to the mobile auto-borne patron, have accelerated
the d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n of r e t a i l shopping.
A considerable volume of
r e t a i l s a l e s i s now transacted i n outlying shopping centers i n the
Washington metropolitan area.
Some of these centers o f f e r a wide
v a r i e t y of goods and a range of p r i c e s comparable t o those i n the
downtown area.
Trade i s a t t r a c t e d to outlying centers by t h e i r prox-
i m i t y t o p o t e n t i a l customers and the a v a i l a b i l i t y of parking space.
A basic support for the future of the c e n t r a l area, however, i s the
f a c t that i t i s , and w i l l remain, c e n t r a l .
I t i s almost inconceivable
that any suburb w i l l ever be as r e a d i l y accessible as the c e n t r a l
business d i s t r i c t
from the e n t i r e metropolitan area.
I t will
continue
to be a f o c a l point of t r a f f i c and parking demands.
Location of C e n t r a l Business D i s t r i c t
The focus of the c e n t r a l business d i s t r i c t
i n downtown Washington
l i e s between the White House and the Union S t a t i o n . The main shopping
d i s t r i c t w i t h i t s department stores and s p e c i a l t y shops extends from
7th to 15th S t r e e t s northwest and from Pennsylvania Avenue to "H" S t r e e t .
As p r e v i o u s l y indicated, o f f i c e buildings and a " q u a l i t y " r e t a i l development are spreading to the northwest; these growths have been stimulated
by t h e i r proximity to high income r e s i d e n t i a l areas.
Some s i m i l a r new
development i s also taking place a t the eastern perimeter of the area.
22
�D I S T R I B U T I O N OF VIRGINIA
IN
ZERO
TRIPS
S E C T O R OF C E N T R A L WASHINGTON
�The c e n t r a l business d i s t r i c t i s located i n the approximate center
of the Washington metropolitan area.
The governmental buildings adjacent
to i t are the l a r g e s t centers of employment i n the c i t y , thus the downtown shopping d i s t r i c t i s w e l l s i t u a t e d to serve a high proportion of
the areas' wage earners.
The governmental buildings and the White House
a l s o a t t r a c t large numbers of t o u r i s t s and other v i s i t o r s , many of whom
are drawn to the shopping center.
There i s every reason to b e l i e v e
that the c e n t r a l business d i s t r i c t w i l l continue to increase i n importance as the metropolitan area grows.
The increase i n importance
of the area w i l l come p r i m a r i l y from increases i n a c t i v i t i e s other than
r e t a i l trade.
Changes i n the u t i l i z a t i o n of land w i l l influence t r a f f i c
and parking demands accordingly.
The d i s t r i b u t i o n of V i r g i n i a t r i p s i n the "Zero Sector" of
Washington, which encompasses the c e n t r a l business d i s t r i c t are shown
g r a p h i c a l l y i n Figure 12 for both 1953 and 1970,
D i s t r i c t 05 i n which
the downtown sector i s located i s the primary a t t r a c t o r ; i t generates
a t h i r d of a l l t r i p s between V i r g i n i a commuters and the center of the
city.
Table V shows the present and a n t i c i p a t e d d i s t r i b u t i o n of t r a n s -
r i v e r t r i p s i n downtown Washington.
The 1970 values assume some r e -
development i n the southwest areas of the c i t y (including d i s t r i c t 03)
and the e l i m i n a t i o n of temporary governmental buildings ( d i s t r i c t 0 8 ) .
By 1970, i t i s estimated that d i s t r i c t 05 w i l l generate an even higher
proportion of a l l downtown t r a v e l than a t present.
23
�Table V
DISBTIBUTION OF VIRGINIA TRIPS TO ZERO SECTOR
OF
CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT
District!/
Percent of T o t a l T r i p s
19532/
1970^/
01
5.4
5.9
02
2.7
2.2
03
7.7
10.8
04
2.8
3.1
05
33.0
37.1
06
9.1
10,2
071-075
16.8
18.8
076-079
7.0
7.4
08
10.6
0.2
09
4-9
4-3
100.0
100.0
Notes
i D i s t r i c t s are shown i n Figure 12.
Based on 1948 0-D Survey.
3 s sumes elimination of temporary government buildings and
e f f e c t u a t i o n of Southwest Redevelopment P r o j e c t .
2
A
C i r c u l a t i o n System—Thoroughfare Plans
The primary thoroughfare systems of major metropolitan areas have
t r a d i t i o n a l l y developed i n a random piecemeal manner as the communities
grew i n s i z e .
When the communities were small the primary systems
consisted simply of the major s t r e e t s .
24
As the urban areas expanded
�the r e l a t i v e importance of s p e c i a l i z e d major and minor s t r e e t s became
evident and a larger v a r i e t y of thoroughfares were developed.
Primary
thoroughfares i n the modern metropolis should consist of a system of
express highways designed to l i m i t e d access standards with separation of
i n t e r s e c t i o n s and crossings and with control of abutting access.
They
may include parkway features to enhance t h e i r a t t r a c t i v e n e s s to the road
user.
These freeway type f a c i l i t i e s should be supplemented w i t h adequate
secondary roads, together forming a comprehensive continuous road net.
A number of plans and programs have been set f o r t h for the development of a major thoroughfare system for metropolitan Washington.
Some studies have been quite comprehensive and have attempted to
e s t a b l i s h an integrated network of roads and bridges which would serve
the e n t i r e area.
The most comprehensive of these studies are those
of the National C a p i t a l Planning Commission, f i r s t published i n 1950,
and the "Recommended Highway Improvement Program" prepared by the
Regional Highway Planning Committee i n 1952 as an outgrowth of the 1948
o r i g i n - d e s t i n a t i o n study.
Both have been supplemented i n part by
studies of highway needs at s p e c i f i c locations.
Proposed Regional Thoroughfare Plan of the National C a p i t a l Planning
Commission i s shown i n Figure 13.
U t i l i z i n g the e x i s t i n g elements of a
comprehensive system, the plan develops an extensive system of r a d i a l
and c i r c u m f e r e n t i a l thoroughfares, of which express highways and parkways
are the key elements.
Three "ring roads" serve to intercept r a d i a l
t r a f f i c — a n inner loop around the c e n t r a l business d i s t r i c t of
Washington, an intermediate loop, and an outer r i n g road i n Maryland
and V i r g i n i a .
The plan c a l l s for four new bridges across the Potomac
R i v e r to provide the t r a n s - r i v e r l i n k s i n the pattern.
25
�N A T I O N A L
PROPOSED
C A P I T A L
REGIONAL
R E G I O N
THOROUGHFARE
PLAN
E X P R E S S HIGHWAYS 6- PACK WAYS
DOMINANT THOPOUGHEAQES
MAJOP HIGHWAYS
<=\IUI
C
/jf',
/
-j
VI hi box <^>M.ltk ST
dwcudu
N A T I O N A L
C A P I T A L
P L A N N I N G
M A 0 C H I 9 5 4
C O M M I S S I O N
FIGURE
13
�The construction of a. C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue Bridge, approved i n a
recent r e s o l u t i o n by the National C a p i t a l Planning Commission, has
now been authorized by Congress.
Other p r i n c i p a l features of the
thoroughfare plan a l s o approved by the Commission include the widening
of Key Bridge, the development of the Inner Loop Expressway and the
construction of a Roaches Run Bridge.
Improvements indicated i n the program of the Regional Highway
Committee of Washington have been designed to increase the c a p a c i t i e s
of the s t r e e t systems i n downtown Washington and i n congested suburban
centers, of important r a d i a l s , and of crosstown and cross-county routes.
I t a l s o recommends the eventual construction of an outer-circumferential
highway about the Washington area and c o r r e c t i v e treatments f o r p r i n c i p a l t r a f f i c w a y s i n the metropolitan area.
Relevant to Potomac R i v e r
Crossings, and the Inner Loop Expressway, the Committee's program i s i n
s u b s t a n t i a l accord w i t h , and designed to carry out, the objectives of
the Comprehensive Plan.
I t i s evident that i n t e g r a t i o n of the various proposals, programs,
and plans i s necessary i n order to complete a well-rounded highway and
s t r e e t system.
Continuity of capacity and f l u i d i t y are r e q u i s i t e .
The s p e c i f i c needs of t h i s study required that an estimate be made
of 1970 t r a f f i c demands i n the Washington Metropolitan Area.
The time
required to t r a v e l between o r i g i n and d e s t i n a t i o n — f r o m home to work,
from work to shopping, e t c . — i s a b a s i c element i n the generation of
t r a v e l by e i t h e r automobile or bus.
I t has been necessary, therefore,
to a n t i c i p a t e the degree to which an express highway network w i l l have
been completed to serve the metropolitan area by 1970, and to estimate
the time required to t r a v e l on i t from one zone to another.
26
�E x i s t i n g elements of a comprehensive highway plan are shown i n
Figure L4.
T y p i c a l of the expressways are the Baltimore-Washington
Parkway, S u i t l a n d Parkway, S h i r l e y Highway and the Pentagon network.
The
Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway, the Mount Vernon Memorial Boulevard and
the George Washington Memorial Parkway have p a r t i a l expressway characteristics.
The Kenilworth Avenue improvement and the E a s t Capitol S t r e e t
Bridge are now under contract.
Further sections of the Washington-
Annapolis Expressway and the Washington National Pike are now scheduled
for e a r l y construction.
The Commission's proposed thoroughfare plan published i n 1950
i s now being studied by concerned highway and planning agencies i n
l i g h t of more recent studies and new information.
The portions of the
plan which appear to be most l i k e l y of acceptance and r e a l i z a t i o n by
1970 are shown i n Figure 15.
I t i s this system of expressways which
forms the b a s i s f o r the 1970 estimates of t r a f f i c interchange i n the
Washington area.
T h i s system includes the extension of the George
Washington Memorial Parkway both i n the Maryland and V i r g i n i a sides to
Cabin John, the Inner and Outer Circumferentials and the Fort Drive Link
i n the Intermediate Circumferential between Sargent Road and j u s t south
of Kenilworth expressway.
Possible E f f e c t s of Proposed Federal Highway L e g i s l a t i o n on Route Planning
The p o s s i b i l i t i e s of l e g i s l a t i v e action i n the immediate future
which might modify the scope of a n t i c i p a t e d construction programs cannot
be overlooked.
There are strong i n d i c a t i o n s that Congress i s preparing
to enact highway l e g i s l a t i o n which w i l l g r e a t l y increase the tempo of
highway construction i n and around large metropolitan areas, p a r t i c u l a r l y
those routes designated as part of the National I n t e r - r e g i o n a l Highway
27
���System.
I f the t e n t a t i v e proposals thus f a r announced were to be
enacted, even i n part, i t i s c l e a r that funds for new highway construction
would be a v a i l a b l e i n much larger amounts than those on which the
present plans are based.
I f an accelerated program of highway construction takes place i n
the Washington Metropolitan area and the highways anticipated for 1970
are b u i l t before that date, t r a f f i c volumes w i l l undoubtedly increase
more r a p i d l y than the forecasts i n d i c a t e .
28
�Chapter I V
POTOMAC RIVER BRIDGES
Increased r i v e r crossing demands are a r e f l e c t i o n of the suburbanization of V i r g i n i a , and of the development of t r a f f i c generators, such
as the Pentagon, on the V i r g i n i a side.
R i v e r crossings have more than
doubled i n the l a s t 15 y e a r s ; at present (1954) there are 217,000 t r a n s river trips.
By 1970, based on normal growths, i t has been shown that
the t o t a l crossings w i l l be about 328,000 d a i l y .
E x i s t i n g Bridges
A n a l y s i s of t r a f f i c c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and operations of e x i s t i n g
bridges i s a p r e r e q u i s i t e to the determination of future bridge needs.
Accordingly, performance of the four v e h i c u l a r bridges c u r r e n t l y spanning
the Potomac River—Highway
Bridge, Memorial Bridge, Key Bridge, and Chain
Bridge—have been studied.
General c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of these bridges are
summarized i n Table V I .
Table V I
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS:
POTOMAC RIVER BRIDGES
Year Open
to T r a f f i c
Pavement Width
Lanes
Type Span
1903
40
3
Movable
1950
50
4
Movable
Memorial
1932
60
6
Movable
Key
1924
50
4
Fixed
Chain
1938
30
2
Fixed
Bridge
Highway - Old
(14th
New
Street)
Highway Bridge - The Highway Bridge i s the p r i n c i p a l and most d i r e c t
connector between c e n t r a l Washington and Alexandria. The o r i g i n a l bridge,
w i t h i t s 40 foot roadway was erected i n 1903.
I n 1927, when crossings
�totaled 12,000 d a i l y , the s t r e e t r a i l w a y tracks were removed and the
bridge resurfaced. The bridge roadway c a r r i e d two lanes of t r a f f i c i n
each d i r e c t i o n p r i o r to 1950 when a companion Highway Bridge with a f i f t y
foot roadway was placed i n operation to the south of the o r i g i n a l s t r u c ture.
The new bridge provides four lanes of t r a f f i c inbound, while the
old bridge c a r r i e s three outbound lanes.
On a t y p i c a l 1954- weekday, the Highway Bridge c a r r i e d between 100,000
and 107,000 v e h i c l e s .
Hourly t r a f f i c v a r i a t i o n s on the bridge are i n d i -
cated i n Figure 16 f o r t y p i c a l 1953 and 1954 days.
Peak d i r e c t i o n a l
volumes were found to approximate 5,400 v e h i c l e s per hour—inbound during
the morning rush period and outbound during the evening rush.
Effects
of V i r g i n i a employment centers ( v i z the Pentagon) are evident from the
pronounced secondary "counter rush" peak values.
A d e t a i l e d t r a f f i c flow diagram f o r the Highway Bridge, and i t s
Washington approaches ( 1 4 t h S t r e e t and connectors) i s presented i n
Figure 17 f o r a t y p i c a l morning rush hour.
The dispersion of bridge
t r a f f i c to Maine Avenue, D S t r e e t , Independence Avenue and 15th S t r e e t
i s r e a d i l y apparent.
Only about 15 percent of the t o t a l inbound bridge
t r a f f i c crosses C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue northbound on 14th S t r e e t .
Maximum lane capacity of the Highway Bridge was determined to be
about 1,800 v e h i c l e s per hour.
The p r a c t i c a l lane capacity f o r the
bridge was found to be 1,500 v e h i c l e s per hour.
I n V i r g i n i a , the Highway
Bridge has l i m i t e d a^tecess connections w i t h the Mount Vernon and S h i r l e y
Memorial Highways, U. S. Route 1 and the Pentagon Road net. The capacity
of these roads i s s u f f i c i e n t to accommodate a l l Virginia-bound bridge
traffic.
30
�HOURLY
TRAFFIC
VARIATIONS
HIGHWAY
BRIDGE
��I n Washington, except f o r a devious turnoff to 15th S t r e e t , the
four inbound lanes must converge to three before reaching the o f f ramp at
Maine Avenue.
T h i s r e s t r i c t i v e cross section prevents f u l l u t i l i z a t i o n
of the inbound roadway.
The e f f e c t i v e inbound bridge capacity i s reduced
to three lanes, and backups of t r a f f i c into V i r g i n i a frequently r e s u l t .
I t should also be noted that 14 th S t r e e t (three lanes each way) i s saturated during periods of maximum bridge t r a f f i c .
T r a f f i c s i g n a l s at "C"
S t r e e t and Independence Avenue impede the steady flow inbound.
Insuffi-
c i e n t bridge capacity during peak evening hours often develops t r a f f i c
backups of southbound t r a f f i c across the M a l l on 14th S t r e e t .
Memorial Bridge - The A r l i n g t o n Memorial Bridge was opened to t r a f f i c i n 1932.
I t i s centered upon an a x i s connecting the L i n c o l n Memorial
i n Washington with the Memorial entrance to A r l i n g t o n National Cemetery.
The bridge connects major parkways and roadways on the V i r g i n i a side with
C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue, Independence Avenue, 23rd S t r e e t , and the extension
of Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway on the Washington side of the r i v e r .
F i f t y - f o u r thousand v e h i c l e s use the Memorial Bridge on a t y p i c a l
weekday.
Peak d i r e c t i o n a l volumes amount to about L,,400 v e h i c l e s per
hour, inbound towards Washington i n the morning and outbound to V i r g i n i a
i n the evening.
T y p i c a l hourly t r a f f i c v a r i a t i o n s are shown i n Figure 18
and pinpoint the preponderance of peak hour flows.
Bridge capacity
values are also indicated.
The t r a f f i c flow patterns on Memorial Bridge and i t s environs are
depicted i n Figure 19 f o r a t y p i c a l peak morning rush hour.
The i n t e r -
mingling of bridge and other movements i s r e a d i l y apparent.
Over 30
percent of a l l inbound bridge t r a f f i c t r a v e l s north on 23rd S t r e e t .
31
�HOURLY
TRAFFIC
MEMORIAL
NATIONAL CAPITAL PLANNING
VARIATIONS
BRIDGE
COMMISSION
FIGURE
16
��Bridge t r a f f i c on Constitution Avenue at 14-th S t r e e t i s only about 15
percent of the t o t a l inbound crossings.
The Memorial Bridge, i n terms of lane d e n s i t i e s , i s the l i g h t e s t
t r a v e l l e d bridge even though i t s maximum per lane flows of 1,500 v e h i c l e s
per hour exceed optimum capacity value.
Short turning r a d i i on the t r a f -
f i c c i r c l e s at both ends of the Memorial Bridge, p a r t i c u l a r l y at the
L i n c o l n Memorial, r e s t r i c t speed and develop c r i t i c a l weaving c o n f l i c t s .
Key Bridge - The F r a n c i s Scott Key Bridge, Georgetown, was completed
i n 1924 replacing an old i r o n bridge constructed i n 1888.
The bridge has
a 50 foot roadway, with a double s t r e e t c a r t r a c k i n the center.
are two moving lanes of t r a f f i c i n each d i r e c t i o n of t r a v e l .
The
There
bridge
connects with the Whitehurst Freeway and "M" S t r e e t on the D i s t r i c t side
of the Potomac R i v e r .
I n V i r g i n i a a t r a f f i c c i r c l e connects Lee Highway
(U.S. 29-211) and l o c a l s t r e e t s to the bridge.
The l o c a l s t r e e t s serve
as connectors to Wilson Boulevard.
The Key Bridge c u r r e n t l y c a r r i e s 47,000 v e h i c l e s d a i l y .
Hourly
t r a f f i c v a r i a t i o n s as r e l a t e d to bridge c a p a c i t i e s are indicated i n
Figure 20.
Peak d i r e c t i o n a l flows approach 2,700 v e h i c l e s per hour.
The t r a f f i c flow patterns on the Washington approach of the bridge
are g r a p h i c a l l y depicted i n Figure 21 f o r a t y p i c a l 1954 morning peak
hour.
Approximately 80 percent of a l l inbound movements are destined
to the east.
The greater number of these v e h i c l e s u t i l i z e the Whitehurst
Freeway.
Capacity r e s t r i c t i o n s on both the Washington and V i r g i n i a approaches
prevent the Key Bridge from developing a possible lane capacity i n excess
of about 1,400
v e h i c l e s per lane.
As shown i n Figure 20 t h i s s a t u r a t i o n
32
�HOURLY
NATIONAL C A P I T A L PLANNING
COMMISSION
T R A F F I C VARIATIONS
KEY
BRIDGE
FIGURE
20
�PRESENT
TRAFFIC
KEY
NATIONAL CAPITAL PLANNING
COMMISSION
VOLUMES
BRIDGE
FIGURE
21
�capacity i s frequently equalled.
T r a f f i c "backups onto the bridge i n the
morning hour from the eastern terminus of the Whitehurst Freeway often
impede bridge t r a f f i c flows. S i m i l a r l y the s i g n a l i z e d operations at
"M"
S t r e e t cannot e f f i c i e n t l y accommodate the approaching steady flows.
I n the evening rush period westbound freeway t r a f f i c backs up across the
outbound ramp from the s i g n a l i z e d i n t e r s e c t i o n at Canal Road.
Similarly,
the t r a f f i c c i r c l e at V i r g i n i a and nearby t r a f f i c s i g n a l operations
decrease possible bridge c a p a c i t i e s .
Some capacity r e s t r i c t i o n s r e s u l t
from s t r e e t r a i l w a y operation on the bridge roadway.
They appear to be
r e l a t i v e l y minor when compared to the r e s t r i c t i v e conditions on the
bridge
approaches.
Chain Bridge - The Chain Bridge, located upstream and f a r t h e s t
removed from c e n t r a l Washington, was f i r s t b u i l t i n 1797.
The present
bridge has been i n operation since 1938 and superseded f i v e e a r l i e r
structures.
The Chain Bridge has a t h i r t y foot wide roadway; one lane of t r a f f i c
moves i n each d i r e c t i o n .
I n V i r g i n i a the bridge connects with Glebe Road,
M i l i t a r y Road, and Route 123.
south of the r i v e r .
I t connects w i t h Canal Road I n the D i s t r i c t
There are 14,000 Potomac R i v e r crossings over the
bridge on a t y p i c a l 1954
day.
Hourly t r a f f i c v a r i a t i o n s f o r the Chain Bridge, and bridge capacit i e s are shown i n Figure 22.
Flows are r e l a t i v e l y minor when compared to
the loadings on the other r i v e r crossings. Movements during the peak
hour e x h i b i t pronounced d i r e c t i o n a l tendencies.
volumes approximate
1,500
Peak hour d i r e c t i o n a l
vehicles.
The sharp curvature on the Washington side of the bridge, and the
i n t e r s e c t i o n of Route 123 and Glebe Road on the V i r g i n i a side of the
33
�A. M.
NATIONAL CAPITAL PLANNING COMMISSION
HOURLY
P. M.
T R A F F I C VARIATIONS
CHA IN
BRIDGE
FIGURE 22
�Potomac R i v e r with i t s r e s t r i c t e d sight distance reduce the possible
bridge capacity to about 1,500 vehicles per lane per hour.
This value
i s reached during peak'hours.
General T r a f f i c C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of E x i s t i n g Bridges.
The e x i s t i n g
Potomac R i v e r Bridges must also be analyzed as a system of r i v e r crossings.
The l o c a t i o n and general a c c e s s i b i l i t y of each bridge as r e l a t e d
to desire l i n e s of t r a v e l and the t r a f f i c a t t r a c t i v e n e s s or capacity of
the bridge w i l l determine the proportion of t r a n s - r i v e r t r i p s that w i l l
use any given f a c i l i t y .
The d i s t r i b u t i o n of the present t r a n s - r i v e r crossings are summarized
i n Table V I I . Almost h a l f of the 217,000 d a i l y crossings, and about 40
percent of the t o t a l peak hour d i r e c t i o n a l movement of 14,000 v e h i c l e s
use the Highway Bridge.
There i s r e l a t i v e l y equal usage throughout the
day of the Memorial and Chain Bridges, with a somewhat heavier share
of the t o t a l peak hour crossings on the Memorial Bridge.
TABLE V I I
RELATIVE UTILIZATION
POTOMAC RIVER BRIDGES
1954
Bridge
Highway
Daily
Traffic
Vehicles
Peak Hour
Peak Hour
% of T o t a l
Inbound
Outbound
Crossings
Vehicles % of T o t a l Vehicles % of T o t a l
102,000
47.0
5,400
38.8
5,350
38.4
Memorial
54,000
24.9
4,230
30.4
4,420
31.7
Key
47,000
21.7
2,660
19.3
2,670
19.2
Chain
14,000
6.4
1,600
11.5
1,490
10.7
TOTAL
217,000
100.0
13,890
100.0
13,930
100.0
34
�The t r a f f i c composition of vehicles crossing the Potomac R i v e r i s
summarized i n Table V I I I .
Passenger cars comprise over 85 percent of
the t o t a l movement across a l l bridges.
Peak hour d i r e c t i o n a l movements are compared with the t o t a l dailyr i v e r crossings f o r each of the e x i s t i n g bridges i n Table I X .
Inbound
t r i p s i n the morning peak hour and outbound t r i p s i n the evening peak
hour each constitute over 6 percent of the t o t a l d a i l y crossings.
Peak
hour t r a f f i c ranges from 5 percent of the t o t a l d a i l y movements across
the Highway Bridge to 11 percent of the t o t a l d a i l y Chain Bridge t r a f f i c .
TABLE V I I I
TRAFFIC COMPOSITION
POTOMAC RIVER BRIDGES
Percei it of Tt a l Ti• a f f i c
o
Memc r i a l
)
Br: -dge
Bri .dge
1948 1953
1948 1953
$
%
Che tin
Bri •dge
1948 1954
%
Type Vehicle
jhway
Bri -age
1948 1953
%
Passenger Vehicles
84.6
87.8
97.2
97.A
83.7
87.0
90.8
93.2
Single Unit Trucks
9.-4
7.8
0.4
0.5
12.1
10.6
8.7
6.3
Combination Trucks
3.2
2.9
0.0
0.0
1.8
0.8
0.3
0.3
Buses
2.8
1.5
2.4
2.1
2.4
1.6
0.2
0.2
TOTAL
Equivalent
Passenger Vehicles
100.0 100.0
100.0 100.0
106
100
105
35
101
100.0 100.0
106
104
100.0 100.0
103
102
�TABLE IX
PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS
POTOMAC RIVER BRIDGES
1954
Bridge
Daily Traffic
Peak Hour
Inbound
% of D a i l y
Vehicles
Total
Peak Hour
Outbound
% of D a i l y
Vehicles
Total
Highway
Memorial
Key
Chain
102,000
54,000
47,000
14,000
5,400
4,230
2,660
1,600
5.3
7.8
5.6
11.5
5,350
4,420
2,670
1,490
5.2
8.2
5.6
10.6
TOTAL
217,000
13,890
6.4
13,930
6.4
Peak hour t r a f f i c i s s l i g h t l y more concentrated
on the adjacent s t r e e t net i n the D i s t r i c t .
on the bridges than
As shown i n Table X evening
peak hour t r a f f i c leaving the inner cordon area of c e n t r a l Washington
represents about 5 percent of the t o t a l d a i l y movements.
I n evaluating
a l l peak hour t r a f f i c flows i t must be remembered that 15 and 30 minute
peaks w i t h i n the hour often have greater i n t e n s i t i e s than the indicated
hourly values.
By r e l a t i n g the t r a f f i c demands placed on a f a c i l i t y to the a v a i l able capacity, i t s adequacy can be determined. Accordingly,
capacity
values f o r the e x i s t i n g bridges and t h e i r approaches were c a l c u l a t e d . 8/
Consideration was given to the number and e f f i c i e n c y of moving lanes,
nature and extent of i n t e r f e r e n c e s , v e h i c u l a r headways, and r e l a t e d
operational f a c t o r s which influence c a p a c i t i e s .
Present bridge and approach c a p a c i t i e s are summarized i n Table X I .
The minor variances between inbound and outbound c a p a c i t i e s r e s u l t
8/ The following capacity c r i t e r i a i n accord with the Highway Capacity
Manual were employed: maximum, possible, or s a t u r a t i o n capacity represents the greatest sustained hourly loading that a f a c i l i t y can
accommodate under prevalent conditions of operations. Optimum or
p r a c t i c a l capacity represents the maximum desired loading.
�from the c r i t i c a l approach conditions.
The combined present possible
d i r e c t i o n a l capacity of the four bridges and t h e i r approaches approximates 14,500 v e h i c l e s per hour.
The maximum optimum d i r e c t i o n a l loading
i s about 12,000 v e h i c l e s per hour f o r the bridges and approaches.
Present t o t a l peak.hour d i r e c t i o n a l loadings approximate 14,000 v e h i c l e s .
The p o t e n t i a l c a p a c i t i e s of the bridges, i f r e s t r i c t i v e approach
conditions were eliminated, are also i n d i c a t e d . The most marked
capacity increase i s that of the inbound span of the Highway Bridge.
F u l l u t i l i z a t i o n of a l l four lanes would increase present c a p a c i t i e s
about a t h i r d .
Trends i n inbound peak hour Potomac R i v e r Bridge t r a f f i c are compared with a v a i l a b l e c a p a c i t i e s i n Figure 2 3 .
I t i s s i g n i f i c a n t to note
that the p r a c t i c a l c a p a c i t i e s of a l l bridge systems have been exceeded
i n recent years.
Table X
PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC IN CENTRAL WASHINGTON
AS PERCENT OF TOTAL APT-1953
A.M. Ilush Hour
Outbound
Inbound
P.M. Itush Hour
Outbound
Inbound
South Side Inner Cordon
4-5$
4.8$
4.1$
4-7$
West Side Inner Cordon
5.6
4-3
3.2
6.7
North Side Inner Cordon
4-9
3.4
2.9
5.0
East Side Inner Cordon
4-7
3.7
2.9
5.0
E n t i r e Cordon Area*
5.0$
3.8$
3.2$
5.2$
*Cordon extends south of C o n s t i t u t i o n , West of 2 1 s t ,
East of Third S t r e e t .
37
North of L S t r e e t ,
�TRENDS IN INBOUND
POTOMAC
NATIONAL
CAPITAL
PLANNING
COMMISSION
~W.IL. £~;d <& 4,,...;..>„
J
RIVER
PEAK
BRIDGE
HOUR
TRAFFIC
FIGURE
23
�Table X I
Pj^BSOEEB
BRIDGE:
MEMORIAL
IN
OUT
HIGHWAY*
IN
OUT
IN
CAPACITIES
CHAIN*
OUT
KEY*
IN
OUT
IN
TOTAL*
OUT
Possible Capacity
Bridge & Approaches
5,400 5,400
4,800
4,800
1,600
1,500
2,900
2,700
14,700
14,400
Possible Capacity
Bridge Only
7,200 5,400
4,800 4,800
1,800
1,800
3,400
3,400
17,200
15,400
P r a c t i c a l Capacity
Bridge and
Approaches
4,500 4,500
3,900
3,900
1,300
1,300
2,400
2,400
12,100
12,100
Peak Hour
Loading
1954
4,230
4,420
1,600
1,490
2,660
2,670
13,890
13,930
5,400
5,350
*Commercial v e h i c l e s would reduce these c a p a c i t i e s s l i g h t l y .
Trends i n outbound peak hour Potomac R i v e r Bridge t r a f f i c as
r e l a t e d t o c a p a c i t i e s are shown i n Figure 2 4 . The patterns of growth
are
s i m i l a r t o those f o r inbound t r a f f i c .
Approximate
d a i l y c a p a c i t i e s have a l s o been determined from the
present (1954) r e l a t i o n s h i p s between peak hour d i r e c t i o n a l loadings and
average d a i l y flows.
the
These capacity values have been superimposed over
trends of average d a i l y t r a f f i c crossing the Potomac R i v e r on e x i s t -
ing bridges and are g r a p h i c a l l y summarized i n Figure 25. The need f o r
a d d i t i o n a l bridge capacity i s evident!
The t r a f f i c s u f f i c i e n c i e s f o r the e x i s t i n g Potomac R i v e r bridges
and t h e i r approaches are indicated i n Table X I I .
expressed as a percent of a v a i l a b l e c a p a c i t i e s .
Peak hour volumes are
I t i s r e a d i l y apparent
�TRENDS
IN
OUTBOUND PEAK
POTOMAC R I V E R
BRIDGE
HOUR
TRAFFIC
�TRENDS
RIVER
NATIONAL
CAPITAL
PLANNING
COMMISSION
IN
DAILY
BRIDGE
POTOMAC
TRAFFIC
FIGURE
25
�that the p r a c t i c a l c a p a c i t i e s of a l l four bridges are exceeded during
peak t r a f f i c hours.
Possible or saturation capacity values are reached
during both peaks on the Highway Bridge, and are approached on a l l the
other s t r u c t u r e s .
The Memorial Bridge appears to be the l e a s t overloaded.
The s u f f i c i e n c y of the Potomac R i v e r Crossings i s summarized i n Table
XIII.
The seriousness of the bridge problem, and the need for a d d i t i o n a l
r i v e r crossings, i s evident.
At the present time the d i r e c t i o n a l peak hour
t r a f f i c exceeds the combined " p r a c t i c a l capacity" of a l l bridges.
The peak
hour loads are w i t h i n 95 percent of the possible capacity of the combined
bridges.
Peak hour congestion involving r i v e r crossings can be expected
to reach the "breaking point" - complete saturation - i n approximately one
year.
TABLE X I I
TRAFFIC
SUFFICIENCIES
POTOMAC RIVER BRIDGES*
PEAK HOUR VOLUME AS PERCENT OF
AVAILABLE CAPACITY
INBOUND
OUTBOUND
A
B
A
B
Highway Bridge
120
100
119
100
Memorial Bridge
108
88
114
93
Key Bridge
111
92
112
99
Chain Bridge
122
100
114
99
A - P r a c t i c a l Capacity
B - Possible Capacity
*As a f f e c t e d by r e s t r i c t i v e approach conditions.
�TABLE X I I I
PRESENT TRAFFIC SUFFICIENCY*
POTOMAC RIVER BRIDGES
Inbound
Practical
Day
Capacity
13,930
12,100
114
Sufficiency
Possible
13,890
12,100
T o t a l Volume-Typical 1954Peak Hourly Flow
Outbound
114
L4,700
Sufficiency
14,400
94
Capacity
96
*Volume as percent of capacity.
Future Bridge Needs
I t has been previously indicated t h a t , based on normal growth trends,
there w i l l be about 328,000 v e h i c l e s crossing the Potomac R i v e r d a i l y by
1970.
T h i s value represents an increase of approximately 50 percent over
present crossings.
I f a t t r a c t i v e and f u l l y adequate systems of approach
roads can be provided, the desired crossings can be expected to approach
393,000 d a i l y .
To e f f e c t i v e l y meet peak hour demands and to accommodate reasonable
t r i p requirements, the minimum lane requirements w i l l be fourteen a d d i t i o n a l
lanes w i t h i n the next 16 years.
This assumes that the new bridges w i l l be
located so as to permit d i r e c t and e f f e c t i v e t r a v e l between motorists
1
p r i n c i p a l points of o r i g i n s and destinations and that a l l lanes w i l l be
utilized.
I t i s evident that t h e i r locations w i l l have to conform with
n a t u r a l t r a v e l patterns.
The new bridges w i l l have to be located so that
t h e i r capacity can be served by approach roads on each side of the r i v e r .
Approach road nets must be c a r e f u l l y integrated with bridge plans.
Inad-
equate approach highways, or required c i r c u i t o u s t r a v e l w i l l greatly reduce
�the p r a c t i c a l e f f e c t i v e n e s s of a bridge.
Improper locations can mean,
therefore, that more lane c a p a c i t i e s w i l l be required.
Accepted Proposed Bridges on. Outer Circumferential
Comprehensive plans for new Potomac R i v e r Bridge crossings should
give cognizance to both capacity and access needs.
Bridges should be
constructed not only to eliminate capacity d e f i c i e n c i e s , but a l s o a t
those locations where they w i l l become i n t e g r a l l i n k s of primary regional
trafficways.
A balanced system of Potomac R i v e r crossings should
contain
both c e n t r a l and p e r i p h e r a l bridges.
Highway as w e l l as planning o f f i c i a l s have already agreed on the
construction of the Jones Point and Cabin John Bridges as part of the
Greater Washington outer c i r c u m f e r e n t i a l route.
This i s an accepted
condition i n the report.
Jones Point Bridge - The l o c a t i o n for a r i v e r crossing a t Alexandria
has been one of the Regional proposals of the Comprehensive Plan.
Bill
H.R. 1980, signed by the President, authorized the Jones Point Bridge.
The Jones Point crossing s i t e I s located south of the c e n t r a l d i s t r i c t
of Alexandria.
T r a f f i c analyses r e v e a l that a four-lane bridge would
meet t r a f f i c demands although i t i s understood a 6-lane s t r u c t u r e has
been contemplated.
I n V i r g i n i a the bridge would have interchange
with
the Mount Vernon Memorial Highway, J e f f e r s o n Davis Highway and Telegraph
Road, and, v i a an extension, with the S h i r l e y Highway.
I f the proposed
Potomac R i v e r expressway i s developed i t would l i k e l y provide access t o
the bridge.
I n Maryland the bridge would have interchange with the
proposed George Washington Memorial Parkway, Indian Head Road, and
eventually be extended eastward as part of the Outer C i r c u m f e r e n t i a l .
41
�The bridge would provide a valuable t r a f f i c service by affording
a much needed by-pass of c e n t r a l Washington.
I t would permit d i r e c t
routing between southwestern portions of the Metropolitan area and
southeastern Washington, and eliminate v i r t u a l l y a l l the reverse movements c u r r e n t l y negotiated over the Highway and south Capitol S t r e e t
Bridges.
S i m i l a r l y , the connection t o the S h i r l e y Highway would a t t r a c t
t r a f f i c which would otherwise be required to t r a v e r s e the Pentagon Road
net.
I t would encourage suburbanization and would provide a "dispersed
development" crossing of the Potomac R i v e r .
Cabin John Bridge - The Cabin John Bridge would span the Potomac i n
the v i c i n i t y of Cabin John Park about 8 miles northwest of c e n t r a l Washington,,
I t would have contact with Route 193 i n V i r g i n i a and MacArthur Boulevard
i n Maryland,
I t would also connect the George Washington Memorial Parkway
on both sides of the Potomac River»
i n the Outer Circumferential.
The bridge would be an i n t e g r a l l i n k
I t would tap new areas and stimulate t h e i r
development.
Preliminary t r a f f i c studies indicated that there are i n s u f f i c i e n t
t r a f f i c p o t e n t i a l s to j u s t i f y I t s construction a t present.
I n light
of the recent plans by Maryland to expedite the construction of the
Outer Circumferential, i t i s reasonable t o expect s u b s t a n t i a l increases
i n the bridge's future t r a f f i c p o t e n t i a l s .
Accordingly, i t i s desirable
that rights-of-way be reserved a t the present time for the bridge approaches
i n both V i r g i n i a and Maryland.
New Proposed R i v e r Crossings Considered
Highway and planning agencies recognize the need for the cons t r u c t i o n of new intermediate and c e n t r a l Potomac R i v e r Crossings.
general locations have been considered:
42
Three
�(1)
a downstream c e n t r a l l o c a t i o n i n the v i c i n i t y of Roaches Run
or Hains Point;
(2)
a midstream c e n t r a l l o c a t i o n i n the v i c i n i t y of Constitution
Avenue; and
(3)
an upstream intermediate crossing between the Key and
Chain Bridges.
0
Tentat-'v locations and alinements of the Roaches Run and Constitution
Avenue R i v e r Crossings are shown i n Figure 26.
Roaches Run - The planned Roaches Run Crossing would be located i n the
v i c i n i t y of Roaches Run approximately 800 feet down stream of the r a i l r o a d
bridge; and would be a s i x - l a n e f a c i l i t y .
with the Southwest Expressway
The bridge would connect d i r e c t l y
leg of the Inner Loop, and 12th S t r e e t
i n Washington and have Interchange with Mount Vernon Memorial Highway
and the Pentagon road network on the V i r g i n i a side v i a high type
connectors.
By development of the Four Mile Run Expressway between the bridge
and the S h i r l e y Highway much t r a n s - r i v e r t r a f f i c could be intercepted
before reaching the Pentagon road net and conveyed d i r e c t l y to the
bridge.
The Four Mile Run Expressway integrates w e l l into the planned
Intermediate C i r c u m f e r e n t i a l i n the V i r g i n i a metropolitan area. The
contemplated Potomac River Expressway
to Alexandria can be r e a d i l y tied
into the bridge.
Advantages —
A t t r a c t i v e interchanges can r e a d i l y be provided on
both approaches to the bridge.
The f a c i l i t y can be expected to provide
s u b s t a n t i a l r e l i e f to the heavy traveled Highway Bridge.
I t can advan-
tageously serve densely populated sectors of the metropolitan area;
O
��about two-thirds of the people i n the V i r g i n i a metropolitan area currentlyl i v e south of Arlington Boulevard.
I t i s r e a d i l y possible to integrate
the bridge approach roads with the Southwest Expressway,
Redevelopment Plans.
Opportunities e x i s t f o r providing o f f - s t r e e t parking
areas i n proximity of bridge approaches.
I t should be noted that these
plans would increase the t r a f f i c a t t r a c t i b i l i t y
of c e n t r a l Washington.
and Southwest
of the southwest portions
V i a the Southwest Expressway Bridge t r a f f i c would
have free flowing access to the South Capitol S t r e e t as w e l l as to the
Third S t r e e t leg of the Inner Loop Expressway.
The bridge would provide
all-weather express access to the National A i r p o r t .
I t provides d i r e c t
access to the c e n t r a l shopping d i s t r i c t and areas to the east. Much of
the land required f o r the bridge approaches i s under Federal ownership
and can be r e a d i l y committed to a bridge l o c a t i o n at any time.
Disadvantages
—
Increased north-south t r a f f i c flows on surface
s t r e e t s t r i b u t a r y to the bridge can be expected to develop needs f o r
a d d i t i o n a l capacity at i n t e r s e c t i o n s along Constitution Avenue.
The
anticipated north-south flows and required c a p a c i t i e s are developed
f u l l y i n Part I I of t h i s report.
Constitution Avenue Bridge - The proposed Constitution Avenue Bridge
i s located about 1200 feet north of the Arlington Memorial Bridge.
connects with George Washington Parkway, Arlington
It
Boulevard and the
J e f f e r s o n Davis Highway on the V i r g i n i a side i n a s e r i e s of high capacity
type interchanges.
On the Washington side the bridge would have complete
interchange with the west leg of the Inner B e l t Expressway and would have
a d i r e c t connection to Constitution Avenue.
Twenty-third S t r e e t would
be carried over Constitution Avenue thereby increasing the capacity of
44
�both roadways.
Integrated with the new bridge are new Mall roads which
would serve the Memorial Bridge t r a f f i c , and reduce e x i s t i n g weaving
maneuvers.
An a t t r a c t i v e contact between the B e l t Expressway and a
widened "E" S t r e e t Mall roadway would be provided.
Advantages —
The bridge provides a d i r e c t c e n t r a l crossing for
Arlington Boulevard, Washington Memorial Parkway, and Lee Highway t r a f f i c
approaching from the west and north.
The bridge would a t t r a c t v e h i c l e s
c u r r e n t l y using Memorial and Key Bridges r e l i e v i n g capacity problems
on these f a c i l i t i e s .
area.
I t provides a t t r a c t i v e access to the west c e n t r a l
V i r t u a l l y a l l of the land required f o r bridge approaches i s
under Federal ownership.
Disadvantages —
Converging t r a f f i c from V i r g i n i a Avenue onto
Constitution east of the bridge i s l i k e l y to develop capacity problems
on the s t r e e t , even w i t h widening.
To separate Memorial and Constitution Avenue Bridge t r a f f i c , the Mall
has been converted into a through t r a f f i c w a y to Ninth S t r e e t , thereby
increasing t r a f f i c movements on the M a l l roadway.
The Constitution
Avenue Bridge serves areas p r e s e n t l y occupied by temporary buildings
whose future access needs are l i k e l y to decrease.
The bridge w i l l not
s u b s t a n t i a l l y r e l i e v e the t r a f f i c loadings on the Highway Bridge.
a t t r a c t i v e interchange provided with Arlington Boulevard w i l l
The
likely
develop increased t r a f f i c loads on the V i r g i n i a thoroughfare which i s
c u r r e n t l y saturated during peak t r a f f i c hours.
I t should be noted
that between 194-8 and 1952 t r a f f i c volumes i n A r l i n g t o n Boulevard i n creased about L40 percent.
Normal increases i n l o c a l V i r g i n i a t r a f f i c
alone w i l l tax the c a p a c i t i e s to be provided by the planned
45
widening.
�The additive bridge t r a f f i c would aggravate t h i s condition and r e s t r i c t
operations on the roadway.
To repeat, present t r a n s - r i v e r t r a f f i c com-
bined with the r a p i d l y growing i n t r a - V i r g i n i a t r a f f i c would absorb the
capacity of t h i s important expressway as r a p i d l y as i t i s provided.
The Commission of Fine A r t s has c l e a r l y set f o r t h the impact of
the structure on c e n t r a l area a e s t h e t i c s .
The Commission states that
i f a crossing must he provided at t h i s location that i t should he a
tunnel.
This type f a c i l i t y would he very c o s t l y although i t would connect
with the same road network as a bridge.
E S t r e e t Bridge - E a r l y plans f o r a c e n t r a l crossing also considered
a bridge connecting Arlington Boulevard with E Street i n the v i c i n i t y of
the E S t r e e t Inner Loop interchange.
This bridge was superceded by the
Constitution Avenue Bridge.,
Three S i s t e r s Bridge - The proposed Three S i s t e r s Bridge
span the Potomac River over the Three S i s t e r s I s l a n d ,
would
I t would connect
with Canal Road, MacArthur Boulevard, F o x h a l l Road and the planned
Glover Archbold Parkway on the Washington side.
On the V i r g i n i a side
i t would connect with the e x i s t i n g Washington Memorial Parkway, and
i t s planned extension i n a "bulb" type Interchange.
The proposed east-
west expressway serving the F a l l s Church area would be linked with the
e x i s t i n g spur of the Washington Parkway to Lee Highway.
The proposed
Whitehaven Parkway i n Washington about a mile to the north of the bridge
would serve as a major east-west d i s t r i b u t o r .
Advantages —
The Three S i s t e r s Bridge would s t r a t e g i c a l l y
" i n t e r c e p t " Washington bound t r a f f i c from northwestern V i r g i n i a areas
which would otherwise use Key, Central, or Memorial Bridges.
That i s ,
the " t r a f f i c shed" of the Three S i s t e r s Bridge includes many of the
46
�f a s t e s t growing areas i n the Metropolitan region.
This w i l l occur to
an even greater extent when the east-west expressway becomes completed.
The bridge would permit d i r e c t and e f f i c i e n t t r a n s - r i v e r movements to
northwest Washington from a l l of metropolitan V i r g i n i a .
function which none of the e x i s t i n g bridges provides.
This i s a
The planned
Intermediate C i r c u m f e r e n t i a l could e a s i l y u t i l i z e the bridge.
Possi-
b i l i t i e s e x i s t f o r connecting the bridge with the Inner Loop.
Disadvantages —
For the Three S i s t e r s Bridge to o f f e r maximum
t r a f f i c s e r v i c e to t r a n s - r i v e r crossings i t should have a limited access
connection v i a the Whitehaven Parkway to the Inner Loop.
This necessi-
tates an extension of the Whitehaven Parkway most l i k e l y through s e v e r a l
blocks of r e l a t i v e l y expensive residences and buildings, to connect with
the Inner Loop at about F l o r i d a and Connecticut Avenues.
The bridge
w i l l not serve t r a f f i c t r a v e l i n g to and from c e n t r a l Washington as
e f f i c i e n t l y as a more c e n t r a l crossing, Unless Canal Road i s developed
to expressway standards and the present bottlenecks of the Whitehurst
Freeway at i t s eastern terminus are removed, Three S i s t e r s Bridge t r a f f i c
w i l l tend to overload these roadways during peak inbound periods.
Nebraska Avenue - The Nebraska Avenue crossing of the Potomac River
i s located about midway between the Three S i s t e r s and the Chain Bridges,
The f a c i l i t y would be almost e n t i r e l y an intermediate crossing and would
not develop the t r a f f i c p o t e n t i a l s of the Three S i s t e r s .
F i e l d studies
indicate that i t would be d i f f i c u l t to provide a t t r a c t i v e and
economical
connections on the V i r g i n i a s i d e .
T r a f f i c P o t e n t i a l s of Potomac R i v e r Crossings
The present t r a n s - r i v e r crossing desires were related to the transportation s e r v i c e s afforded by the a v a i l a b l e road net of metropolitan
47
�Washington,
The amount of t r a f f i c p o t e n t i a l to any bridge depends on
the r e l a t i v e time and distance savings, and the q u a l i t y of flow over
the given f a c i l i t y as compared with competing routes, and i t s r e l a t i o n
to v e h i c l e o r i g i n s and d e s t i n a t i o n s . Motorists can be expected to seek
out the e a s i e s t route from t h e i r o r i g i n s to t h e i r destinations.
The
d i v e r s i o n f a c t o r s that have been employed give due cognizance to that
component of t r a f f i c which i s p o t e n t i a l to several, a l t e r n a t e f a c i l i t i e s .
Origin-destination c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of c e n t r a l Washington were analyzed
in detail.
Assignments of 1954 average d a i l y t r a f f i c volume to the e x i s t i n g
bridges are summarized i n Table XIV.
The a c t u a l t r a f f i c flows on the
e x i s t i n g bridges are also i n d i c a t e d . I n general, there i s a reasonable
correspondence between the a c t u a l and assigned crossings. I t should be
noted that the t r a f f i c assigned to the Key Bridge i s considerably l i g h t e r
than the volumes recorded on the f a c i l i t y .
This crossing appears
u n a t t r a c t i v e when t r i p desires are considered, c h i e f l y because of i t s i n d i r e c t approach connections and i t s poor o r i e n t a t i o n .
are
The present loadings
to a considerable extent r e s u l t a n t from the extreme t r a f f i c pressures
on more d i r e c t crossings and t h e i r approaches.
I n t h i s regard the Key
Bridge i s used as an a l t e r n a t e route for the Memorial Bridge.
The desire t r a f f i c loadings on each bridge are shown g r a p h i c a l l y
i n Figure 27.
T r i p d e s i r e s to the zero sector are a l s o indicated. I t
i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note that over 35 percent of a l l t r i p s assigned to
the Memorial and Highway Bridges are between V i r g i n i a and downtown
Washington.
48
�PRESENT
TRAFFIC
BASED
NATIONAL C A P I T A L
]/\JlUu.t
>=
<Snn'dL
PLANNING
COMMISSION
<S? <=?4-ii<fclatei
TRANSRIVER
TYPICAL
DISTRIBUTION
ON
TRIP
DESIRES
1 9 5 4 DAY
FIGURE
27
�Table XIV
PRESENT TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION
TYPICAL 1954 DAY
Approx.
Daily
Practical
Capacity*
A c t u a l Count
Daily
Traffic
Percent
of T o t a l
Crossings
Assigned
Daily
Traffic
Percent
of T o t a l
Crossings
47.0$
106,000
48.7$
Bridge
Effective
Lane
Highway
6
85,000
102,000
Memorial
6
50,000
54,000
24.9
67,000
30.8
Key
4
43,000
47,000
21.7
31,000
14.3
Chain
2
12,000
14,000
6.4
13,000
6.2
217,000
100.0
217,000
100.0
TOTAL
^ C a p a c i t i e s are based on the r e l a t i o n of e x i s t i n g peak hour d i r e c t i o n a l
volumes to t o t a l d a i l y t r a f f i c .
Present t r a n s - r i v e r crossings projected to 1970 approximate 328,000
vehicles daily.
As new bridges and approach road systems are placed into
operation they w i l l generate new t r a f f i c t r i p s .
i s additive to normal projected volumes.
This generated t r a f f i c
Accordingly, the t o t a l a n t i c i -
pated 1970 t r a n s - r i v e r crossings, assuming the development of new Potomac
R i v e r bridges has been estimated a t 393,000 t r i p s d a i l y .
This value i s
used i n subsequent t r a f f i c assignments.
Anticipated 1970 t r a f f i c volumes have been assigned to e x i s t i n g
and proposed bridges.
Assignments were predicated on the completion of
c e r t a i n highway improvements, delineated i n Figure 15.
the
They have assumed
planned Outer Potomac Crossings at Cabin John and Jones Point, and
an intermediate new crossing at-Roaches Run.
With these bridges i n
place, anticipated loadings were determined f o r the e n t i r e system of
Potomac R i v e r crossings assuming ( l ) a c e n t r a l C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue
49
�Bridge and ( 2 ) a Three S i s t e r s Bridge.
Table XV.
T r a f f i c values are indicated i n
These d i s t r i b u t i o n s by desire would remain e s s e n t i a l l y the
same i f a l e s s e r t o t a l of t r i p s i s considered.
The Three S i s t e r s loca-
t i o n was considered p r e f e r e n t i a l to the Nebraska Avenue s i t e because
i t can be more r e a d i l y integrated into o v e r a l l highway plans.
A study of t h i s table shows that the maximum percentage of t r a f f i c
on any one bridge i s about h a l f the present percentage.
A more equitable
o v e r a l l d i s t r i b u t i o n of t r a f f i c i s attained. Over 85 percent of a l l
t r a n s r i v e r crossings would use c e n t r a l or intermediate bridges; only
15 percent of the t o t a l t r a f f i c i s p o t e n t i a l to Jones Point, Chain and
Cabin John Bridges.
T r a f f i c demands would be served best by e i t h e r the Constitution
Avenue or Three S i s t e r s Bridge.
E i t h e r crossing would a t t r a c t about
one-quarter of the t o t a l t r a n s r i v e r t r i p demands. E i t h e r f a c i l i t y
would d i v e r t appreciable volumes from e x i s t i n g adjacent bridges. The
Roaches Run Bridge would s u b s t a n t i a l l y reduce o v e r a l l loadings on
the Highway Bridge.
The C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue crossing a t t r a c t s considerably more
t r a f f i c than the Memorial Bridge because of i t s a b i l i t y to "intercept"
t r a n s - r i v e r t r i p s approaching from western and northern V i r g i n i a
areas.
I t a f f o r d s r e l i e f to Memorial and Key Bridges.
S i m i l a r l y the
Three S i s t e r s crossing a t t r a c t s s i g n i f i c a n t l y greater volumes than Key
Bridge because of more d i r e c t roadway connection.
I t provides greatest
r e l i e f to Key and Chain Bridges, although i t d i v e r t s t r a f f i c from
Memorial Bridge as w e l l .
50
�Table XV
ANTICIPATED 1970 TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION
OF
POTOMAC RIVER CROSSINGS
Based on T r i p Desires
CENTR AL CROSSING
AND
OUTER CROSSINGS
BRIDGE
Daily
Traffic
Percent of T o t a l
Crossings
THREE S ISTERS CROSSING
AND
OUTER CROSSINGS
Daily
Traffic
Percent of T o t a l
Crossings
Jones Bridge
29,000
7.4
29,000
7.4
Roaches Run
51,500
13.1
52,500
13.3
Highway-
93,500
23.8
96,500
24.6
Memorial
53,200
13.5
76,200*
19.4
Constitution
95,000
24.I
Key
44,000
11.2
18,000
4.6
-
-
101,000
25.7
Three S i s t e r s
-
•
-
17,500
4-5
12,000
3.0
Cabin John
9,300
2.4
7,800
2.0
TOTAL
393,000
100.0
393,000
100.0
Chain
^Exceeds the p r a c t i c a l capacity of bridge. T r a f f i c would d i s t r i b u t e
to Key and other bridges where excess capacity i s a v a i l a b l e .
I n assigning t r a f f i c i t has been assumed that the Roaches Run
and C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue or Three S i s t e r s Bridges would provide three
moving lanes i n each d i r e c t i o n , while the outer bridges would be four
lane f a c i l i t i e s .
Assigned loadings to the Three S i s t e r s or Constitu-
t i o n Avenue Bridges appear to exceed optimum capacity values.
There
i s a tendency f o r t r a f f i c to d i s t r i b u t e i t s e l f i n accord with a v a i l a b l e
capacities.
Hence the t r a f f i c excess or overload has been r e - a l l o c a t e d
51
�i n order to determine the a c t u a l t r a f f i c volumes on each of the Potomac
R i v e r crossings.
Anticipated 1970 volumes based on t r i p desires and
c a p a c i t i e s are summarized i n Table XVI.
Highway and the Constitution
Avenue or Three S i s t e r s Bridges w i l l c a r r y the heaviest flows:
Figure 28
g r a p h i c a l l y summarizes and compares the anticipated 1970 t r a f f i c
loadings
on the Potomac R i v e r Bridges.
Table XVI
ANTICIPATED 1970 TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION
OF
POTOMAC RIVER BRIDGE CROSSINGS
Based on T r i p Desires as Related to Bridge Capacities
Bridge
Lanes
Approx.
Daily
Practical
Capacity*
Central
Crossings
and
Outer
Crossings
Daily
Traffic
%
of T o t a l
Crossings
Three S i s t e r s
Crossings
and
Outer
Crossings
%
Daily
of T o t a l
Traffic
Crossing,
Jones Point
4
50,000
29,000
7.4
29,000
7.4
Roaches Run
6
75,000
54,000
13.7
55,000
14.0
Highway-
8
100,000
94,000
23.9
98,000
24.9
Memorial
6
60,000
58,200
14.8
60,000
15.3
Constitution
6
75,000
75,000
19.1
Key
6
75,000
56,000
14.2
Three S i s t e r s
6
75,000
Chain
2
20,000
Cabin John
A
50,000
TOTAL
-
-
53,700
13.6
-
75,000
19.1
17,500
4-5
14,500
3.7
9,300
2.4
7,800
2.4
-
393,000
100.0
393,000
100.0
^Assumes that peak hourly d i r e c t i o n a l movements w i l l be 6 percent of t o t a l
d a i l y crossings.
For Memorial and Chain Bridges, a 7 percent value has been used.
52
�ANTICIPATED
1970
POTOMAC
NATIONAL
CAPITAL
PLANNING
COMMISSION
TRAFFIC
RIVER
CROSSINGS
DISTRIBUTION
�Chapter V
RECOMMENDATIONS
Long-range plans for Potomac River Crossings can he made from
the data and analyses presented.
Also, other improvements e s s e n t i a l
to e f f i c i e n t use of the bridges are apparent.
I n evaluating bridge
requirements, consideration has been given to a system of r i v e r
crossings.
When e x i s t i n g bridges are modernized, care should be
taken to insure no reductions i n crossing c a p a c i t i e s during
construction periods-.
Coincident with the improvement of e x i s t i n g bridges, and t h e i r
approaches, and taking precedence over the construction of new c e n t r a l
crossings, i t i s essential, that a d d i t i o n a l s t r e e t capacity be provided
on the Washington side of the r i v e r .
Roadways are c u r r e n t l y taxed
during peak hours and cannot accommodate the a d d i t i o n a l loadings which
would r e s u l t from increased bridge capacity.
1.
Inner Loop Expressway
The Inner Loop Expressway d i s t r i b u t o r should be developed before
any new c e n t r a l bridge i s b u i l t .
objective.
T r a f f i c w i s e , t h i s i s a. most desired
I t i s r e a l i z e d , however, that the magnitude of t h i s under-
taking l i m i t s i t s e a r l y achievement.
I t i s recommended, therefore, that
the key sections of the Expressway—the Southwest Expressway, the
western l e g , and the 3rd S t r e e t l e g between the Southwest Expressway
and a. point to the immediate north of Constitution Avenue—be developed
p r i o r to or, a t the l a t e s t , i n conjunction with the new c e n t r a l bridges.
2.
Improvements to E x i s t i n g River Crossings and Approaches
Capacities of e x i s t i n g bridges and t h e i r approaches can be r e a d i l y
increased.
E x i s t i n g bridges should be improved as follows:
53
�Highway Bridge - A new four-lane span should be constructed to
replace the o r i g i n a l Highway Bridge which has outlived i t s
structural u t i l i t y .
This new span would be located i n about
the same alinement as the s t r u c t u r e i t w i l l replace. This
improvement i s being considered by the D i s t r i c t of Columbia
Department of Highways.
The inbound bridge should be
connected
to the Inner Loop v i a Main^Avenue or by other means which permits
f u l l u t i l i z a t i o n of the four inbound lanes.
These improvements
w i l l increase the bridge capacity about 25 percent.
The plans to
depress 14th S t r e e t under Independence Avenue and the Mall are
good, and w i l l increase both north-south and east-west c a p a c i t i e s .
Long-range plans should develop north-south one-way operations
through the C e n t r a l area.
P a i r i n g of 14th and 15th S t r e e t s as a.
one-way system between Massachusetts Avenue and 14th and Madison
Drive would s u b s t a n t i a l l y improve operations through the downtown
area, and should be considered.
Memorial Bridge - By modification of the ramp connections on the
V i r g i n i a side of the r i v e r , the capacity of s e v e r a l weaving sections
can be improved.
Improvements on the Washington side are i n p a r t
contingent on the development of a Constitution Avenue crossing.
The present weaving maneuvers at the L i n c o l n Memorial should be
reduced by making Bacon Drive a. one-way eastbound roadway and by
increasing i t s radius at Constitution Avenue, or by a s i m i l a r
f u n c t i o n a l treatment.
Pending the grade separation of 23rd S t r e e t
at Constitution Avenue, westbound bridge t r a f f i c should turn l e f t
at 24th S t r e e t extended and merge with bridge-bound t r a f f i c on the
54
�Loop from Ohio Drive.
These improvements should increase optimum
Memorial Bridge c a p a c i t i e s about 10 percent.
Key Bridge - S t r e e t r a i l w a y operation on t h i s bridge should be
replaced with buses and the e x i s t i n g s t r e e t c a r tracks removed as
planned.
The bridge should be widened to provide three moving
lanes i n each d i r e c t i o n by including the c a n t i l e v e r i n g of the
south walk.
E f f i c i e n t interchanges accommodating a l l important
movements should be provided between Key Bridge and George
Washington Memorial Parkway at Rosslyn.
I n i t i a l l y a one-way s t r e e t
system over e x i s t i n g right-of-way should connect A r l i n g t o n
Boulevard to Key Bridge with grade separations developed at
Arlington and Wilson Boulevards.
Long range plans should pro-
vide f o r a l i m i t e d access north-south connector to A r l i n g t o n
Boulevard.
On the Washington side a grade separated interchange
at "M" S t r e e t should be constructed.
35th and 34th S t r e e t s should
be developed as one-way connectors through the western f r i n g e of
Georgetown to Wisconsin Avenue and the planned Whitehaven Parkway.
Plans to develop Canal Road as an expressway extension of the
Whitehurst Freeway w i l l eliminate the present congested operations
at t h e i r i n t e r s e c t i o n .
The improvement of "K" S t r e e t as an eastern
extension of the Whitehurst Freeway w i l l eliminate the present
bottleneck at the eastern terminus and permit over a 30 percent
increase of inbound freeway capacity. For maximum s t a b i l i t y and
f l e x i b i l i t y of operations a t t r a c t i v e connectors should be
between the Whitehurst Freeway and the Inner Loop.
developed
The widening of
Key Bridge and the improvement of i t s approaches should increase the
55
�crossing capacity over 15 percent.
Both the widening of the Key
Bridge and the improvement of Canal Road are included i n the
Highway Department's program.
Chain Bridge - The planned improvement of Canal Road w i l l improve
the bridge approach on the Washington side.
I n V i r g i n i a , widening
of the nearby i n t e r s e c t i o n , including the provision of increased
sight d i s t a n c e , i s d e s i r a b l e .
About a 10 percent increase i n bridge
capacity would be r e a l i z e d a f t e r these improvements are effected.
3.
New
Potomac River
Crossings
The analyses of t r a f f i c growth and o r i g i n - d e s t i n a t i o n data r e v e a l
that by 1970 a minimum of 14 a d d i t i o n a l bridge lanes w i l l be required,
assuming that the lanes are a l l positioned i n accord with d r i v e r s ' desire
l i n e s of t r a v e l .
Recommended improvements to the Highway and Key Bridge
w i l l provide four new lanes.
New
r i v e r crossings are required to
provide the ten other lanes.
Inasmuch as f u l l capacity usage cannot be
achieved on a l l bridges, a d d i t i o n a l lanes w i l l be required to provide
c a p a c i t i e s commensurate with p r i n c i p a l t r a v e l patterns.
1.
New
bridges must have adequate approach and d i s t r i b u t o r
connections on both sides of the r i v e r .
At present a r e l a -
t i v e l y f l e x i b l e road net e x i s t s on the V i r g i n i a side.
2.
While the acceptance of the outer loop bridges at Jones Point
and Cabin John i s desirable from the standpoint of regional
development and a c c e s s i b i l i t y , the bridges would d i v e r t r e l a t i v e l y small proportions
of t r a f f i c and thereby would not
provide s u b s t a n t i a l r e l i e f for the more c e n t r a l l y located
crossings.
Four lane roadways would adequately accommodate
56
�t r a f f i c demands at each crossing beyond 1970 but a d d i t i o n a l
lanes might be j u s t i f i e d as part of long range plans.
These
bridges w i l l become i n c r e a s i n g l y important i n the future access
pattern f o r the metropolitan area.
that t h e i r rights-of-way be now
3.
I t i s e s s e n t i a l , therefore,
procured.
Roaches Run must be developed as a separate new f a c i l i t y and
not merely as another bridge to replace the old Highway Bridge.
I t should provide s i x lanes.
4-.
A new upstream s i x lane crossing should be provided.
The
development of e i t h e r the C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue or Three S i s t e r s
Bridge or a bridge somewhere between these two l o c a t i o n s with
adequate approaches and connectors would a f f o r d maximum t r a f f i c
service.
(a)
Both bridges would have about the same o v e r a l l t r a f f i c
e f f e c t s on the system of Potomac R i v e r crossings and
would r e l i e v e e x i s t i n g crossings.
(b)
The C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue Bridge would be b e t t e r adapted
for t r i p s to or from the c e n t r a l area of Washington.
The
Three S i s t e r s Bridge would r e c e i v e i t s greatest usage by
other than downtown oriented t r i p s , and would r e l i e v e other
c e n t r a l bridges from t h i s type of t r a v e l .
(c)
The Three S i s t e r s Bridge appears to have b e t t e r long range
planning p o s s i b i l i t i e s . I t permits a north to south transr i v e r movement removed from the c e n t r a l area.
I t s Virginia
approaches are removed from the heavy peak hour loadings
i n the Pentagon Road net.
57
�I t i s better suited to new highway development:
the
planned expressway serving the F a l l s Church area i n
V i r g i n i a which w i l l tap some of the f a s t e s t growing
sections of the metropolitan region would l i n k d i r e c t l y
into the bridge.
S i m i l a r l y , the bridge would a t t r a c t
t r a f f i c from areas served by the George Washington
Memorial Parkway extension.
The bridge can and should
be integrated with the intermediate c i r c u m f e r e n t i a l
route.
To e f f e c t t h i s i n Washington the Glover Archbald
Parkway should be extended northward
to Nebraska and Wiscon-
s i n Avenues.
(d)
For e i t h e r the Constitution Avenue or Three S i s t e r s
Bridge, d i r e c t limited access connections to the Inner
Loop Expressway
should be provided.
To achieve t h i s
f o r the Three S i s t e r s Bridge the planned Whitehaven
Parkway would have to be developed between the Inner
Loop and the Glover Archbald Parkway.
5.
Even w i t h the proposed system of bridges, by 1970 a l l motorists
would not be able to cross where they p r e f e r during peak hours,
although there would be s u f f i c i e n t t o t a l reserve capacity.
In
any large metropolitan area i t i s never possible to accommodate
a l l t r i p d e s i r e s , and some r e d i s t r i b u t i o n of t r a f f i c i s necessary.
6.
Anticipated t r a f f i c requirements and assignments have been p r e d i cated on optimum c a p a c i t i e s . 2 / Higher capacity values are
P r a c t i c a l lane capacity values approximating
flow lane per hour were assumed.
58
1,500 v e h i c l e s per steady
�c u r r e n t l y attained on e x i s t i n g bridges and can be expected to
develop on new f a c i l i t i e s as pressures mount.
Thus, the use of
conservative capacity c r i t e r i a represents a reserve insofar as
future bridge requirements are concerned.
Schedule
I n programming proposed Potomac R i v e r Bridge improvements, i t i s
evident that primary a t t e n t i o n should be turned to c e n t r a l crossings.
Outer bridges should be b u i l t subsequently as funds become a v a i l a b l e ,
although t h e i r rights-of-way should be reserved at the present time.
The a u t h o r i z a t i o n by Congress f o r the Jones Point Bridge would
give the bridge a high p r i o r i t y i n the o v e r a l l program of r i v e r
crossings.
I n scheduling improvements, new lanes have been added i n accord
with d r i v e r s ' d e s i r e s , and to achieve an equitable d i s t r i b u t i o n of the
t o t a l crossing capacity. While surplus lanes would be provided at some
l o c a t i o n s , p a r t i c u l a r l y at the outer bridges, there would be l i t t l e
excess capacity on the c e n t r a l bridges.
I t must be remembered that
bridges should, i n accord with Bureau of Public Roads' p o l i c i e s , provide s u f f i c i e n t c a p a c i t i e s f o r a t h i r t y - y e a r period.
The recommended scheduling of improvements follow.
Priorities
have given cognizance to the t r a f f i c needs; however the ease of
e f f e c t u a t i o n of the various bridge p r o j e c t s has a l s o been considered.
59
�IMMEDIATE PROGRAM
A.
Improvement and Replacement of E x i s t i n g Bridges
1.
Replace the Old Highway Bridge Span and improve the Washington
approaches so as to develop four e f f e c t i v e lanes i n each
direction.
I t has been indicated that the old i r o n t r e s t l e
w i l l need replacement,
s t r u c t u r a l l y , i n the very near f u t u r e .
The new s t r u c t u r e would be developed on approximately the
same alinement.
2.
Widen the Key Bridge and improve i t s approach interchanges
on both sides of the Potomac R i v e r .
3.
B.
New
1.
Improve the approaches to the Memorial Bridge.
Construction
Reserve the rights-of-way for the Jones Point and Cabin John
bridges.
2.
Build the Inner Loop Expressway, giving p r i o r i t y to the
Southwest Expressway,
to a Third S t r e e t Expressway
connector
to a point to the north of Constitution Avenue and to the west
leg.
3.
Construct a new upper c e n t r a l Potomac R i v e r crossing at the
Three S i s t e r s or Constitution Avenue locations or somewhere
between these two l o c a t i o n s .
4.
I n i t i a t e by 1957, coordinate with the Southwest Expressway, the
construction of the Roaches Run Bridge.
placed i n operation at the same time.
The two should be
I f adequate approach
road connectors could be developed on the V i r g i n i a side, the
Roaches Run Bridge could be constructed e a r l i e r .
�FUTURE PROGRAM
1.
Improve the approaches to the Chain Bridge.
2.
I n i t i a t e by I960 the construction of the Jones Point Bridge.
3.
I n i t i a t e by 1968 the construction of the Cabin John Bridge.
Bridge improvement scheduling must, of course, be integrated into
the o v e r a l l highway plans f o r the metropolitan area.
I n l i g h t of t h i s ,
some modifications i n the recommended construction sequence may be necessary.
61
�PART I I
THE INNER TRAFFIC LOOP
�INTRODUCTION
P a r t I I of the authorized study involves the development of volume
and capacity data f o r the Inner Loop Expressway and north-south
roads.
connector
This aspect of the work required the use of the t r a f f i c volume
and o r i g i n - d e s t i n a t i o n data developed i n the Bridge and Metropolitan Area
studies.
Comprehensive new t r a v e l data were not a v a i l a b l e .
The Inner Loop Expressway as conceived by the National C a p i t a l
Planning Commission w i l l encompass c e n t r a l Washington and serve as a
controlled access c i r c u m f e r e n t i a l .
Through planned connections with
e x i s t i n g s t r e e t s and other major highway f a c i l i t i e s , the roadway w i l l
serve to d i s t r i b u t e t r a f f i c around and into the c e n t r a l area of the c i t y
from a l l approaches.
I t i s comparable to inner expressway f a c i l i t i e s
c u r r e n t l y planned i n many large c i t i e s .
The concept of such a d i s t r i b u t i o n a l roadway circumscribed around
the c e n t r a l area of a c i t y i s not new.
I t was a primary s t r e e t
planning objective even before the automotive e r a , as i s t y p i f i e d i n
the "Inner Quadrangle" of the Burnham Plan f o r Chicago.
Boston, New
York,
Cleveland, London, and Kansas C i t y are among the metropolitan areas that
embody new c i r c u m f e r e n t i a l roadways i n t h e i r s t r e e t plans and
systems.
In Washington, the need f o r the Inner Loop Expressway has been
apparent.
"The lack of wide continuous crosstown s t r e e t s I n the
1898
highway plan, and the f i n g e r - l i k e pattern of the park, public and semipublic land use areas has encouraged development of r a d i a l routes and
retarded the development of crosstown routes."iQ/
10/
I n common with other
Moving People and Goods - A Portion of the Comprehensive Plan f o r the
National C a p i t a l and i t s Environs - National C a p i t a l Park and Planning
Commission - Washington, D. C. Monograph No. 5 June 1950.
62
�c i t i e s , Washington's system of r a d i a l highways has received the greatest
amount of improvement.
I t i s evident that an e f f i c i e n t i n t e r n a l c i r c u l a -
t i o n system must provide r i n g or c i r c u m f e r e n t i a l routes that augment the
r a d i a l ways.
Studies by the National C a p i t a l Planning Commission r e v e a l
that about 25 percent of the persons entering the downtown area i n rush
periods are passing through; t h i s s t a t i s t i c c l e a r l y pinpoints the need f o r
an a t t r a c t i v e c i r c u m f e r e n t i a l bypass f a c i l i t y .
General Planning Considerations
The Inner Loop w i l l encompass the c e n t r a l business d i s t r i c t of
Washington as the innermost of three complete c i r c u m f e r e n t i a l routes
planned f o r the metropolitan area by the National C a p i t a l Planning
Commission.
I t w i l l be circumscribed around the e x i s t i n g g r i d i r o n s t r e e t
net i n the c e n t r a l area, and w i l l intercept the key r a d i a l s that converge
on downtown Washington.
I t w i l l be a dominant thoroughfare i n both of
these s t r e e t patterns.
A comprehensive study has been r e c e n t l y authorized by the D i s t r i c t
of Columbia Highway Department to determine the detailed location, a l i n e ment, and design of the route.
Many p o l i c y decisions remain to be made
concerning interchanges and connectors.
I t i s understood that the route
would form an approximate c i r c l e with a radius of s l i g h t l y over one mile
from the White House, as shown i n Figure 26. On the west the route would
follow Twenty-Fifth S t r e e t N.W. and R i v e r s i d e Drive, on the north "S" or
"T" S t r e e t s , on the east Third S t r e e t and New Jersey Avenue, and on the
south Independence Avenue and "F" S t r e e t southwest.
The Southwest
Expressway forms part of the southern leg of the Inner Loop and w i l l
traverse "F" S t r e e t i n general alinement.
63
�The development of the Inner Loop Expressway affords excellent
opportunities to combine t r a f f i c , transportation and parking with land
use planning.
The Inner Loop traverses many of the e x i s t i n g areas i n Washington
which are blighted or near blighted i n character; see Figure 29. I t
straddles many of the 11 areas which have been r e c e n t l y recommended to
the D i s t r i c t Commissioners as targets f o r a 10-year program of redevelopment and renovation.
These areas contain some 65,000 dwelling u n i t s , a
fourth of the c i t y ' s t o t a l ; some 20,000 are substandard or dilapidated.
They include southwest Washington where urban redevelopment i s already
underway.
T r a f f i c Considerations
Present roadways i n c e n t r a l Washington are c u r r e n t l y taxed during
peak hours.
To provide progressive t r a f f i c movements
on key a r t e r i e s such
as Constitution and Pennsylvania Avenues, i t i s necessary to r e s t r i c t
cross-street capacities.
The c a p a c i t i e s of major routes are, i n turn,
l i m i t e d by t h e i r i n t e r s e c t i o n s with each other.
such as Maryland, Massachusetts
Heavily traveled diagonals,
and Pennsylvania Avenues, create many com-
plex, plaza-type i n t e r s e c t i o n s w i t h severe capacity r e s t r i c t i o n s .
I n d e r i v i n g t r a f f i c needs i t i s e s s e n t i a l that t r a f f i c conditions
during peak morning and evening rush periods be given c a r e f u l consideration.
Inadequate t r a f f i c c a p a c i t i e s during these peak t r a v e l .hours develop
congested operations which often have impeditive e f f e c t s on "near-peak"
hours.
Accordingly, i t i s e s s e n t i a l that new and improved roadway
f a c i l i t i e s provide r e l i e f f o r rush hour t r a f f i c flows i f they are to be
64
��of l a s t i n g value.
T r a f f i c requirements based on l e s s e r volumes would
f a l l short of providing the necessary
relief.
I t i s evident that a l l sections of the Inner Loop must provide
s u f f i c i e n t c a p a c i t i e s to meet anticipated peak hour loadings, and also
provide a " r e s e r v o i r of capacity" f o r adjacent surface s t r e e t s .
The
expressway should become the foundation of the master highway plan.
Accordingly, i t follows that the Inner Loop Expressway should be a m u l t i lane l i m i t e d access f a c i l i t y and that i t be continuous i n character, desig
and capacity.
I t must be remembered that an Inner Loop f a c i l i t y at grade,
when superimposed on the s t r e e t pattern of downtown Washington, could
not develop s u f f i c i e n t c a p a c i t i e s nor permit a t t r a c t i v e and f l u e n t
movements.
Functional Objectives - The t r a f f i c s e r v i c e s and values of the Inner
Loop Expressway have been long recognized by the National C a p i t a l Planning
Commission. Most of the following f u n c t i o n a l objectives have been set
f o r t h i n t h e i r Comprehensive Plan.
The Inner Loop Expressway should:
1.
serve to c a r r y t r a f f i c around c e n t r a l Washington;
2.
f a c i l i t a t e the d i s t r i b u t i o n of t r a f f i c w i t h i n the c e n t r a l area;
3.
equalize a c c e s s i b i l i t y to a l l sides of the c e n t r a l business
district;
4.
serve as a connector and d i s t r i b u t o r between key r a d i a l s , present
future;
11/
Roadway f a c i l i t i e s designed to accommodate l e s s e r t r a f f i c loadings
would become unduly congested at l e a s t four hours d a i l y . This i s
r e a d i l y apparent from the a n a l y s i s of present volume c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s
and t r a f f i c operations over e x i s t i n g Potomac River Bridges- set f o r t h
i n Part I .
65
�5.
afford a t t r a c t i v e ingress and egress into s t r a t e g i c a l l y located
p e r i p h e r a l parking areas;
6.
r e l i e v e all-purpose business s t r e e t s as the primary t r a f f i c w a y s
i n the c e n t r a l business d i s t r i c t ; and
7.
serve t r a f f i c origins and destinations i n areas adjacent to
c e n t r a l Washington.
Scope - The study endeavors to r e l a t e the proposed Expressway to new
bridge crossings and to other important developments which w i l l have a
d i r e c t bearing upon the t r a f f i c generating c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the Washington
Metropolitan Area - p a r t i c u l a r l y the c e n t r a l area of the c i t y .
Needs of
the Southwest Expressway and connectors have been given s p e c i a l consideration.
Further information on inner loop c a p a c i t i e s and capacity recommen-
dations f o r i n t e r s e c t i n g s t r e e t s w i l l be forthcoming from the Highway
Department's study c u r r e n t l y underway.
66
�THE INNER TRAFFIC LOOP
Many of the s t r e e t s that the Inner Loop would follow, or p a r a l l e l ,
are e s s e n t i a l l y l o c a l i n character.
Third S t r e e t , the approximate loca-
t i o n of the east l e g , i s c u r r e n t l y h e a v i l y t r a v e l e d and serves as an
e a s t e r l y bypass of c e n t r a l Washington.
However, i t s capacity and a t t r a c -
tiveness as a t r a f f i c w a y are l i m i t e d by the numerous s i g n a l i z e d i n t e r sections along i t s extent.
Only one segment of the e x i s t i n g roadways that the Inner Loop would
follow has p a r t i a l expressway c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .
Such p a r t i a l expressways
would include Ohio D r i v e , Independence Avenue, and Maine west of 14th
Street.
This connector, t r a v e r s i n g Federal park land, affords some
c o n t r o l of access and permits r e l a t i v e l y f l u e n t movements i n both d i r e c t i o n s of t r a v e l .
The present t r a f f i c volumes along the route a t the
e l l i p t i c a l r o t a r y junction with 17th S t r e e t are depicted i n Figure 30.
Maximum d i r e c t i o n a l flows exceed 3,000 v e h i c l e s during peak hours.
Heavy
weaving movements during rush periods l i m i t c a p a c i t i e s and saturate the
intersection.
traffic
I t i s evident that t h i s sector cannot absorb a d d i t i o n a l
unless improved.
T r a f f i c Usage
Anticipated 1970 t r a f f i c loadings on the Inner Loop Expressway have
been determined.
I n developing these values, consideration has been
given normal population and t r a f f i c growths, probable changes i n land
use and t r a v e l patterns, and new bridge crossings.
These f a c t o r s and
how they a f f e c t present t r i p desires and flow patterns have been d i s cussed i n d e t a i l I n Part I .
67
�PRESENT
INDEPENDENCE
TRAFFIC
AVE. SECTOR - INNER LOOP
TYPICAL
NATIONAL
CAPITAL
Wlll>ut
<=
Smith
PLANNING
VOLUMES
EXPRESSWAY
1954 DAY
COMMISSION
(£T* ^d-sseclatei
FIGURE
30
�Present t r a f f i c volumes p o t e n t i a l to the Southwest Expressway have
been derived.
I f the Expressway were i n operation today, i t could be
expected to c a r r y about 75,000 v e h i c l e s d a i l y and i t s peak hour d i r e c t i o n a l
volume would approximate 3,700 v e h i c l e s .
Based on a maximum desired lane
capacity of 1,500 v e h i c l e s per hour, s i x l i m i t e d access lanes (three i n
each d i r e c t i o n ) would be required to accommodate indicated t r a f f i c volumes.
This would allow some excess capacity.
Anticipated 1970 d a i l y t r a f f i c volumes on the Inner Loop Expressway
are shown i n Figure 3 1 .
I t i s reasonable to assume that the e n t i r e Loop
would be i n operation by that year and that flows on i t would have become
stabilized.
I t must be remembered that these values would l i k e l y be
modified to conform with the f i n a l expressway design.
I n determining anticipated t r a f f i c volumes f o r 1970 i t has been
assumed t h a t :
1.
the Highway Bridge would be improved to provide four e f f e c t i v e
moving lanes i n each d i r e c t i o n ;
2.
the Roaches Run Bridge would be developed as a new s i x lane
facility;
3.
the Jones Point Bridge would be b u i l t ;
4.
urban redevelopment would occur i n Southwest Washington; and,
5.
a new upper c e n t r a l Potomac R i v e r crossing would be developed,
probably a t Constitution Avenue.
I t has also been assumed that during peak hours the Highway Bridge, the
Roaches Run Bridge, and the other c e n t r a l r i v e r crossings would be loaded
to t h e i r p r a c t i c a l capacity.
The average a n t i c i p a t e d 1970 t r a f f i c volumes f o r the Southwest Expressway would exceed 100,000 v e h i c l e s per' day.
68
With the construction of a
�ANTICIPATED
INNER
TRAFFIC
LOOP
VOLUMES
EXPRESSWAY
T Y P I C A L 1970 DAY
NATIONAL
C A P I T A L PLANNING
COMMISSION
FIGURE
31
�Constitution Avenue River crossing, the volumes might be as great as 120,000
v e h i c l e s per day.
Peak d i r e c t i o n a l volumes i n 1970 f o r t h i s section of
the Expressway would range from 5,300 to 5,900 v e h i c l e s , depending on
the construction of a Constitution Avenue crossing.
The d a i l y 1970 t r a f f i c volumes on the west l e g of the Inner Loop
Expressway would range from 70,000 to 100,000 v e h i c l e s , assuming the
development of a Constitution Avenue crossing.
The heaviest movements
can be expected to occur between Constitution Avenue and "E" S t r e e t and
would approximate 96,000 v e h i c l e s d a i l y .
Peak d i r e c t i o n a l volumes
would be about 5,700 v e h i c l e s per hour.
I t i s anticipated that the north l e g of the Inner Loop would serve
about 85,000 v e h i c l e s per day, with peak hour d i r e c t i o n a l volumes of
about 4,300 c a r s .
and s e r v i c e roads.
These vehicles can be expected to use both express
Volumes on t h i s section of the expressway would be
s u b s t a n t i a l l y the same i f a Three S i s t e r s Bridge, rather than a Constitut i o n Avenue f a c i l i t y were
constructed.
The anticipated t r a f f i c volumes f o r the east ( T h i r d S t r e e t ) leg of
the Inner T r a f f i c Loop would average about 75,000 v e h i c l e s a day, with
peak d i r e c t i o n a l loadings approaching A,000 v e h i c l e s .
Lane Requirements
T r a f f i c volumes take on added s i g n i f i c a n c e when r e l a t e d to capacity
values.
A maximum possible lane capacity approximating 1,700 v e h i c l e s per
lane per hour should be attained on the Inner Loop Expressway. Frequent
merging, diverging and weaving areas w i l l l i k e l y prevent achievement of
higher values.
Lane requirements f o r the expressway should be based on
a p r a c t i c a l capacity of 1,500 v e h i c l e s per lane per hour.
69
This i s an
�accepted capacity standard f o r continuous flow i n urban areas and has
been widely used i n the Washington Metropolitan Area.
The 1970 lane requirements, as r e l a t e d to a n t i c i p a t e d t r a f f i c volumes
on the Inner Loop Expressway, are summarized i n Table X v T I .
A s i x lane
expressway should accommodate anticipated t r a f f i c demands, except f o r
sections of expressway adjacent to the Constitution Avenue and Roaches
Run R i v e r crossings where 8 steady flow lanes w i l l be required.
A multi-
lane expressway providing these lane requirements w i l l e f f i c i e n t l y
accommodate 1970 peak hour loadings, and provide some excess capacity f o r
future growths.
P a r a l l e l s e r v i c e roads w i l l l i k e l y c a r r y s i z a b l e flows
on many sections of the Inner Loop, thereby representing a f a c t o r of
capacity reserve.
The Southwest Expressway between Twelfth and T h i r d S t r e e t s would
provide some surplus i n "possible capacity" even a t the anticipated peak
hour volumes i n 1970.
However, the provision of a l e s s e r lane capacity
would obviously be inadequate f o r sound highway planning and design.
I n i t i a l construction of a 6 lane l i m i t e d access roadway with expansion
to 8 lanes p r i o r to 1970 w i l l provide the necessary c a p a c i t i e s .
70
�Table X V I I
LANE REQUIREMENTS
INNER LOOP EXPRESSWAY
Section of Route
Anticipated
1970 Volumes
Approx. Peak
Hour
Da 1 1 v
Dir.
Flow
Flow
Express
Lanes
Required
I n Each
Direction
Sufficiency*
Practical
Capacity
Sufficiency*
Possible
Capacity
West Leg
Constitution Ave. to
"E" S t .
"E" S t . to Mass. Ave.
96,000
5,700
4
6,000
95
6,800 84
74,000
4,300
3
4,500
96
5,100
85
86,000 4,300
3
4,500
96
5,100
85
3,700
3,500**
3
3**
4,500
4,500
82
78**
5,100
5,100
73
69**
3,600
5,900
3
4
4,500
6,000
80
99
5,100
6,800
71
87
North Leg
"T" S t . - Rhode
I s l a n d Ave.
East Leg
Rhode Island Avenue Mass. Ave.
Mass. Ave. to "F" S t .
74,000
70,000
South Leg
Constitution Ave. Roaches Run Bridge
Southwest Expressway
***
72,000
115,000
*Volumes as percent of capacity.
**Values across the M a l l , based on d e s i r e s , would approximate 3,000.
However, l i m i t a t i o n s i n capacity on north-south s t r e e t s should increase
peak loads to about 4,000 v e h i c l e s .
***Volumes and lane requirements a t 17th S t r e e t are contingent on interchange
design. An e l l i p t i c a l type treatment would require a d d i t i o n a l lane capacity.
�P r i o r i t y of Development
The d e s i r a b i l i t y of e a r l y t r a f f i c operations on the Inner Loop
Expressway has been indicated emphatically i n Part I ,
Immediate a t t e n t i o n
should be furnished those key sections of Expressway which w i l l be
p r i n c i p a l avenues of approach or connectors to new Potomac River
Accordingly,
Crossings.
i t i s recommended that the Southwest Expressway, the West
(25th S t . ) Leg, and the 3rd S t r e e t Leg between the Southwest Expressway and
a point north of Constitution Avenue be developed p r i o r to, or
i n concurrence with, new c e n t r a l r i v e r crossings.
at the l a t e s t
Remaining sections of
the Inner Loop should be completed p r i o r to 1965. A t e n t a t i v e p r i o r i t y
follows:
Immediate
Construction
1.
Southwest Expressway (Highway Bridge to S. Capitol S t . )
2.
West (25th S t . ) Leg - (Memorial Bridge to "M" S t r e e t )
3.
East (Third S t . ) Leg - (Southwest Expressway to "E" S t r e e t )
Subsequent
Construction
1.
South Leg (Memorial Bridge to Highway Bridge)
2.
Third S t r e e t Leg ("E" S t r e e t to Rhode Island Ave.)
3.
West Leg ("M" S t r e e t to Massachusetts Ave.)
4.
North Leg (Massachusetts Ave. to Rhode I s l a n d Ave.)
72
�DISTRIBUTION PROBLEMS FROM SOUTH AND WEST
The d i s t r i b u t i o n of v e h i c l e s entering the c e n t r a l area from the
south and west have been given s p e c i a l consideration. Future t r a f f i c
needs of north-south roadways entering the c e n t r a l business d i s t r i c t
from the south have been ascertained.
Present T r a f f i c Flows Across Mall
A review of the e x i s t i n g patterns of t r a f f i c movement across the
Mall r e v e a l s that over 150,000 v e h i c l e s crossed the Mall on a t y p i c a l
1953 day; see Table X V I I I .
The greatest t r a f f i c magnitudes were found
on T h i r d and 1 4 t h S t r e e t s , each c a r r y i n g about 20 percent of the t o t a l
d a i l y volume.
During the peak rush hours, about 7,000 v e h i c l e s cross
the M a l l i n each d i r e c t i o n of t r a v e l .
While t o t a l movements i n the
evening rush period are s l i g h t l y greater than morning rush hour loadings,
i t i s believed that the impact of Highway Bridge t r a f f i c i s greatest
inbound during the morning hour.
(See the hourly t r a f f i c v a r i a t i o n s
set f o r t h I n Figure 16.) I n the evenings, t r a f f i c generators i n
Washington represent the l a r g e s t source of t r a f f i c o r i g i n s .
Present t r a f f i c flows at Constitution Avenue, by c o r r i d o r s of
t r a v e l , are summarized i n Table XIX.
I t i s apparent that the greatest
concentrations of t r a f f i c occur on 1 4 t h , 15th and 17th S t r e e t s , inbound
during the morning rush and outbound during the evening rush period.
At these times, almost h a l f of a l l trans-Mall t r a f f i c t r a v e l s i n t h i s
westerly c o r r i d o r .
The impact of Highway Bridge t r a f f i c on t o t a l north-south flows
i s evident from Figure 32 which shows present t r a f f i c operations across
the Mall during a t y p i c a l 1954 rush hour.
73
Bridge t r a f f i c comprises about
�PRESENT
NORTH-SOUTH
TRAFFIC OPERATIONS
S T R E E T S AT CONSTITUTION AVE.
TYPICAL
PEAK
NATIONAL
1/VllLi
CAPITAL
SmltL
PLANNING
&
1954 DAY
MORNING
RUSH
INBOUND
HOUR
COMMISSION
cdaoclalu
FIGURE
32
�Table X V I I I
NORTH-SOUTH TRAFFIC VOLUMES
AT CONSTITUTION AVENUE*
Average 1953 Weekday
Northbound
AM Hour
Vehicles
% of
Total
Northbound
PM Hour
Vehicles
% of
Total
Southbound
AM Hour
Vehicles
% of
Total
Southbound
PM Hour
Vehicles
% of
Total
Total Daily
Movement
Vehicles
% of
Total
3rd S t .
1,130
16.6
1,328
18.0
1,223
19.8
1,511
21.0
31,208
20.6
4th S t .
505
7.4
732
9.9
510
8.3
500
6.9
11,411
7.5
7th S t .
540
7.9
636
8.7
633
10.3
615
8.5
13,151
8.6
9th S t .
278
4.1
371
5.1
423
391
5.5
7,290
4.8
12th S t .
1,157
17.0
1,293
17.5
681
11.1
751
10.5
20,375
13.5
14th S t .
1,208
17.9
924
12.6
929
15.0
1,164
16.2
29,404
19.4
15th S t .
801
11.8
778
10.5
833
13.5
1,116
15.4
17,102
11.3
17th S t .
1,046
15.4
801
10.9
831
13.4
1,146
16.0
19,697
13.0
21st S t .
127
1.9
498
6.8
109
1.8
1,893
, 1-3
6,792
100.0
7,361
100.0
6,172
•100.0
151,531
100.0
Total
* I n n e r Cordon - Annual Weekday Averages 1953-
6.8
_
7,194
100.0
�Table XIX
NORTH-SOUTH TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION
AT
CONSTITUTION AVE.
Average 1953 Weekday
Corridors of T r a v e l
7th-9th
14th-15th
-12 th
-17th-21st
3rd-Ath
1,975
3,182
Northbound - AM Peak Hour Vehicles
1,635
29.0
29.0
47.0
100.0
2,060
2,300
3,001
7,361
27.9
31.3
40.8
100.0
1,733
1,737
2,702
7,172
28.1
28.2
43.7
100.0
2, O i l
1,757
3,426
7,194
27.9
24.5
47.6
100.0
42,619
40,816
68,096
151,-531
26.9
45.0
100.0
%
Northbound - PM Peak Hour Vehicles
%
Southbound - AM Peak Hour Vehicles
%
Southbound - PM Peak Hour Vehicles
%
24 Hours
Vehicles
Both Directions
28.1
%
40 percent of t o t a l flows.
Total
6,792
A comparison of t r a f f i c volumes and c a p a c i t i e s
indicates an o v e r a l l t r a f f i c s u f f i c i e n c y .
Inbound north-south t r a f f i c
was found to use 75 percent of the a v a i l a b l e possible capacity during
the morning rush hour.
I t should be noted that congestion i s apparent
along 17th, 15th, and 1 4 t h S t r e e t s which are c u r r e n t l y operating a t or
near t h e i r possible c a p a c i t i e s .
Southwest Redevelopment
I t i s e s s e n t i a l that adequate road, parking, and mass t r a n s i t f a c i l i t i e s
be provided i n conjunction w i t h the Southwest Redevelopment.
I t i s under-
stood that the southwest area as envisioned by Webb and Knapp would contain
about the same r e s i d e n t i a l population that i t has a t present.
75
About 15,000
�a d d i t i o n a l persons would be attracted into the area d a i l y , mostly to the
new o f f i c e buildings that are proposed.
About 4O percent can be expected
to come by t r a n s i t , and the remainder by c a r . The development would
generate about 9,000 v e h i c l e t r i p s d a i l y of which approximately a t h i r d
would be t r a n s r i v e r i n character. Translated into peak hour movements,
between 2,000 and 2,500 t r i p s would be made into the area during the morning
rush period. Motorists would come from a l l points of the compass and would
be dispersed on a l l approach s t r e e t s .
Most of these v e h i c l e s would t r a v e l
a d i r e c t i o n counter to p r e v a i l i n g bridge flows.
The plans c a l l f o r 1,500,000 square feet of o f f i c e buildings. At
l e a s t 3,000 parking spaces should be provided to meet t h i s need.
Addi-
t i o n a l parking should be provided i n accord with the a t t r a c t i v e n e s s of
other key generators.
Southwest Expressway
The Southwest Expressway w i l l serve as a d i s t r i b u t o r f o r Roaches
Run and Highway Bridges, and a l s o serve as a p r i n c i p a l approach roadway
to the Southwest Redevelopment Area.
I t i s t h i s expressway that makes
the p r o v i s i o n of a d d i t i o n a l bridge capacity f e a s i b l e .
I t i s e s s e n t i a l that a t t r a c t i v e ramps be provided between the
Expressway and north-south s t r e e t s , so that f u l l usage can be made of
the connector s t r e e t s .
Ramps should be amply designed f o r weaving,
merging, and storage of t r a f f i c .
Assignment of t r a f f i c to surface
s t r e e t s w i l l , of course, depend on the detailed t r a f f i c designs.
plans a t present are f l u i d .
76
These
�S t r e e t Capacity and Volumes
Anticipated inbound t r a f f i c volumes on north-south roadways across
the Mall are shown i n Figure 33 f o r a t y p i c a l 1970 morning rush h o u r . i ^ /
Indicated values can be considered as somewhat l i b e r a l .
The t o t a l
northbound movement approximates 12,000 v e h i c l e s . The impact of
Highway and Roaches Run Bridge t r a f f i c on t o t a l flows i s r e a d i l y
apparent:
4,200 v e h i c l e s (34$) come from the Highway Bridge and
3,000 v e h i c l e s ( 2 4 $ ) come from the Roaches Run Bridge, r e s p e c t i v e l y .
In deriving lane requirements i t must be r e a l i z e d that lane
capacity i s a v a r i a b l e concept. I t i s affected by such determinants
as the operational e f f i c i e n c i e s (present and p o t e n t i a l ) of the s t r e e t s
involved, the s p a t i a l and t r a f f i c patterns of i n t e r s e c t i n g s t r e e t s ,
and the q u a l i t y of operations desired.
I t i s estimated that by 1970 about 8 steady flow lanes would be
required across the Mall to accommodate the peak inbound (A.M.) hour
t r a f f i c between 17th and 3rd S t r e e t s , based on maximum optimum lane
loadings.
A s i m i l a r number of lanes would l i k e l y be required to accom-
modate the peak "outbound" movement during the evening rush period.
These d i r e c t i o n a l lane requirements are roughly the equivalent of
about 25 surface lanes.
I t appears that about 42 percent of the inbound lane demand would
be required west of 13th S t r e e t ( 1 4 t h , 15th and 17th S t r e e t s ) .
While
desired 1970 t r a f f i c volumes i n t h i s sector might exceed optimum lane
12/
(1) Non-Highway Bridge t r a f f i c has been increased i n accord with normal
growths i n downtown Washington. (2) Highway and Roaches Run Bridges
were loaded to t h e i r p r a c t i c a l c a p a c i t i e s . ( 3 ) Bridge t r a f f i c was
added to determine composite volumes.
77
�ANTICIPATED
NOR TH - SOU TH
S TREE
TRAFFIC
TS
TYPICAL
PEAK
AT
CONS
1970
MORNING
RUSH
VOLUMES
Tl TU TION
A VENUE
DAY
HOUR
INBOUND
NATIONAL
CAPITAL
~1/Uilhu.t
Smith
P L A N N I N G COMMISSION
d-itoclatti
F I G U R E 33
�loadings, even with indicated improvements, some excess capacity w i l l
e x i s t to the east of 13th S t r e e t (12th
to 3rd S t r e e t s ) and would be
able to accommodate the "overflow" loadings.
lane capacity i s required between 13th
attainable.
About 30 percent of the
and 6 t h S t r e e t s and appears
The balance of capacity would be required between 6 t h
and
2nd S t r e e t s . This capacity would he provided by development of the 3rd
S t r e e t leg of the Inner Loop Expressway; a minimum of three l i m i t e d
access lanes i n each d i r e c t i o n should be
provided.
North-South Connectors
I t has been indicated that improved access from V i r g i n i a on the
Highway Bridge, and the planned Roaches Run Bridge, r e l a t e d to t r a f f i c
increases r e s u l t i n g from normal growths and urban redevelopment, w i l l
require increases i n north-south c a p a c i t i e s across Independence Avenue,
the Mall and Constitution Avenue.
Coincident with the development of
the Southwest Expressway, and by completion of the Reaches Run
Bridge,
i t i s e s s e n t i a l that the Third S t r e e t Leg of the Inner Loop Expresswaybe completed across Constitution and Pennsylvania Avenues.
S i x limited
access lanes should be provided with possible future expansion to eight.
The roadway would provide an increase of 25 percent over the present
lane c a p a c i t i e s across the Mall between the Washington Monument and
the C a p i t o l . The continuation of the Southwest Expressway along Third
Street would afford an a t t r a c t i v e and time saving route into the
c e n t r a l business d i s t r i c t .
This east leg of the Inner Loop would en-
courage a r e d i s t r i b u t i o n of north-south t r a f f i c volumes p r i n c i p a l l y i n
accord with c a p a c i t i e s a v a i l a b l e .
78
�Plans have been set f o r t h by the National C a p i t a l Planning
Commission f o r the underpassing of north-south s t r e e t s under Independence
Avenue and the M a l l .
These plans provide a t t r a c t i v e t r a f f i c s e r v i c e s
south of the Mall and encourage continuous movements to and from the
Highway and Roaches Run Bridges.
I t i s e s s e n t i a l that these plans be
integrated w i t h t r a f f i c treatments along C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue so as to
assure s u f f i c i e n c y and c o n t i n u i t y of capacity. Improved north-south
t r a f f i c treatments must be effected at C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue.
C i v i c and
governmental land use make d i f f i c u l t the development of grade separated
interchanges.
Accordingly, t r a f f i c regulatory techniques must be
employed to achieve the needed capacity i n c r e a s e s . S u f f i c i e n t r i g h t s of-way, however, are a v a i l a b l e f o r the f l a r i n g of i n t e r s e c t i o n approaches
to achieve capacity increases.
A comprehensive north-south one-way
system should be considered as a long range t r a f f i c o b j e c t i v e .
Suggested
t r a f f i c operations are shown i n Figure 3 4 j both two-way and one-way plans
are i n d i c a t e d :
1.
A d d i t i o n a l approach lanes should be provided on Fourteenth,
F i f t e e n t h , and Seventeenth S t r e e t s at t h e i r i n t e r s e c t i o n s with
Constitution Avenue.
Some widening w i l l l i k e l y be required.
Fourteenth and F i f t e e n t h S t r e e t s could be developed as a oneway system between Thomas C i r c l e and Fourteenth S t r e e t south
of C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue.
F i v e (or p o s s i b l y s i x ) lanes i n each
d i r e c t i o n could be provided with t o t a l c a p a c i t i e s commensurate
w i t h the s i x lane l i m i t e d access system to the s o u t h . 1 2 /
The
13/ The roadways are 65 and 70 f e e t wide r e s p e c t i v e l y north of Constitut i o n Avenue, on 110 foot rights-of-way.
79
�POSSIBLE
FUTURE
TRAFFIC
OPERATIONS
NORTH - SOUTH S T R E E T S AT CONSTITUTION
AVE.
INBOUND
NATIONAL
CAPITAL
y[kH<ux £mitlc
C7
PLANNING
COMMISSION
=d-iiociatei
FIGURE
34
�system would ( l ) increase e x i s t i n g north-south c a p a c i t i e s on
these s t r e e t s by more than 20 percent, ( 2 ) permit e a s i e r s i g n a l
timing, ( 3 ) f a c i l i t a t e l e f t turns, and (4.) s i m p l i f y t r a n s i t i o n
movements i n the environs of the White House.
I f street railway
operation i s retained on Fourteenth S t r e e t , some a d d i t i o n a l
trackage w i l l be required along F i f t e e n t h S t r e e t .
2.
Twelfth - Tenth One-Way System - Twelfth S t r e e t w i l l receive
increased usage, because of i t s d i r e c t connection to the Roaches
Run Bridge.
Some f l a r i n g of i t s southern approach to Constitu-
t i o n Avenue i s d e s i r a b l e . The d i r e c t i o n s of the present Twelfth
Tenth one-way system could be reversed, p a r t i c u l a r l y i f a d i r e c t
connector to Eleventh S t r e e t can be provided.
The r e v e r s a l
would reduce l e f t turns o f f of C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue a t Twelfth
S t r e e t , and s i m p l i f y the r e s t r i c t i v e s i g n a l phasing.
3.
Ninth S t r e e t Extension - Integrated with the r e l o c a t i o n of the
Smithsonian B u i l d i n g s , Ninth S t r e e t should be extended from
Independence Avenue across the Mall to connect the Southwest
Expressway w i t h the c e n t r a l business d i s t r i c t .
4.
Ninth - Seventh One-Way System - Long range plans should
consider the removal of s t r e e t car t r a c k s on these s t r e e t s and
the conversion of them to one-way operations north of Constitut i o n Avenue. When i n s t i t u t e d , t h i s system w i l l provide
s u b s t a n t i a l capacity gains.
With the construction of the Southwest Expressway and the Southwest
Redevelopment P r o j e c t , consideration should be given to the r e s t r i c t i o n
of c e r t a i n t r a f f i c movements on Maryland and V i r g i n i a Avenues.
These
can be achieved through conventional t r a f f i c engineering techniques.
80
�I n retrospect, proper t r a f f i c treatments a t Constitution Avenue
and the development of the T h i r d S t r e e t l e g of Inner Loop Expressway
w i l l probably provide the required 1970 north-south lane capacity.
The
operational treatments can be effected with r e l a t i v e ease and w i l l provide the much needed c o n t i n u i t y and consistency i n capacity on northsouth s t r e e t s .
81
�PART I I I
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
�SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
This comprehensive report on the Potomac R i v e r Crossings and the
Inner T r a f f i c Loop has been based on an evaluation and a p p r a i s a l of
a l l f a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g t r a f f i c growths and d e s i r e s .
I t has considered
population s h i f t s i n the D i s t r i c t of Columbia and i t s metropolitan
area,
v e h i c l e ownership trends, redevelopment plans, d i s p e r s a l of government
activities,
removal of temporary buildings, and changes i n the land use
patterns i n the area.
R i v e r Crossings
At present there are about 217,000 t r a n s - r i v e r crossings d a i l y .
By 1970, i t i s anticipated that there w i l l be about 328,000 crossings
daily.
I f an a t t r a c t i v e and extensive system of approach roads can be
provided, the desired crossings would approach 393,000.
The seriousness of the bridge problem i s evident.
At the present
time, the d i r e c t i o n a l peak hour t r a f f i c exceeds the combined " p r a c t i c a l
capacity" of a l l the bridges, and approaches the possible capacity of
the combined bridges and t h e i r approach road systems.
To e f f e c t i v e l y meet peak hour demands and to accommodate reasonable
t r i p requirements, a minimum of fourteen a d d i t i o n a l lanes w i l l be needed
by 1970.
This value assumes that new bridges w i l l be located so as to
permit d i r e c t and e f f e c t i v e t r a v e l between motorists' p r i n c i p a l points
of o r i g i n s and d e s t i n a t i o n s .
New bridges w i l l have to be located so
that they conform with n a t u r a l t r a v e l patterns.
Improper locations would
mean, therefore, that more lane capacity w i l l be required.
82
�The recommended system of Potomac R i v e r Crossings includes both
new c e n t r a l and p e r i p h e r a l bridges, as w e l l as improved e x i s t i n g
bridges.
Most t r a n s r i v e r t r i p demands are and w i l l be e s s e n t i a l l y
c e n t r a l i n nature; only 15 percent of the t o t a l (1970) crossings
would desire to use Jones Point, Cabin John, or Chain Bridges.
The
new c e n t r a l bridges w i l l a f f o r d capacity r e l i e f ; other bridges w i l l
provide new access and encourage development of new areas.
Approach
and connector roads must be integrated with r i v e r crossings. I t has
been recommended t h a t :
(1)
key sections of the Inner Loop Expressway be b u i l t p r i o r to,
or concurrently with, new c e n t r a l crossings;
(2)
e x i s t i n g bridges and t h e i r approach roads be improved—
including the widening of the Key Bridge, and the replacement
of the i r o n t r e s t l e Highway Bridge;
(3)
a new upstream s i x - l a n e crossing be constructed at the
Constitution Avenue or Three S i s t e r s l o c a t i o n or somewhere
between these two s i t e s ;
(4.)
Roaches Run Bridge be developed as a separate new
facility,
and not as a replacement f o r the i r o n t r e s t l e Highway
Bridge;
(5)
Jones Point and Cabin John Bridges be constructed as part
of long range crossing plans, and that t h e i r rights-of-way
be procured now;
(6)
and
primary a t t e n t i o n be given to c e n t r a l crossings i n scheduling
bridge improvements.
83
�The Inner Loop Expressway
The Inner Loop Expressway w i l l encompass c e n t r a l Washington and
should become an i n t e g r a l part of area highway plans.
I t should be a
l i m i t e d access f a c i l i t y , continuous i n character, design and capacity.
I t i s a n t i c i p a t e d that by 1970, t r a f f i c volumes on the various
sections of the Expressway w i l l range from 70,000 to 120,000 v e h i c l e s
daily.
P r o v i s i o n of s i x steady flow lanes, with s e v e r a l eight lane
sections i n proximity of Constitution Avenue and the Roaches Run
Bridge, w i l l provide s u f f i c i e n t c a p a c i t i e s to meet peak demands.
By 1970, about eight steady flow lanes, or t h e i r equivalent, w i l l
be required across the Mall to accommodate peak inbound A.M. hour
t r a f f i c between Seventh and T h i r d S t r e e t s , based on maximum optimum
lane loadings.
A s i m i l a r number of lanes would l i k e l y be required
to accommodate the peak "outbound" movement during the evening rush
periods.
Indicated t r a f f i c treatments on north-south s t r e e t s a t
Constitution Avenue, and the development of the T h i r d S t r e e t l e g of
the Inner Loop Expressway should provide t h i s needed lane capacity.
84
I n t e r i o r — D u p l i c a t i n g Section, Washington, D. C.
83000
��
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Report on traffic volumes and capacity requirements for Potomac River Bridges and Inner Traffic Loop
Subject
The topic of the resource
Bridges--Washington (D.C.)
Description
An account of the resource
Please note: This report includes irregularly-sized pages. If the report is not visible, try scrolling to the right or left or using the zoom in (+) or zoom out (-) functions in the PDF viewer window.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Wilbur Smith and Associates
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
Archival Box 12
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1955
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
National Capital Planning Commission
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Documents
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
DDOT Historical Reports & Other Documents
Subject
The topic of the resource
Transportation--Research--United States
Transportation--Planning
Description
An account of the resource
District Department of Transportation's historical reports and other documents.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Various
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Documents
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
Various
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
District Department of Transportation
Document
A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Bridges
Subject
The topic of the resource
Bridges--Washington (D.C.)
Bridges
Description
An account of the resource
Historical reports and documents related to bridges in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Various
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
Various
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Documents
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Anacostia River Bridge
Arlington Memorial Bridge
Bridge Construction
Bridges
Calvert Street Bridge
Chain Bridge
Duke Ellington Bridge
Eleventh Street Bridge
Fourteenth Street Bridges
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge
George Mason Bridge
Key Bridge
P Street Bridge
Park Road Bridge
Sousa Bridge
South Capitol Street Bridge
Theodore Roosevelt Bridge
Three Sisters Bridge
Whitney Young Memorial Bridge
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/3570dc19b5bfea630f20061848317311.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=mc0K9cn%7Eu6u3c1tBwWZnuANh2%7EkAVz6fND%7EQuEAfbF5aFc0ChB9IZcvjp%7ESnjPPSf2mv0aLKPkl9zHAQvHX-bDrmS%7EdAWYExfKYEIQ5HS-BX-o7IVMi2zwIF0u93SOm173OPT3cwi1YIoRXsNBf5dwI%7EYRFThV3ek6BB-d6yFuj3QFXan3BksRlErYBRvSA4pvNiCQsZvZ6Q%7EVrZI%7ELnVg2Cv%7ExGJOR8%7EnpVqBrAJfMv%7EP-3Rn7DvBA1VEvHbF7naaIA%7EkQW2%7EmCCfZoh4eC9Kb5afbgBGMnzIWsLIOAs9q7jPorNXrrufN8EfQOrxs38Jfe6%7EEcnR4y7WazzDeR-g__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
d0bf98423f7c7878ea4bb1fd64adb726
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge 001
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
Anacostia River (Md. and Washington, D.C.)
South Capitol Street (Washington, D.C.)
Bridges
Description
An account of the resource
The Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge, or the South Capitol Bridge,
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District of Columbia. Department of Highways
District Department of Transportation
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
April 11, 1951
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Public domain
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/015ab748c39c6e02d6546c144868e875.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=PYN1LH-EHIOmpRlILSivrCKWZzWyzfo6l50v8LDvloRjTcgBdsArAu6X8ONQqCuswRybAJYCI95HFTke7nUOLXQe6qvKGHHzabCSlaL2BfOV553y6gYAC-Ye6EY7Q-aHf-KqZh4%7ELJhEMdbB0Y1Oc6eGHHCqBEcp013Sbs6xiURE5j3pSHwLJfZVMKFUh22mQPx%7EzTluPSshzChFfgvmZ7HKKnE%7EgDa9CrYhv-orE6g6RgYUhZM3G8xyydizmVwUvSKus0U8tp2q7v44vdJI0lQ2838m%7Ei4YULt7xAd5FI7KxOCZNldJo%7EMKNQjwts3lWV-B-pNG9SojXAZ5oM5Yvw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
af35929cfae879092450eeb1a7fa9667
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge 002
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglas Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
South Capitol Street (Washington, D.C.)
Bridges
Anacostia River (Md. and Washington, D.C.)
Description
An account of the resource
Aerial view of the Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge/South Capitol Street Bridge over the Anacostia River.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District of Columbia. Department of Highways and Traffic
District Department of Transportation
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
September 14, 1960
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Public domain
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/0258eec2a4e92160eedaadf281ce5656.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=GGwpLSRiZ%7EiR-EJCNwyFIOdAoJS73HOrJEOjaq3lQiCDiw8oDTx0ueQ9AswaGLrTYx9HQPvETrvdeG7HD9jejESkSeebkUJlRbm%7EQ1VQbHNqs8Rp1wHGAwhNZIzVNQzuT0RdMXUeUffI1oFlxs7TheHriiYT-I3Jkn5f6V16PtInNSklvyhjA7ZGnmpo2IBfCjZzTNpBDDeEL-B9fzpyv58uvWWH9eDzrWtUHG9euZAV05C1DmSoGDElNncUevZXO1b3eygwjE1cWNYW02Boumiofv2HPPL3pMPj-pbOD1SUzpngK0Rk2qApNOgH7qu3IUimczIbdwp1DczbyM9Nqg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
37e1c9b8fb299996c88b15cc0f82ba86
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge 003
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
Bridges
South Capitol Street (Washington, D.C.)
Description
An account of the resource
A side view of the Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge, formerly known as the South Capitol Street Bridge.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District Department of Transportation
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
January 2, 1957
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Public domain
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/c65f612c605a0528eae04509b6737443.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=rjunjnKphPWt0MJpF3KJebIyfj8P2oPYxuQmuYL7nTOlDR14HB3jRsp9WM8%7EhOfeFGW10bFPlNulA%7ET4cVIu9shVGGj90V5ynZOspQjEBsR4QnSUtmfd2MBuBOIcxYVLWSywK46LKDvpBdFXvVBgYBxwZ6s%7EX2AiYg3y7s%7EkMUMGFOvA8lHbzNUcY%7EubchdWHied8TcpY8o4494rGfkrmSEfo-OeUdZAiANSRw6woDnozny64VRz104ksKe9LhnfrpK-jXvtqbTh34TV5%7EC5ihafmbwnv7IcbzRTGX%7EYyqxhMP%7EoaLEicLJ9b2jlenFq-qFnTfJXQ92vFZc8Tsflqg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
ce916d2198ce53a21639db4dd3123f5c
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge 004
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
Bridges
South Capitol Street (Washington, D.C.)
Description
An account of the resource
A view of the Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District Department of Transportation
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
circa 1950
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/899be487f92944e0d50e52bcd3b8bd33.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=rQvHpp5rvJDkkB3oFxIWpZFUe5itfMZPnTrJ1nlefzkoge1TeSWd9Ww-1ez7ZrT7bRrzeXNya0TQBwX7PEb-UtKOhZPa5eJsw-9m93UQIT04rBLAaweD0wZrRi2nW0aENJeNmMDGEVA2RjRIfXNe65FaFIky55RIWSu9xFptOpt%7EKTQMKrXvgOsSAw3BHmqo75YunQhEt8Vb4mLn3vTldA2NCw9ArRCkVhtqM9c37zC4ubPqfV6KcZ40btfr8PqiSvnuxvFhNQJsomdHRrja9PJBc32kEJFQGHVjdT0iosr%7ELtFs2zZxWInMI4gbBlGt5O57FFoJtRgfDFXRQe6pJQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
eb0173a73853687048ea4b9733d3877d
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge 005
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
Bridges
South Capitol Street (Washington, D.C.)
Description
An account of the resource
A view of the Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District Department of Transportation
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
circa 1950
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/ef494307a9b64f6eb23e44fa23abf6a5.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=TusGeJANVZhTZFTf0lZKERYrE9NcyLPDN4ceHRext-Hllg4SSuF6oAcxyaMbP4ENtqrcWprjCVRGy%7EtEtVaDL9b3KRK-wRnSGXlM1uizsDNJpV-5QOgdyKEX8xlIN1QsVyiujz0mNe162bg2QspRXazElGVgILB7fKCjEyLMgZDpiWJrDr6RU3mECKYDwuIxlEIA6QR8haVLpXwYr3R17daWqOwVTBD3kBFJ7ImtHgJsxl928bBPyt2GkOuFXGFwL4d0KQnKtFPlmQJDd0IbE8uAVTVOi67nV9h4sQBbaCPp7TpnRYMtrB53QARSNdxezrAMgsNxR9eoSr-LEojSHg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
248766688f5eda5892792bb7fe59dd65
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge 006
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
Bridges
South Capitol Street (Washington, D.C.)
Description
An account of the resource
A view of the Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District Department of Transportation
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
circa 1950
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/798591e1c68088af4a13178855791d9d.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=gJjyvmvdo0BQ-ZjsPgKH3%7E5ltWPS-ozISiwq1zY7PJw2OKRIHuXOsPI7JoRwnmdGhBVlaJvbyJLlsENtHK75fees6MiOX557n3WNHXON5lpk0BSsdq4YkpyK1zPiGj5LgAhof1ihl%7En3iihQXOGgb4Lrp-YHVP06AWBMD0Tw%7EdQFYyFw%7EoKOslOi53kEFN7gl9vdiXsS%7EzSX2n5emshLdOyqi35Jeg2rSz1moWLEpujkzqHDCxriokTvayTsRAX%7EWKgOi2spJORyToK%7EWlRidd9QNULTOXIqBCiQE1ZC1bFNnpg522MiYvI3MQHB9shrMrAeBI%7EHkOrBleCryXRG5A__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
dca4aa9ce29d07aabb66166feb019cc5
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge 007
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
Bridges
South Capitol Street (Washington, D.C.)
Anacostia River (Md. and Washington, D.C.)
Description
An account of the resource
A view of the Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge and the Anacostia River.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District Department of Transportation
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
circa 1950
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/c19bab11dce3d3d5279733503bda9eb5.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=o5D3lC60AJcmPOoQNTx4uakC4PIU5X9Rlw8-IVtGA4Vd20Z7bNly1XRg18p01CvW%7EkngITnrDmvfPVCTn65qJuoRn8tdilXEhqVu3RhSXwOFaHlgRzBFIck3cc0E%7EKV1yUBgnqgIfnBpDT3NcBMiZiMfG649iE8ufQkD3fzhLogDKqk2sMz3ElLx4w23niropMSNnVWWCMzCxmQzJg-gJJiwt4KsMfHvIsIdaR9GyPhWRO2GJHN79EOquPQRM6VChj6IXRAxyCm8eGH9AJqZ538Ifp4BvWgcdNYm7-zaEjgw1rEVuw13hoBTkeVrOP69OaZdBCBhq7ZmBCrCdm05kw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
9927c759916c4e89478344aa06b65e22
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge 008
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
Bridges
Peak hour traffic
South Capitol Street (Washington, D.C.)
Description
An account of the resource
A view of the Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge during the morning rush hour.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District Department of Transportation
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/8cf38f4fbf6d8f3788b67ec0a94849c2.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=LboQzobCUkU2FNDgJcNPO5INvhfAIphLYV6GvmnVrPv7jhlQ7BahHZHcMIFsP9xMN6NxQyGrqp1qjGUL3eKmnL8UBI5k5pCoiGORrfKBDBS7KROyOY%7EsCgs5eJYzeCrrKUyGy-Cqx1%7EC5IxADT5w%7ElbaLTpobn6PrtpEkFghyuz6Xxw9zwXBVOxOygpUvhkqLDXAwvNBiHpHm0E72tAZmJmQqBYPGyr9h75Np%7E2cE%7EsYoh5BGaiMjMDn8JJpwHxFwtbXZrt5b4j7L1u0sz-bhyg7NlFVKnlZ2gF14TNPRNK2%7EbGp8zbIpAh0iE3BojiMDS2TlwNNV4tY%7EgfoOhab0A__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
f5886b807ec3476b8cc4a32dcb672829
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge 009
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
Bridges
Bridge piers
Description
An account of the resource
South Capitol Street Bridge electrical and mechanical rehabilitation of the swing span at 1902 Anacostia Drive S.W. pre-construction no. 1. Main pivot pier.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District Department of Transportation
Stewart Brothers Photographers
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
March 5, 1998
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/50c472684c4b9722112128f120ee6027.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=ROKnxONZE6Le9X3m1eFZy7ZPpD%7EkJ4p6-a1Rl98jNpNfMHGcH3wooOyL7fDKY47%7E0e2BEHa6hp0DYAYjqDiTZl4Z5%7EOlPe4TpfQmZKgECN7sP4EANgrAbf6AGUsgf-yvY8cqYwHd44EoQtXIv3rEQmpNUBGSJwsBaysIAhdb2qTDa03x9XPy7Rbz%7EVKrVaW4bzBAt%7Exc0l9gqhZAuzDUSP7mmlKcxV4Cc3UCqL%7EZ%7EJIpppeVaGHC1FhGo82nRsT3uFnfSSDM9srHBjoJz-V54LnNWd4WFDplOutBic0E8aQISuETwdxRlPbIxGj0URlrgpG9jqd75x6AJjikFn0ZRQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
17198d59d1cafde724a3ed68a7b4ea4f
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge 010
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
Bridges
Wedges
Description
An account of the resource
South Capitol Street Bridge electrical and mechanical rehabilitation of the swing span at 1902 Anacostia Drive S.W. pre-construction no. 2. North wedge.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District Department of Transportation
Stewart Brothers Photographers
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
March 5, 1998
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/011bbea23f68a269a88935cd1972f714.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=Mex8xK%7EgnxuxInUGLfl9kjVaCZAwj8iI8r7KEe0MJp4hBsnLGJrVEXIG83F9XLn5ywpFGLvu2Fb1u9-0cpatNkey9tXP9X1O0KfvLg9%7EwepgOoh1AmZPoXFja7xmp3PWKHnRKNBVkW2m7pSCs91C24uRudBV0y1K1oDQ4TVGmQ6RsYglTY9ms6pO4%7EnmpeRXpeS0xfGncAs7%7EkGv7v8qgUA0M6xl2zQIU3Tx1397S8fHqxTnh0wN9p34%7EpjpdJeBeyh6G9tmtxgPJQ36WNfNuIlDz7ejzXxSW-Wax3c0IfJAGLzo%7EZRynsaBmQtVkslEUoD318lxcUREU1UFq2Rr6w__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
f577d9014a0b766fb969ba14dd718c15
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge 011
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
Bridges
Description
An account of the resource
South Capitol Street Bridge electrical and mechanical rehabilitation of the swing span at 1902 Anacostia Drive S.W. pre-construction no. 3. Balance wheel (looking toward Anacostia side).
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District Department of Transportation
Stewart Brothers Photographers
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
March 5, 1998
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/5327c19f011bdc910bbe1746b06aa59a.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=J8xaBYDTSnbMML-pjjMZNsnEFv1rdgrej%7Ehg4X-smla1zhbTl7wTJfKv2jvSHt4c47dg6VHUnSQJDsNc2O2GPVqNOJ7Kp8u4PLXkgVdqnCgO9nLmZhOwczCRdpWqpOq7xubs8wptxF3Rad7XiIqs--aQDASmwW1B%7EdaW3QD1GlDcQXHDiTGIVNX7oKur0ji6D-nBnnxJn2SnRO-47FL-kYGI0JVsSpGzVWE9myvQs4K2dlTJOOQWKtSVo2gYss5U8sRw58eKn3zFxo1AmWiiWkutLlVLZIJCnlZJnbE9XNLlSksox6GuS3VViVkp2fpfq7CizVMvNHM3McloHDXW9A__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
a07183012d9fbbb6f0bf390b348704ef
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge 012
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
Bridges
Machinery
Description
An account of the resource
South Capitol Street Bridge electrical and mechanical rehabilitation of the swing span at 1902 Anacostia Drive S.W. pre-construction no. 4. Anacostia side span drive machinery.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District Department of Transportation
Stewart Brothers Photographers
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
March 5, 1998
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/75ff5154e98ee320617f79d5902484d8.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=tkIslMeiPJ7qgfYSBU6E1Kxzd8NLCi1dPQnYHlIWuj4iST8qUV2vUGUhc3rHUGTzGoZ2Gf4lkAG21O5xcY0GdgNXTuE8lMnB2HhYHX0EjVZa5KKmfQgLEsgkB3JBOAl5LVL6KWc2O4eyjDd3K6izPYtS1i9ZhvJHt3f8AyH77INmcEtq5toLjshfuaqxTS8m4ZLeUXzHLdIww8DZr-Yv26jNDYnGbF2nY9nqdgDLPFcVxluro9UVt%7EzuEYgJ8VgstxIjSUpIKJEbShtQwYvP40NkGN%7EH0%7EO3qZKIpw2d6TmDBOb-jBWtrulfmxSfim%7Eq0h1T4SkrMjiknvB6IJ7SDg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
c1c8632c6582c2157b0f56764715753b
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge 013
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
Bridges
Machinery
Description
An account of the resource
South Capitol Street Bridge electrical and mechanical rehabilitation of the swing span at 1902 Anacostia Drive S.W. pre-construction no. 5. Span drive machinery overhaul on the Anacostia side.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District Department of Transportation
Stewart Brothers Photographers
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
March 5, 1998
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/36a5ad027442ac7f6b9a12ac08f5c1c8.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=KWg7LjYFtNiKAexBZ6AABCkgZiTOPzhXZcxV9zJkQtJYhVXSt51JGOc0BxXoez8RH09kq%7EjUZMJwDE9KP%7Eceo%7Ef7IB9yIMh-pMIKDyibVDFKe0LkJ4vNSpbfS2vRUmwcq6FpFGhWNrxhvSL2e8pk0tImbGWt1aZGfc1YgRvdcscIYowVBq-SjZ19mAFGC1ySML%7EUWqdtr2GQ5hm8vXEejCvThSsDlXaFqouB-qDJ6amS%7EIbe-wdKkR1nTWutXRawYDMWXP2EvSNU7eYEPMIV4yigM1eCPWbjhUIVfuWILBDEaQSrj6UUZbOVBs0u3FSUGziErDs1G%7E7ykUP1ZJ-uCw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
49f127a987ddbc4c3621325e5e25a048
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge 014
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
Bridges
Machinery
Description
An account of the resource
South Capitol Street Bridge electrical and mechanical rehabilitation of the swing span at 1902 Anacostia Drive S.W. pre-construction no. 6. Anacostia side toggle motors and drives.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District Department of Transportation
Stewart Brothers Photographers
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
March 5, 1998
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/127abe5b20331e6ae5d345df81ed1d31.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=GDwm41C6NaqlNfT5ywvynAqvJbIEWNvgEyFy8UNv5qDoV1%7ETAYfL8r0No08132Nfv58eNQcVBjK167K6645eekuZbGLLmt66nBBGCjy5RhB23vJSNKJ9sEDWJm5BS5B4zB05%7EAHxerlMGexVvuliWROWiLCKsgqHUBG3pfavVQC4saafhfCj-QwMagoJr5dY0mHTx%7EED2%7E8MudnqK1qWW2LgZrK0YJ27C%7EzKSPEbCq-91v5DrCDRH%7EzP-7UnrdsrE9YHKslQ%7EYn4EXGOHf39g%7EryLtdG0OMs4I0iUOm2yYAYyXoOQaRd5sNYvYe4TuIQ67c2gNA4E6Lw7jOqNoKBgw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
d9cb3b627dd25f61a2e150b24c82c639
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge 015
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
Bridges
Description
An account of the resource
South Capitol Street Bridge electrical and mechanical rehabilitation of the swing span at 1902 Anacostia Drive S.W. pre-construction no. 8. Span centering devices.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District Department of Transportation
Stewart Brothers Photographers
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
March 5, 1998
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/1e59678353cfa545608ab0204471f0f1.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=DOEL5GIf0zh4NVoUbidelGXF4F9wlN4DnUurHT3NWMNLxVE8cK8wnC1kSuGslFamjeSksIQvNZUyqM%7EVOt68ENEEhIW%7Ej511frCG9tMN-xBx1yW3tVj8wnB9nWcNScL7vrpUYp7IrtdkuNlZqSiEqhj0HS14qpyqpo1Qe6Vps-6Hrk8w63NpIwk0j4NxnDrvXUNQ966XAXc0YhuoVACXA6IGMrDn5xISLQv62PJN442lwwnqq59anrcfKr5gPMYlzNiLdo690V1xhtn0Dc0kKyFlOvQ2ZCMmVl4tGuq5jYke2i9wh8fVtJeypvhr8f7xAqEp0HeA-XzytDZHqcnfXg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
b9a03d92a67e16a04bbfaded5973a5b6
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge 016
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
Bridges
Machinery
Description
An account of the resource
South Capitol Street Bridge electrical and mechanical rehabilitation of the swing span at 1902 Anacostia Drive S.W. pre-construction no. 8. Toggle north.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District Department of Transportation
Stewart Brothers Photographers
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
March 5, 1998
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/34ddd291c4d44ac419b168608ed7e051.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=LCc3nNphrerI89tBPhNocppulzxwsGGm5mjjP7IRt7hZbejHA9HZa7Dvi2UzR04WwUPraRdsIljBt8Vbbwgt9FKmbJJAwpqwbIOXKMjfEXlF1qX-xB56M9PXg%7Ep%7EbtfZwD5caH5467PtaykUNlEmMJn7xDo%7EmzQ5NEkScIJghE6IrRPaOfUMtb95-EmL6bO8nWPRXtHjQFFWFGuZ0dszx0fJvhLRrBFw3TxGHujb5fksfvTruLYtlN-6CnkzCzOGk8cKB9Wd2XZ3YiWClnnZIzd7cCezuJgczbgDeOX5888Wqc5LJwQQKlfPdETeLdOJBl6VDnGCWjSZPdeQqX7kEA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
aa60ce90ac1c80e659fc7436cf707b63
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge 017
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
Bridges
Description
An account of the resource
South Capitol Street Bridge electrical and mechanical rehabilitation of the swing span at 1902 Anacostia Drive S.W. pre-construction no. 9. Structural beam on the north side looking toward the Anacostia River.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District Department of Transportation
Stewart Brothers Photographers
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
March 5, 1998
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/c4bdb67badf828f7b63462c8f8c5a02f.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=ooJPbuobcRR-X42PGuPmlbdieUas-mTfe-hbmulYzpVc0p0l8vH5OnO8zM43ofZ4flsdEO207ZsRyEBBCjJpMn5MgCPsCYkOAD6hxdVkcY3uMiHCj3sOLXZZO86vBf20gKR1ph0cUI6071rkxQsoMn5rZxnpg77ClH1mw5T%7E14l4xSXe%7Eyc0v%7EFBC3uWZofkQORlu9uJuw-8QYND%7EEZAszgiLSdjpegYwgBvsggR8mGzKeGrGW3A36xIzESnuEBCylmVGQZoHJMkv4YcgOeeJwWvIIcnAG6oouap9Qnd3Lm2jWS9pSiGy7cZ%7Erf6ukn-a3f-0k2Kz2EjI2CucmfyDw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
7cc5ca74c655224d40c6004d8724c24e
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge 018
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
Bridges
Control rooms
Description
An account of the resource
South Capitol Street Bridge electrical and mechanical rehabilitation of the swing span at 1902 Anacostia Drive S.W. pre-construction no. 10. Anacostia side control room and control panels for the swing span.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District Department of Transportation
Stewart Brothers Photographers
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
March 5, 1998
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/66b0f7c644eb9a52712d2e2a2cc0ce26.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=JVN145J98IvjCqvTpeJCKqByVZP4wk7ohLtZzoNzTVUkTNOyyErXHcXCXYHyi0vn1QKakrPEdFae%7EZUst3dE-3S2tDYtQQMOX70MYTaz2AMZFOI1u0RmDz6Ta%7EwyXpgjVtvnow3ftuvBDYTBKGDGM53Lk6W%7ElgzPcMPhgItlXAKqVwr7FO-L1HmT%7EfX08au-oxo38eGG-lfu2bU%7EITxQxeNZ-PbBQ9bKd5MhEAymTr7dJAi2eZV1JqSnNgqFUJ0gnYGZGfIeR-wrPuz7LWnmuI9oFtQayCJcJYoZzGIMNiCetj1DHQb%7EwmTgiIt5l%7EoUggNq4AZgFRkVIiVE3Wya%7EA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
0fe9ee2a58797da9ad59acbc0a61ad28
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge 019
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
Bridges
Air compressors
Description
An account of the resource
South Capitol Street Bridge electrical and mechanical rehabilitation of the swing span at 1902 Anacostia Drive S.W. pre-construction no. 11. Air compressor.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District Department of Transportation
Stewart Brothers Photographers
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
March 5, 1998
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/cf3da03ba23c7f216bdeeabde890434b.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=c-Dwge2Ci9B1YUy6N2SyCzGRjzoN92aDNbhOghmAg9U8yZxMHsvGJfFIxdWhCAzgJDd4SX0iMdnA4mF3iU12mkERC-eRSJcbXPpLiSWdgZDP7UPgOYC-5vEWuxa5e33TaRslHC2LulhAFoSXDierbIjhMtWsMjXeN1pBTDycEYgphJAdJnYUIAB9TtFZD18z9kKFYKVOikqT8lYdFHTt%7E0O69DQre3Yiynr%7E7fs-upGsfmAlqu%7EoDqAVF5288oTZs6N6we64qXBGOzV14GyMH2FT%7ERheXRobjq74xNj7gZbbnaHHDaMT7EBsFIZR3PQT5ZoNPXwYKqXvQD-6aCwC-w__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
69df489948eaaee9c36d0294b7286c4c
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge 020
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
Bridges
Electrical systems
Description
An account of the resource
South Capitol Street Bridge electrical and mechanical rehabilitation of the swing span at 1902 Anacostia Drive S.W. pre-construction no. 12. Electric switch gear.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District Department of Transportation
Stewart Brothers Photographers
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
March 5, 1998
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/d151ece6f08996f3dcae2a5d8f88a699.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=skHkphA-KJfVhKzD5s4R5HBCc%7ESZY5-e98w8ifQKgaA8EgsVUNrysSrmy6BdXrzw4utw4mllV7LtjLi99hR8C6a3X1LfLQqYfpEusvBFC8G2X%7E%7ENH0aoYd9C9bXIvRMMgDwOE7HQSeT1-R2C4g80M8abMdd1mRI6h2AMnjUiJkTyD5iyqIh0tdeYZLY90utTUwFpQ2RMguBfdSuQ0vq6JMYb2inKUB1AwOav8kbPQ1K33rmUOyv33o97gkEWAXdxOMqztE4c5Xak9xd6DTSn09TjM4nzk2F2aIEP37kwnrB2SX%7EBrzA36aUtlW%7EafZg9OIoGsmYTsMkc6LPO8ZLddw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
0c0e27595a5b3e3bafc979dc222d03a9
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge 021
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
Bridges
Electrical systems
Description
An account of the resource
South Capitol Street Bridge electrical and mechanical rehabilitation of the swing span at 1902 Anacostia Drive S.W. pre-construction no. 13. Electric meter.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District Department of Transportation
Stewart Brothers Photographers
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
March 5, 1998
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/44e009510c9095edbc714e0e40df3ba5.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=UnQ4jDAThaIZEvxIBNC-JU0N4JqodkGrIl9kudpQ3k4jYGI%7ExhhS55UwMHw-nbzkjV7hBLw7ZUhZrrlCcCrd3eI5UpXVw1fG18LqiE5FcO71y%7EffczlRx%7E4Uhju4CWT9SQVvZPxf7szVYPdMut2ywrHc6Xn5P47eDj4v2ATMMDuvMYvQT9JNsphrc0LZu94ko%7EGoTW6bejTYRQHeeAVjqxFAy6GsFAXfv814kmc0T5AVtr2yXtTD5GI8YV4foxnHJlUjJvbCHlr8Ep6jf5Dqhb8uzle0FpSkM6S%7EZWZiN0vS46fEVU8B6ak3qpeL%7EZOV80u2wCinbICSf3E61BAHLg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
040b3ac08205b6b65fe5cb47705cbc64
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge 022
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
Bridges
Bridge piers
Description
An account of the resource
South Capitol Street Bridge electrical and mechanical rehabilitation of the swing span at 1902 Anacostia Drive S.W. pre-construction no. 17. District side pier at end of swing span looking southwest.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District Department of Transportation
Stewart Brothers Photographers
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
March 5, 1998
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/78b0d26e517116a5cf3a6188bc886b04.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=Ej%7ETnrg4LP4cwcCNlMIaer5Si2YwsXajEiW7z8v8%7Em4VGP2%7Ez3--ksHQumF5wbqtlM2Np1dd0bmlJfSleW2nHJzL9o5V%7EEa0B23UusmWKgrpxOG%7Es7wHB65dwFs7C6BJBAK1DGAGaSjXPQe6r46f%7ELdwFmypBBuHeWbRfHRjZ1x1JIQ9OPeau4FwWhv4hgyCXV3XberiEwhzUxQay7-m8OvENv2JF-fuyRb%7EIlN4VzBqGCbUUx9lOV0uMQK%7EEkMegd%7EmywLq0pQkmUWl2xDaBE1XaFuM1I7jZZxz2R1r6faGDndWk1s0X1Tk97XJ5HQPLxqraeuBqdyRjI7ad431%7Eg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
62381640b1e5099926b4bcf4fc438b0d
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge 023
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
Bridges
Falsework
Description
An account of the resource
South Capitol Street Bridge electrical and mechanical rehabilitation of the swing span at 1902 Anacostia Drive S.W. pre-construction no. 20. Temporary falsework under toggles.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District Department of Transportation
Stewart Brothers Photographers
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
March 5, 1998
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/0edf7a8215a3a2a5e58fc0f9a4e70faf.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=I1e5NroH-BtCMcXCq40FwfKhUIu4otUDH6Io%7EfbBDX0bL7vsABG-OXSKJgUtDjt4-CEJlUkrcqTOakWs0AaU0FRPu072D9t7kyj11N5nZeIk3NjHJe0lEqKcjP7TlmxVtm2Au9XTknnPp4cbI2WRSzplS07-dX3%7E%7EpYzcQslknZpXRDNDKlp-skEai1Cc4uQcFhu4ncPjvg1dFLpBGOM%7Ef3e387e-Vv%7EZ91DFc946jCC27a-PRNKzdO3qdNpKb5Kz0-xw3AWLyrdpEMqKIjzbosGISLt%7EDfVJ7EO9IeYG8X3l3UWD652Y9S0oDCy5cDYqTx23FoyRjdn4cSvZ%7E6M0A__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
daeb59295925f234c759034473a6efef
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge 024
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
Bridges
Description
An account of the resource
South Capitol Street Bridge electrical and mechanical rehabilitation of the swing span at 1902 Anacostia Drive S.W. pre-construction no. 22. Air line on the District side.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District Department of Transportation
Stewart Brothers Photographers
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
March 5, 1998
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/50a288c96766597e51f875f3c4d930bd.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=MOBhlWXi42mqf%7EU1jE8SiNZxSoGZ%7EhENUX%7EAk56aWOb0GoaOfjvEercONpjOjXTVUMSRBc3aVKjRudLXnDwmqUS53YmrsqEnrYwoGRfn8NzABZCWT0ejeNH%7E9hv6k7d-avcBJixReQAwVJ6WeCTDB156OXbk1nKWvo1f7TCmLDR4nROzDx%7EzwP1xrryXF0StjjvQ8Q6UKGzuOgNohk1ZGxQBo7vyYsuUZWVHxEu0zixjx8VJyPKFIEnl5iY2SRevD49a7Fe6%7EwbK2YhjwXG8Q7qq1xDFRlyePQZ2Ggsl62cvBU8t-MtjVCKBwxeJv22fyWE85z36cgZ9%7E2ybnQo87A__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
523be38535a0c04a097de5fa142f214e
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge 025
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
Bridges
Piers
Description
An account of the resource
South Capitol Street Bridge electrical and mechanical rehabilitation of the swing span at 1902 Anacostia Drive S.W. pre-construction no. 23. Structural beam near toggles looking toward the Navy Yard.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District Department of Transportation
Stewart Brothers Photographers
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
March 5, 1998
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/e82192674497bedd73dfb5f733e33a5b.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=DLwqTawf18C5Xe8-bvJWHHCHs5VnVoAFKBK4SIkLBpMBpgUn1%7EfSJAwA3ESihEv8w7f%7EUSwtVgqJSEIjJ55E-eetQoLhE-fab-%7EUzdxWiaDYPholV3Q4MEYZkWGH4CPnVzcgTrnkmd%7EdYJSkm6Dsw8Ja6ImDXOWiGc0poL%7E%7EgKOa5OcHztpjRyH0GxxBx9lfykM2l2Fu-bxOgeuZ3pSBAD-wEaIsVLvRjYj-gTVQsIlDHVfr33-DysGG260UN5dp1tmZsDEWnksHAdV2gMo%7EPLxdeHgaBXa5aScwmc7JvCbtCgAPbhcPfU%7EHEk5aMsuDK0dXpv8YUoHCOejwuC90qQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
d8d995b30d55cfc1dae2ba7b6c6409a4
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge 026
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
Bridges
Stairs
Description
An account of the resource
South Capitol Street Bridge electrical and mechanical rehabilitation of the swing span at 1902 Anacostia Drive S.W. pre-construction no. 24. Stairwell location and structural steel on the Navy Yard side.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District Department of Transportation
Stewart Brothers Photographers
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
March 5, 1998
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/f5de59f950ebc829cfda414d282d1e50.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=KKOAvWYvv6-ZQFr1nHSDXdkscreC%7EDKuCyqvu-TIAQI2zBkzcEFTkXV3O6KTU5v7S4u-PUJXNDOUcsVa3cm6GOjtHuRTdMTmm99EgsRY%7EPnvEok17fJ7%7Esyunleo%7E77NTtIRxVDWmndYjAw9f50vYHjziSVIDeQUaEoqUHeHKANSQo7WzT2JuW%7EwysLtdpa5HR2PG7Wrt3C4PGG3vW2IES%7ELfJFdF9t9bk4wfWuU5od-wE6sBoxOQUkfNm9GOuAWTbcyRCVj3gg2u97Ybg8IfkOr5zI3p9BJW1ryZLmIvIIz7PejGvoLmt3yn1ayHOsmXgDNeqQ-2zCkKYI6g1CE4w__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
904821fd83869138c78cfeadb8038fe2
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge 027
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
Bridges
Description
An account of the resource
South Capitol Street Bridge electrical and mechanical rehabilitation of the swing span at 1902 Anacostia Drive S.W. no. 100.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District Department of Transportation
Stewart Brothers Photographers
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
January 7, 1999
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/653586bb0e78f8ab80f02b26c6a7f7fd.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=oXXEpFBDoNPccRp4y4t8AMs3XUTjrhW3ZqgO1w0WWQIa9FAgH2ThecahIa%7EVvimvMJKJWBslWG7OqMCXeyiV51fElm0B6SW6l5TLOovzPbkC7pzMrxalE6JZ7X2QxBmrLlvOMjc3advZKiyxH56PPHXru8WMkRn23D41BhDYW7CypXM%7EeTr%7ENpYl1h7%7EYpaRpb0pPP%7EcxQh1%7EA9V%7Ea05TejPfsDTzTpOdLH5g3lOwGYl3qoLfnowsd3L%7EOguteXpXJhLi4m6kzG%7EDeEzTQ9NELkg5OhDubHtMbmmiaPHjysOOBvgLaTOAuf87XgNgiXKtWFyesymYmKk2E2MROzTQA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
9c9f4cb8f3699d17300d03e584a12287
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge 028
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
Bridges
Description
An account of the resource
South Capitol Street Bridge electrical and mechanical rehabilitation of the swing span at 1902 Anacostia Drive S.W. no. 99. Subcable strapping on the DC side.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District Department of Transportation
Stewart Brothers Photographers
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
January 7, 1999
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Stewart Brothers Photographers
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/b539809c5a997343f1fffbd23ceebe29.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=lGhUstMLhQtogBFrH6Ke%7EMu-tl14-xnq-R0hBSCguPq43Oo4yx4%7EBzJve7MN3piMvk4gLFLUqHmgsJ%7Ep%7EEJVn3Pv-mYV-DkQ9nEigWgPEcIuQMb5Hbvo4jvZatMtMK%7EhNX7JiIk2Io9ehWwhemEm1G7Xv5IgGhYRagjDCkoSbLKG-k6eG1J3pFYJrdP1OXn3PeRKMBBmiGGjwVjfUmCw0JbeRSDwhJ9LzCVB8wrhpir54WY3Ra81PJc4yr-CBtCsZuj952rUOWAQfyogGemKlk-bMMHKF21rRJoFOffVdM7aJUkKYzzASrUZCaPsfEpr2JQ44QtcPR9KMgfvZ3wdGA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
6621f400d29988522c62f968c0b7c29e
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge 029
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
Bridges
Pumps
Description
An account of the resource
South Capitol Street Bridge electrical and mechanical rehabilitation of the swing span at 1902 Anacostia Drive S.W. no. 98. Water pump on the DC side of the bridge.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District Department of Transportation
Stewart Brothers Photographers
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
January 7, 1999
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/4747bce77625c8475c32d4b8416bf930.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=SabUPRxlqBt7sS6LRjJh0jKF94cw2SgASRaRmLVcwjL7rhxdmzl2G1UqtPIkXqMQJOS8IHGvUdL7a1xbLUome1Zy7oX1uGaIe4rAJVhLqPuAE3wbkSUVW6q62mF6-O%7E8s2HE-52uOj51Qo5o17mayiJJcSBdC9u2ERK9Rypk3f5s9Fz1g%7E3kPf2tbE5C5yu5zdoz5BaXFF3rSmXmiXh3X1PvEE5e3W9br7OXD7dQZ9NXbOopvVmmbN5wt2sq3BS3PAR3EOi%7E2kYS-YxVBV7r%7EW11SgbFsztB3BItkulm5RICTB5%7EP5BO86LvKsSpDrPTpqYPjDhQoTpNF5J7ceMp7g__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
ae34a0da3c7a55fff6be68fe20dc83f6
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge 030
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
Bridges
Pumps
Bridge piers
Description
An account of the resource
South Capitol Street Bridge electrical and mechanical rehabilitation of the swing span at 1902 Anacostia Drive S.W. no. 97. Water pump on pivot pier.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District Department of Transportation
Stewart Brothers Photographers
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
January 7, 1999
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/8d4951fa456f6ced1b4f8859ab192299.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=Zex4hL27SuUETEPnK7hfVyclG68tYpZ2mlzAap4seTWqkRXbXrfbEC7am5h%7EG-pyUMpgOeRfgGHaYZ7p7nSUMowcdH33K-C9dntkmZ160k6x5cqxg78ck8coUoi4jRhqTFckA6dEwXDxD--BzTkFtNnEvvpQQV8unD7uMVkLkMbjmzOs8qg9pRf3BV8QRByP--bbL3iaRU%7EbcQZeIlnN8GsqwGFAuPX3HOmOO2P%7EYekDTKmiOx-Vaa1qlKbTP6eNBAMNLnXexpIaBmRYflYmpOYh3oQ7ULW4JaYVLtMqLkTYePYyF8kwqnK9jWeK-0V247A5SpjSoyTViVETWWcSjw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
a9b29e6adfee51d9d1d838b3a4385607
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge 031
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
Bridges
Painting
Description
An account of the resource
South Capitol Street Bridge electrical and mechanical rehabilitation of the swing span at 1902 Anacostia Drive S.W. no. 66. Painting platform on the DC side of the bridge.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District Department of Transportation
Stewart Brothers Photographers
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
September 22, 1998
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/b163cfbccd73699341b9ac5141b1bd9d.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=Pb3maV0JL0W8WI-kryBBS7inZtsdqsfaMLj2VrYt1nolnk%7E3cITx%7EFJh1UtxbKO4rW9WiwnAu-oFN95zT3igBJYjO5zm29sOqFfH%7ERDgw8Mc3JoHEJXRqEF7SrWpg1cCWnCy6kR6ZKoFUO4cGKIKyjTaZdH5eH-4ABNKRi-oAR4piaYS9%7E0H1F-gHAxdJf08z82lvnc4dHP3YNaidypLCdPqYPMuq%7EZzI6uEF55cyJ5K0Lj5fDAReBsYz-VHv-X5gA%7E-FYfsMhzhsX91Bdjf7mmrb6Q%7Ec1scdN3oT59%7ETTE1rCClmAeq2rinj%7EhsaRF8rNjOMTxCqDTjKD8bibFmIQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
85eaf620656d1b8caa211b2c47a9c74c
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge 032
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
South Capitol Street (Washington, D.C.)
Motor vehicles
Peak hour traffic
Description
An account of the resource
Cars driving down South Capitol Street toward the approach to the bridge during the PM rush.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District Department of Transportation
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1957
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Public domain
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/9fae622280530a939c3e528fbc78b0aa.png?Expires=1712793600&Signature=XOL8nQmjeKVZW6ljj9KiSrWOFJnyQp3sDlL7KXmlUp72KmSRC4phLwGfpyR5jmYPcSPyCd6grgB-H-QePszGaxsuLi4GY3Iym9wMcb6dfLv0f0Hxwix7VrGKtVpPP%7ETOukmHZAj2KS4XGI-c2AQLNOZqwHswjfcjoBYv4aK9LWe9pXGxCUXoq-EBA5yEseTXLMX73Thj5z87MTMSSk-tO2ibNwbXeIcU3ddC3TnO639%7E3vhb6UmKHJ2avwdH1%7E-mUVha5gZtZDuBxXN98KYglt88S3-SomGDX0zMdyHBu-HOFNv0vnjZd6m3CHher5bS8unGoTd1R8ESYkbOg8AoQQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
deb70f7c5fbd6b80bb6e733738276be2
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge Rendering
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
South Capitol Street (Washington, D.C.)
Bridges
South Capitol Street (Washington, D.C.)
Description
An account of the resource
Rendering of the future Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge currently being built. This will be a six lane bridge with pedestrian and bicycle lanes as well.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District Department of Transportation
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2017
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Renderings
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Digital
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
DC Bridges and Tunnels
Subject
The topic of the resource
Bridges
Description
An account of the resource
Photographs of bridges in Washington, DC, including the 14th Street Bridges, Sousa Bridge, Memorial Bridge, Frederick Douglass Bridge, Duke Ellington Bridge, Key Bridge, and more.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District Department of Transportation
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
Various
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
District Department of Transportation
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples of still images are: paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type "text" to images of textual materials.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (South Capitol Street Bridge)
Subject
The topic of the resource
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge (Washington, D.C.)
South Capitol Street (Washington, D.C.)
Bridges
Anacostia River (Md. and Washington, D.C.)
Description
An account of the resource
Photos of the Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge, also known as the South Capitol Street Bridge, which carries South Capitol Street over the Anacostia River.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
District Department of Transportation
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
Various
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Photographs
Renderings
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Prints
Digital
Anacostia River
Bodies of Water
Bridges
Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge
Rehabilitation
South Capitol Street
South Capitol Street Bridge