https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/4eb0d56682a2193224f5692d073d3684.pdf?Expires=1782345600&Signature=SYBqdlJ1w9BfvaPPI4ZYxBnC2iN7fdGNn8JxjIDGc-nOYCcMSB2BcuSD1C3PEqHYOdg0e%7EooKja5DsjkMYiPjkCgxwksvw0ChvHYxerWwsIPi3cOnqgXVrgYMoT22TBUi1QBo118eGOaWEXyFms9epFv7ySVYDlUM6OznXC%7EeeKn%7EyDS%7EDa%7EzXirBPvqvL4pQyPuTlaOyZC2qRVBxgw64u6vztgP1bBxKu4je0winomVyu-qVuvSLEdAhuQXiTyk%7EopIPnNdCaRb3PoXDUhj7c0iMY-8gJrMXpxfF%7EhoPgIYUjpXNOev1ooRvgP-76TsxuHNjNZC0tbAV0udJjp%7EdQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM abf0280df325330862384a74eb0c9aa8 PDF Text Text �HISTORIC GEORGETOWN A Nation's Heritage, the Community's Future Celebrating the Bicentennial of Washington, D.C. A Public Forum March 18-19, 1991 Four Seasons Hotel Washington, D.C. Georgetown Heritage Trust Halcyon House 3400 Prospect Street N.W. Washington, D.C. 20007 202-338-0731 (formerly Historic Georgetown Foundation) ANNOUNCEMENT Citizens Association of Georgetown Meeting Monday, April 13,1992 7:30 Dumbarton House 2715 aStreet N.W. Topic: Historic Georgetown: A Nation's Heritage, The Community's Future. A town meeting to discuss a master plan for the Historic District of Georgetown as a follow^-up to_ the March 19th, 1991 Planning Forum. This project was undertaken with a grant from the Cafritz Foun dation as part of the Bicentennial Celebration of Washington, D.C. Organized by G.H.T. in cooperation with CA.G. andBJ>A.G. and Georgetown University. �HISTORIC GEORGETOWN A Nation's Heritage, the Community's Future Celebrating the Bicentennial of Washington, D.C. A Public Forum March 18-19, 1991 Four Seasons Hotel Washington, D.C. �H I S T O R I C G E O R G E T O W N FOUNDATION FORREST-MARBURY HOUSE 3350 M Street Washington, D.C. 20007 (202) 338-0731 Our keynote speaker was Douglas Evelyn, Deputy Director of the National Museum of American History and President of The American Association for State and Local History. In a far ranging speech, he set the agenda for the two day planning forum which followed. He directed us to develop a project which would be broad in the inclusion of community, institutional and academic participants; challenging in the selection of issues for research and interpretation; bold in its creation of alliances and projects to preserve, interpret and share Georgetown's unique past as a community and as a participant in the shaping of the Nation's Capital City. What evolved over the next two days was an effort to develop the groundwork for such a pro-active shared vision for the total community. In time, the community must decide whether the accepted plans and projects individually or collectively become official (needing adoption by City Council Resolution) or an unofficial consensus for community action. Eight areas of specific interest emerged as the key focus of attention. Projects for community action and approval could emergefromany or all of them. These areas of interest are as follows: 1. Develop a network of historic districts in Washington, something like the Historic District Council of New York. This alliance, which would include such important H.D.s as LeDroit Park, Dupont Circle, Anacostia, Cleveland Park, and Georgetown would focus on matters of mutual interest in affairs involving economic revitalization, legal consultation, interpretation, transportation links, etc. 2. Develop an Interpretation Center. It should have a broad and imaginative range of presentation approaches. The history of the residential, commercial, waterfront and industrial components of the story need different analysis and different types of presentation. We must understand how they interact and how they can interact more smoothly. An Interpretation/Orientation Center should develop stories, i.e., Georgetown's relationship to the development of the Nation's Capital and the development of the Nation; the geography and history of the Potomac River Basin; the urban/rural relationship; ethnic diversity; early Indian relationships to the area; local industrial history; and federal vs. local issues. The Interpretation Center should be built along the model of the ecomuseum concept and be a part of a larger heritage corridor along the Potomac River Watershed. 3. Reposition Georgetown as a social, cultural and intellectual heart of the Nation's Capital. Utilize urban cultural park models to give a sense of direction. This is not mutually exclusive to the ecomuseum concept and can in fact enhance the interpretation program. �4. Inventory historic and cultural resources. Do a real historic district nomination for Georgetown as a National Historic Site for the National Register for Historic Places. This would give vital information to city planners, the Fine Arts Commission, citizens, developers and politicians. 5. Have a good urban design plan drawn up which would; a) plan for transportation (ferries, feet, electric vans, monorails etc.. Unite Georgetown with the rest of the region. Plan in context, both externally and internally; b) protect the residential neighborhood; c) plan both public and private spaces—take control of the streets and alleys. Make clear what is public domain, where visitors are welcome and where they are not; d) plan the retail miT and distribution step by step. Think of innovative uses for empty upper floors on main street (i.e., business incubators for entrepreneurs, homes for families willing to trade work for the community for a home to live in, etc.); e) get to the water—for a port town, this is a key opportunity for interpretation, transportation, and recreation; f) create places where people can have a good time without spending money—learning something, walking, experiencing and understanding Georgetown's history; g) cause change, do not fear it. Be pro-active. Exercise stewardship of the land and of the built-and-yet-to-bebuilt-urban environment (see attached sheet for suggested course of action). 6. Develop substantial partnerships with nearby academic, cultural and government agencies (i.e., Georgetown University, George Washington University, the Potomac River Consortium, The Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, and the National Park Service). 7. Develop a management strategy for the Historic District and Organize an effective organization with a good manager. The Board of Directors should represent all segments of the community. 8. Revolving loan funds should be developed to help in the preservation and restoration projects of the historic district. Once the projects have been selected and a clear mission statement developed to embrace the community's interests, then a variety of funding procedures will be investigated to see these plans to fruition (i.e., Business Improvement District, tax exempt bonds, grants, etc.). It was agreed that a deadline driven procedure should be incorporated into the plans so that the community as a whole would see the benefits of the process. Andfinally,we should understand that in this process, we are celebrating not only our city, our community, and our famines, but we are also celebrating ourselves as a people, as Americans. We will be seeking out and promoting the connections of this wonderful city, the symbol of George Washington's extraordinary vision of nationhood, to all Americans. The story that we will betellingis the story of our emerging and evolving nation, and we will see, at last, that in our shared heritage we catch a glimpse of Historic Washington's glorious future. �Historic George Town's Bicentennial Celebration Washington, D.C. 1791 - 1991 In George Town, on March 29, 1791, our first president, George Washington, met with landowners at a dinner hosted by General Uriah Forrest, whose home is the present 3350 M Street. Forrest was a wounded veteran of the Revolutionary War, a prominent businessman, and future mayor of George Town. At that dinner, the acquisition of property was arranged for the congressionally mandated permanent seat of the federal government. Prior to the dinner, Washington had made a final inspection of the sites for the Capitol Building and the President's House. The next day, March 30, 1791, George Washington issued a proclamation outlining the boundaries he had selected for the federal district. He had intimate knowledge about this area and the Potomac River Basin. Nature had created its destiny and determined its name. Patowmack, in Algonquin, means "the Meeting Place." And so it was to be. George Town, situated at the head of the Potomac River's tidewater and near its fall line, had a strategic location on the great east-west river. Because of its location, it was to become the heart of the new Capital and gateway to the emerging nation west of the Allegheny Mountains. Washington's efforts to secure interstate commerce agreements with the several states bounded by the Potomac River had led eventually to the Constitutional Convention and a strengthening of the Union that had emerged after the Revolution. Washington's Potomac River canals remind us still of these momentous events in the development of nationhood. When he chose the site and the designer for the Nation's Capital, Washington envisioned a splendid city that would symbolize the prosperity and power of the Union as he foresaw it, reaching from eastern shore to western wave. Earlier, the President had chosen Major Pierre Charles L'Enfant, who had been with him at Valley Forge, as the designer to create the plan for the great Federal City. L'Enfant understood and reflected Washington's vision for this nation and his faith in the future of the Republic. Together they pushed forward with plans for a Federal City that would be magnificent in scale and concept. By March 26, 1791, having arrived to begin work several weeks earlier, L'Enfant made his formal report to President Washington in George Town. While standing at the base of the hill that would someday be graced by the Capitol Building, he said that his plan was inspired by ". . . liberty hailing nature from its slumbers." The plan that evolved endures and inspires to this day. People from this city, the nation, and the world remark on its beauty, scale, and physical elements, which relate to the constitutional government celebrated by this nation. The hills, valleys, and waterways, so much a part of this splendid plan, have indeed been aroused from slumber and proclaim . . . LIBERTY. Betty Jane Johnson Gerber Historic Georgetown Foundation �Historic Georgetown Foundation Historic Georgetown Master Plan Historic District Master Plan • Phase I & I I Purpose: To coherently link the existing historic resources of Georgetown to promote the preservation, interpretation, and development of cultural, historic, natural, and architectural resources. Phase I Material - Symposium • Inventory of Historic District - structures/institutions/resources • Presentation • Access/Linkage - Stewardship - Partnerships - Resources Phase I I Material • Access/Linkage Study - Analyze Historic District Inventory to assess access patterns Analyze visual linkages Develop linkage/access alternatives exploring pedestrian and shuttle bus options and signage, paving, street lighting, and street furniture options Develop a program for a central Interpretive Center Select preferred alternatives and prepare presentation material Compile Master Plan elements into a final document Develop criteria for Phase I I I �Historic Georgetown Foundation Historic Georgetown Master Plan November 14, 1990 Historic District Master Plan - Phase I I I Purpose: To establish guidelines and goals to increase and improve the historic fabric and character of Georgetown as a whole and to promote beneficial enjoyment and future development of the urban area through the preservation, interpretation, development, and use of cultural, historic, natural, and architectural resources. Base Mapping Historic District Master Plan - Phase I I - Inventory of historic resources - Access/Linkage Plan - Interpretation Center Program and Location Plan Traffic Study - Traffic volume analysis - Parking analysis - Mass transit/light rail analysis of potential connections up to C&O canal to suburbs Urban Structure Study - Evolution of Georgetown's urban fabric - 1700 to present - Land-use analysis - Facade analysis of M street & Wisconsin Avenue - Existing zoning/review process/guidelines analysis Main Street Plan - Street design guidelines for historic district - M Street & Wisconsin Avenue street design • cross section alternatives • sidewalk widening alternatives • signage, furniture, paving, and lighting alternative • Main Street trolley alternatives - Facade guidelines • Materials, colors, window types, heights, and setbacks Waterfront Plan - Pedestrian Access Plan - Esplanade Design Alternatives - Water Dependent Use Opportunities - Water transit connection alternatives to Alexandria, Mount Vernon, and Maine Avenue Development District Plan - Sub-standard Structures and Uses Plan - Target Development Sites Plan - Historic District Program, Use, Development, and Design Guidelines �Summary Document Prepared By: KEENS COMPANY 414 Poplar Drive Falls Church, VA 22046 (703) 237-2900 (703) 237-2902 (fax) Project Director: William Keens Project Managing Editor. Bruce Peyton Project Coordinator: Gregory Roby In the past six years. Keens Company has documented hundreds of conferences, seminars, and workshops for nonprofit and commercial clients. If you would like to know more about our services, which also include the planning and facilitation of meetings of all kinds, please contact us at the above address. �TABLE OF CONTENTS The Planning Forum Process 1 DAY ONE Opening Remarks and Keynote Address 2 This session began with a brief account of the process leading up to the present forum, followed by notes from the keynote speaker on the changing history of Georgetown and Washington, ongoing historical research and preservation efforts throughout the metropolitan area and the nation, and key issues involved in developing a master plan for Historic Georgetown. Panel I : Inventorying Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources 8 The panel explored a planning process for carrying out the inventory—the scope and uses of the inventory and the resources required. Panel II: Preserving Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources 18 The panel explored a strategy for the historic preservation of Georgetown that takes into consideration Department of the Interior standards, the needs and interests of residents and businesses, and the numerous tourists who visit Georgetown each year. DAY TWO Opening Remarks and Keynote Address 30 This session focused on stimulating and harnessing community commitment to urban revitalization through the establishment of a central Main Street management program. Panel III: Interpreting Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources The panel explored the best ways to help residents, businesses, and visitors recognize and appreciate the historical and cultural features of the community. How can an awareness of the community's heritage be integrated into the daily life of the neighborhood, and how can we help visitors develop a stewardship ethic towards the neighborhood? 36 �Panel IV: Designing Georgetown's Future ,48 The panel explored all the diverse elements that need to be considered in designing a future for Georgetown that respects its historical and cultural heritage, and takes into consideration the needs of residents, businesses, and visitors, including transportation, housing, businesses, entertainment, and the Georgetown University campus. Officers, Staff, and Advisory Committee 62 Index .64 �THE PLANNING FORUM PROCESS During two days of meetings, residents, business persons, friends, and scholars with an interest in Historic Georgetown began the planning process to protect and design a future for the historic district in Washington, D.C. Four expert panels, respectively, addressed particular aspects of the planning process. Interested persons were encouraged to contribute information and ideas to the panels during the forum. Over the summer, the panelists will develop a set of recommendations for Georgetown's protection and future. These recommendations will be reviewed by a number of citizens, professionals, and scholars, and modified as needed. In the fall, the final draft recommendations will be published through the Washington-area media. And then, in a town meeting, interested persons will be invited to give input to the draft recommendations. The community's final recommendations for Historic Georgetown will be published as a prospectus for the historic district. The prospectus can be used by community groups, businesses, and public agencies for planning purposes. It can also be used by these groups to raise additional funds to carry out the consensus plan for Historic Georgetown. 1 �OPENING REMARKS AND KEYNOTE ADDRESS This session began with a brief account of the process leading up to the present forum, followed by notes from the keynote speaker on the changing history of Georgetown and Washington, ongoing historical research and preservation efforts throughout the metropolitan area and the nation, and key issues involved in developing a master plan for Historic Georgetown. Opening Remarks: Jeannine Clark, D.C. Bicentennial Commission Betty Jane Johnson Gerber, President, Historic Georgetown Foundation Keynote Speaker: Douglas Evelyn, Deputy Director, National Museum of American History; Board Member, American Association of State and Local History SUMMARY OF REMARKS B Y JEANNINE CLARK On behalf of the Bicentennial Commission of the District of Columbia, Jeannine Clark welcomed the participants to a "precedent-setting forum on Historic Georgetown," convened by the National Trust for Historic Preservation and the Historic Georgetown Foundation. As Alexis de Tocqueville once observed, Americans regularly form associations for the benefit of the society; and the collaboration that resulted in the present public forum is a model of this revered American tradition. To place Georgetown in its proper historical context, Clark quoted a passage from Constance McLaughlin Green's history of the nation's capital: "On the heights of the Potomac, upstream from Washington, stood the city of Georgetown, which was laid out in 1751 and incorporated in 1789, two years prior to the setting of the boundaries for our nation's capital." SUMMARY OF REMARKS B Y B E T T Y JANE JOHNSON G E R B E R The process leading up to the present forum and the ongoing master planning process that will continue through the coming year were the focus of Betty Jane Johnson Gerber's introductory remarks. She expressed the hope that these planning efforts would encompass not only the Georgetown community but the Washington community as a whole, thereby encouraging networking among the various historic districts. It is only through such cooperative efforts that all "the buried treasures and fragile assets" of the Washington metropolitan area can be discovered, catalogued, preserved, and offered to the public as major educational resources. 2 �Historic Georgetown, Day One: Opening Remarks and Keynote Address Gerber extended a warm welcome to the distinguished panelists and the citizens of the Georgetown community who were participating in the forum,, which was made possible by the support of the National Trust for Historic Preservation. In particular, she thanked Jack Walter, president of the Trust, and Kathleen Hunter, project manager. She noted that the planning process was being funded by a challenge grant from the Morris and Gwendolyn Cafritz Foundation, matched by a grant from MMP International, Inc., along with in-kind contributions from private Georgetown citizens. This process will result in documents that, after responses, input, and refinements from various community leaders, eventually will provide a prospectus similar to the one created by and for historic Annapolis in 1976, which made use of the energy from that year's bicentennial to look at the next 200 years of historic Annapolis. "You all can look at historic Annapolis today and see the wonderful effect that those planning processes brought to that very delightful town." Over the last five years, as vice chairman of future planning for the Dumbarton House board, and member of the board of both the Francis Scott Key Park Foundation and the Forrest-Marbury House, Gerber observed that each was isolated in its educational mission because there was no organizational structure in Georgetown to focus heritage education and heritage tourism. Thus, in 1989, the Historic Georgetown Foundation, of which Gerber is president, was established by a number of community leaders, including Jeannine Clark, chairman of the Bicentennial Commission of Washington, D . C ; Jim Hemphill and Kathy Graff of the Citizens Association of Georgetown; and David Levy and Richard Stauffer from the Business and Professional Association of Georgetown (BPAG). In addition, during the two years leading up to the present two days of meetings, a number of other advisers worked with the Historic Georgetown Foundation on the development of this event and the ongoing process of which it is a part. The Historic Georgetown Foundation is also helping to develop a film for the Public Broadcasting System. Tentatively titled Open Wide the Door: George Washington's Vision for America, the documentary will be realized with the help of a number of scholars, who are currently conducting background research, and filmmakers, one of whom eventually will be chosen to take charge of the project. Gerber introduced the keynote speaker, Douglas Evelyn, deputy director of the National Museum of American History and coauthor of a book on Washingtonarea history entitled On This Spot, to be published this summer, profiling the events, the people, and the changes associated with some 200 locations in the metropolitan area. A city resident for twenty-five years, Evelyn was a board member of the Cultural Alliance of Greater Washington for six years and is president-elect of the American Association for State and Local History. In 1987, he started a national program called A Common Agenda for History Museums, to help history organizations attack issues related to collections and interpretations and to develop collaborative solutions. Recent projects include directing the 1990 microfilm publication of the papers of Robert Mills, architect 3 �Historic Georgetown, Day One: Opening Remarks and Keynote Address of the Washington Monument, and negotiating the partnership between the Smithsonian Institution and the United States Postal Service to establish a National Postal Museum, to open in 1993, in the former city post office building next to Union Station. SUMMARY OF REMARKS B Y DOUGLAS E V E L Y N Noting that an important part of the task at hand was "to build a broad community awareness and appreciation for history," Douglas Evelyn began by providing a brief historical background on the Washington area. He used as his sources two highly contrasting views of Georgetown and Washington at the turn of the nineteenth century. The first set of observations was made in 1806 by Benjamin Latrobe, who at the time was battling William Thornton over the design of the capital. After work had begun according to Thornton's designs, Latrobe was brought in to supervise the public building program, and he immediately began to make numerous changes in Thornton's work, which resulted in a bitter dispute. Latrobe described the new capital city as one of the offspring of revolutionary enthusiasm, brilliant and exuberant as an idea but in reality little more than the "favorite folly of General Washington": Everything was badly planned and conducted. L'Enfant's plan has in its contrivance everything that could prevent the growth of the city. The distribution of the public buildings over a surface of five miles in length and three in breadth prevents the possibility of concentration. . . . The proprietors of the soil over which the town is to be spread are rivals and enemies, and each opposes every project which appears more advantageous to his neighbor than himself. Speculators of all degrees of honesty and of desperation made a game of hazard of the scheme. The site itself is upon a river noble in its extent and depth of water below the city, but above of difficult navigation, and running through a country comparatively barren in the materials of commerce and agricultural produce. But the principal disadvantage under which this establishment labors is the preoccupation of its commerce by the cities of Baltimore and Alexandria and the town of Georgetown. The two latter cities . . . are in the fact the factories of Philadelphia, Baltimore, Norfolk. The principal part of near a million dollars dispersed in the federal city passes through Alexandria and Georgetown to our large seaports. These two towns have accordingly prospered and increased and may be compared to a pair of fat twins who are suckled by a consumptive mother. Latrobe blamed George Washington for all these problems, including "the badly designed and still more indifferently executed capital," while he described President Thomas Jefferson—who had appointed Latrobe—as a man whose talents, virtues, and patriotism had led him to become the only real patron of the city. Clearly, the personal, professional, and civic rivalries that can hamper any efforts to develop and pursue a consensual master plan are by no means modern inventions. 4 �Historic Georgetown, Day One: Opening Remarks and Keynote Address In contrast to Latrobe's acerbic views, David Baillie Warden, in A Chorographical and Statistical Description of the District of Columbia, published in France in 1816, says of the city on the Potomac that "it is scarcely possible to imagine a situation more beautiful, healthy, and convenient than that of Washington." He describes the river as "truly picturesque," one of the most glorious aspects of the city. "The public buildings occupy the most elevated and convenient situations, and the city plan is universally admired." Warden's account of a nursery in the Palisades area hints at the existence of the free black community in the city at the time. To cultivate this nursery, the owner "employs five or six young blacks . . . whom he nourishes, educates, and rewards with the annual sum of sixty-four dollars. During hours consecrated to repose, he teaches them to read and write and instructs them in moral duties. Joseph Moor, a manumitted black who lived with him several years, is now a respectable grocer in Georgetown." Analostan Island, now called Theodore Roosevelt Island, in Warden's day was a summer plantation for General Mason, a government official who supervised the federal Indian trade, with offices in Georgetown. This raises the issue of Georgetown's early role as a location for federal offices. Analostan Island was also significant as the site of Mason's propagation of merino sheep, imported from Spain during the Napoleonic Wars, when America was seeking new sources of livestock. Finally, Warden remarks that "nearly one-half of the population of Washington is of Irish origin." In addition to the Irish laborers and the free blacks who helped build the city, many other ethnic groups were part of Georgetown's early history. "Who were the people who moved into this city, and when and how did they interact?" asked Evelyn, who stressed that "it helps us understand the demographics today if we can get an appreciation for how they actually lived and worked in the past." Evelyn next spoke of a number of recent and ongoing efforts in the Washington area focusing on local history and preservation, several of which involve innovative techniques of research and information accessibility that can be applied in Georgetown. The fruits of these labors include the book recently published by the Historical Society of Washington, D . C , Washington at Home, and the formation of historic districts in LeDroit Park, Anacostia, and Cleveland Park. "We are in a burgeoning business, a growth industry—and it is an industry. . . . It takes money." Research projects include the following: • The Center for Washington-Area Studies has released a booklet by Kathryn Schneider Smith entitled "Port Town to Urban Neighborhood: the Georgetown Waterfront." Evelyn described the booklet as "hard, gutsy academic work" that goes beyond the obvious written resources in the libraries to collect oral histories, photographs, and other visual materials from people in the community. " I think the research approach that is used here is �Historic Georgetown, Day One: Opening Remarks and Keynote Address very similar to the kind of approach you will find yourself using in Georgetown." • The Montgomery County Historical Consortium, a group of about seven history organizations, is creating a database of all their combined holdings of objects. This database will be computerized and made available in libraries and other public facilities. • In Alexandria an effort is under way to resurvey the city's boundary stones, a cooperative project by the American Congress on Surveying and Mapping, the National Society of Professional Surveyors, the American Association for Geodetic Surveying, the Surveyors Historical Society, the Maryland Society of Surveyors, the Potomac chapter of the Maryland Society of Surveyors, and others. "They have lined up every conceivable type of relevant business and professional organization, and I think those coalitions of interests are important to remember." • A project run by the Historical Society of Washington, D . C , assists churches in protecting and organizing their records. The lesson here is that ownership is not an issue. The preservation and accessibility of historical records held by various organizations must be the concern of the community as a whole. The stakeholders in this local history and in the historical evidence under the guardianship of various entities are all the people who live in Georgetown and in the city of Washington, the members of organizations—churches, societies, social clubs, and other groups—who have records of and an interest in Georgetown history. "One of your inventory projects needs to be to find these people, find these organizations, and meet with them. . . . There need to be bridges built between the academic community and the concerned officials of organizations and the buffs and people who have specialized collections or simply have a family interest, and I think one of the tricks of building a kind of broad public support for the District's history is going to be to find ways to bring those people together, to find forums for the exchange of information." This brought Evelyn to the concept of the ecomuseum, developed in France in the 1960s and now popular in Canada, whereby the community itself becomes a museum. The idea is to involve local people in the research, planning, and operation of the community's historical resources. "Every physical aspect of the community, everything that has been built, is part of this community museum of the whole. Outdoor museums have this quality," Evelyn observed, and he urged his audience to consider all of Georgetown as an outdoor museum. In closing, Evelyn briefly reviewed several key issues that must be confronted in developing a master plan for the future of Historic Georgetown: • Historical evidence must be conceived of broadly as encompassing everything from the community landscape and properties to artifacts, organizational records, photographs, scrapbooks, and personal papers. "You have various types of evidence in your community that can be extrapolated to help stimulate the imagination." • Collecting strategy. Much of the information that would be useful to interpreting Georgetown is held in various repositories around the city and throughout the metropolitan area, including Maryland and Virginia, and all of 6 �Historic Georgetown, Day One: Opening Remarks and Keynote Address • • • • • this information should be consulted and catalogued. "Once you find out what already exists, you must think of what needs to be added to that corpus so that you can have a continuing research base." Interpretation. "We are talking here about people, not things . . . people who were shaped and influenced by the land, and the people who shaped that land, the buildings and the artifacts." Important clues to these personal shapings and influences are contained in photographs, diaries, and oral histories, all of which must be consulted in arriving at interpretations of historical resources. Federal versus local issues. What did Georgetown extract from the federal government? There were rivalries between Georgetown and the capital city of Washington, but there were also mutual support systems. The waterfront offers many opportunities for cross-referencing with Anacostia, the Navy Yard area, and Alexandria. What was the life along the waterfront, and who participated in it? Presentation. A broad and imaginative range of presentation approaches must be found to capture the interest of people who otherwise would not be aware of the history of Georgetown. " I think you are going to be looking at a central orientation area, but you also ought to be looking at places throughout the community where the interpretive message can be brought out to the public." Video databases made accessible at key points around the city could be extremely useful and highly cost-effective in this regard. "Once the database is established, the cost of the equipment and the transmitting of material is not that big a deal." Process. Here the key word is inclusiveness. An exemplary model in this regard is the Greater Washington Cultural Alliance, which embraces not only arts organizations but also community leaders, businesses, and labor and management interests—"the whole works throughout the metropolitan area. Your scope may be narrower because you are dealing primarily with Georgetown, but you are also dealing with the city of Washington, and you need to deal with everybody who has a stake." Evelyn strongly recommended keeping abreast of developments by organizations throughout the metropolitan area from which Georgetown can learn. "We need to find ways of linking up progress that is being made by these different organizations interpreting local history." Evelyn is encouraged by the great vitality he observes in preservation efforts throughout the region. "There is a growing concern for neighborhood history and proven success in developing collaborative projects. These signs augur well for this project to develop a strategic plan to preserve and interpret Georgetown's historic district." The panels about to convene would begin a process that eventually would identify the relevant issues, key participants, and major resources of the community. The Georgetown effort could become a model for other historic districts and community projects in the District of Columbia, throughout the metropolitan area, and around the country. I f so, it must be broad in its inclusion of community, institutional, and academic participants, challenging in the selection of issues for research and interpretation, and bold in its creation of alliances and projects to preserve, interpret, and share Georgetown's unique past as a community, and as a participant in the shaping of the nation's capital city. 7 �PANEL I: INVENTORYING GEORGETOWN'S HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES The panel explored a planning process for carrying out the inventory—the scope and uses of the inventory and the resources required. Introduction: Betty Jane Johnson Gerber, President, Historic Georgetown Foundation Panelists: John Blackburn (Panel Chairperson), Architect, Smith, Blackburn and Stauffer Janice Artemal, Urban Archaeologist, Engineering Science, Inc. Tanya Beauchamp, D.C. Historic Preservation Office Carter Bowman, Trustee, Mount Zion United Methodist Church Robert McNulty, Partners for Livable Places Philip Ogilvie, D.C. Department of Records; Author Joseph Passonneau, Architect and Engineer, Urban Geographer SUMMARY OF REMARKS BY B E T T Y JANE JOHNSON GERBER In her introduction to the first panel, Betty Jane Johnson Gerber noted that the Historic Georgetown Foundation has submitted an application to the Design Arts Program of the National Endowment for the Arts for funding the inventory of Georgetown's historic and cultural resources. In the Endowment proposal, Gerber called the project "The Inventory for an Ecomuseum," in reference to a concept that began in France, has been adopted in Canada, and is beginning to take hold in the United States. She defined ecomuseum as "a region in which everything that makes it unique forms the collection—the flora, fauna, topographical features, weather, buildings . . . the past, the present, and the future heritage of the area." Gerber then introduced and turned the session over to the panel chairperson, John Blackburn. A partner in the distinguished Georgetown architectural firm of Smith, Blackburn and Stauffer, Blackburn is also chairman of the Business and Professional Association of Georgetown's Committee on Streetscape. Having worked in Georgetown for eighteen years, Blackburn is particularly interested in working with existing buildings. SUMMARY OF REMARKS BY JOHN BLACKBURN As moderator, John Blackburn introduced his colleagues on the panel, in the order in which they would speak: 8 �Historic Georgetown, Day One: Inventorying Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources • • • • • • Robert McNulty, president and founder of Partners for Livable Places, was assistant director of the Arts and Architecture Program at the National Endowment for the Arts and, prior to that, director of the Columbia University School of Architecture's Historic Preservation Program. Janice Artemal, an urban archaeologist with Engineering Science, Inc., in Washington, has participated in numerous historic and archaeological studies in Washington, including projects focusing on the Foxhall House, the ForrestMarbury House, and the Georgetown waterfront. Tanya Beauchamp is an architectural historian with the D.C. Department of Historic Preservation, where she has been since 1973. Blackburn, who has known Beauchamp for several years, noted that any architect working in Washington with existing buildings is going to encounter her. "We have worked together, I have worked against her, and she always wins." Carter Bowman, a trustee and chairman of the Mount Zion United Methodist Church, the oldest African-American congregation in the District, currently is working to restore the Mount Zion Cemetery. Blackburn characterized Bowman as a wonderful resource for Historic Georgetown: "When this inventory happens, when they begin that oral history, I am sure you will be the first man on the list." Philip Ogilvie, as the Public Records Administrator of the District of Columbia, is responsible for maintaining the District's archives and managing historical records throughout the government. He is author of an article on manufacturing in Georgetown, "Waterpower in the District of Columbia," and currently is investigating and documenting the late-eighteenth- and nineteenth-century history of the District. In addition, he teaches local history at Georgetown University. Joseph Passonneau, an architect, engineer, and urban geographer, and past dean of the School of Architecture at Washington University, is an acknowledged expert on architectural styles in Georgetown. In 1966, he authored the chapter "Planning: Inventory for the Metropolis" in the book Planning for a Nation of Cities, and he is coauthor of Urban Atlas: Twenty American Cities. SUMMARY OF REMARKS BY ROBERT McNULTY Expanding on Gerber's introduction to the ecomuseum concept, Robert McNulty added that "if you inventory the historic and cultural resources here, you have to be concerned about the whole of Georgetown's role in the Greater Washington, D . C , area. . . . It is my precept in working in a number of communities that historic districts . . . can easily become frozen—in perception, in time, isolated from the mainstream—and I would urge you to reposition Georgetown as a social and cultural and intellectual heart of the nation's capital." McNulty encouraged those who will be responsible for inventorying Historic Georgetown's resources to view their community as a dynamic, living historic district. He warned that to freeze a historic district, either as a "commercial caricature" of itself or as a quaint and exclusively upscale residential area inaccessible to the young, to families, and to people from the full range of 9 �Historic Georgetown, Day One: Inventorying Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources economic strata, is to consign it to the dustbin of unfulfilled contemporary needs. His remarks focused on several key issues, some of which he illustrated with examples of what other historic districts are doing: • • • • • Transportation policies must be carefully planned so that Georgetown does not become isolated from the rest of the city, creating a worse traffic situation than that which residents complain of now. Diversity. McNulty offered as a model of socioeconomic diversity Portland, Oregon, whose mayor supports subsidies that encourage middle-income, unmarried citizens to rent apartments in the center of downtown. Essential to the Portland mayor's definition of urban livability is the presence of a diverse mixture of residents in the heart of the city, not just the very rich and the very poor. Social needs. Last year Charleston, South Carolina—home of the finest collection of eighteenth- and nineteenth-century architecture in America—won a national design award for creating a homeless shelter in the heart of its historic district. Two years ago the city won another design award for a municipal parking structure. And prior to that, Charleston was recognized for establishing scattered-site, low-income housing in the historic area. Historic Georgetown, in developing its standards of design excellence, should embrace the consideration of social needs. Retail mix. Georgetown has a tradition of convenience stores on every corner, catering to neighborhood residents. But eventually most of them will go out of business because the grandfather clause that has protected them through years of gentrification is no longer seen as desirable, and it is being phased out as each building is sold. "It will be interesting when people who live in Georgetown can only buy tennis shoes, as opposed to milk. Will it continue to be a living community with a sense of neighborhoodness?" The historic district as entertainment center, as home to legalized gambling. The Old Stockholm section of Sweden's capital city has evolved into an entertainment center full of bars, dance clubs, and trendy restaurants, where street noise continues until four in the morning and high levels of crime are the rule. In the United States, many historic districts, particularly in less affluent jurisdictions, are turning to gambling to make themselves economically viable. "These are serious issues," McNulty warned. "Historic districts are either in danger of being isolated, or they are in danger of economic overuse or underuse." In closing, McNulty issued the following challenges: • The inventory of Georgetown's historic and cultural resources must include an active search for the threads that will weave everyone's history into the story of the community. • Look for ways of stimulating and supporting diversity in housing and commerce. • Develop standards of architectural excellence that not only preserve the existing buildings but encourage new construction and renovations that help 10 �Historic Georgetown, Day One: Inventorying Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources meet the established needs of Georgetown residents, including basic social services. • Devise and promote transportation policies that unite Georgetown with the rest of the city. • Take care that Georgetown's expanding role as a regional entertainment center is not allowed to continue without thought; otherwise, most likely this will "swamp any further role it can play as the true heart of the nation's capital." SUMMARY OF REMARKS B Y JANICE ARTEMAL "We are all aware that an archaeologist looks at things underground," Janice Artemal began. "But archaeologists also look at things above ground, because our mandate is to look at the total culture, to try to understand the life ways of the people. I think that is the approach that we are all looking for in an inventory of Georgetown's resources." Artemal described in some detail three exemplary studies in which she has been involved: • The Foxhall House. At the urging of some of the proprietors of the new city of Washington, Henry Foxhall, an industrialist, came to Georgetown in the late eighteenth century and established the Foxhall Foundry. Foxhall was also a successful merchant active in the maritime trade with England, and he built a house on 34th Street from which he could conveniently oversee his business interests, both at the foundry and on the waterfront, and continue his associations with a number of Georgetown's most notable early residents. When Artemal and her colleagues began to explore the property, reduced by that time to its foundations, the most exciting find was a cistern chockfull of extraordinary artifacts deposited there between 1815 and 1820, the period of the building of the Chesapeake and Ohio (C&O) Canal. After Mr. Foxhall's death, in 1816, crews of blacks, Irishmen, and other immigrants began arriving to build the canal, and the scene was "just not very attractive to this upper-class person," Foxhall's widow, who, like many other longtime residents, was disturbed by the noise and dirt of industrial construction. In her rush to relocate to her country home, Mrs. Foxhall tossed into the cistern, on top of what already had accumulated over the years, an unusual number of goods, including many examples of the "finer things" that people usually do not discard. The comprehensive picture of the life of the period that these artifacts provide is invaluable. "But we bring it to today through an article that appeared in the Washington Post, and also the Georgetown paper, on the work that we were doing at the Foxhall House at the time." Artemal received a phone call from a young woman who happened to be in town, saw the article, and was very excited because, as a descendent of the Foxhalls, she had in her possession the ledgers of Henry Foxhall's early-nineteenth-century enterprises, along with dishes and other family heirlooms. "We brought a link together—1990 to 1815—because indeed in her grandmother's home in Alexandria we have the very same objects that we found in the cistern, as 11 �Historic Georgetown, Day One: Inventorying Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources well as the account book that demonstrated when and where Mr. Foxhall bought them." • Buildings at the corner of 9th and E Streets, in Washington. Before these buildings were torn down, Artemal and her colleagues, as "above-ground" archaeologists, explored the first and second floors. Over more than a century, they had been put to a number of commercial uses, most recently as retail stores, bars, and tourist shops. In addition, the old Gaiety Theater yielded some movies and other memorabilia. Most important, searches of the upper floors of the buildings yielded photographs of the people who had lived there in the 1860s and 1870s, above the long-forgotten businesses. In fact, the archaeological team was able to put together a living historical image of a Georgetown street corner starting in 1797—when the building on the property was the first post office of Washington, D.C—and extending through 1989, by which time the street and the activities of the area had changed dramatically. "This is something that brings relevance and understanding to today's life and today's people, through an understanding of our history." • Artemal currently is involved in an archaeological study of the Dover Gaslight Company, in Delaware, which dates back to 1859. "As we began looking, because the buildings are all torn down, we wondered, What can archaeology bring to this?" They began to consider the question, Why Dover, Delaware? Why was that the location of the state's first industry, other than the mills in Wilmington? Answers include the extension of the railroad down to Dover, because of a change in farming, and the development of the canning industry and a number of other industrial concerns during the same period. What is beginning to emerge is a comprehensive picture of Dover as an important mid-nineteenth-century industrial center. Thus, through the investigations of urban archaeologists, a historical misperception—that the gaslight company was established in Dover primarily to supply lighting for the capitol building—is being corrected. SUMMARY OF REMARKS BY TANYA BEAUCHAMP "There is nothing closer to my heart than achieving an actual inventory of the Georgetown Historic District," stated Tanya Beauchamp. Although it was one of the first historic districts in the nation to achieve official recognition, Georgetown today is a historic district without a survey. There is no way to get at the hard facts to back up your opinions—your professional opinions—when there is a fight at hand. And there is no excuse for this." The D.C. Historic Preservation Office, created as part of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, has been involved with inventorying the resources of the District of Columbia since that time. And beginning in the early eighties, the office has been conducting comprehensive surveys throughout the area, with the aid of funds from the Historic Preservation Fund of the National Park Service. "We have about 10,000 sites in our database now, and none of those are from Georgetown." Beauchamp detailed the essential components of the kind of comprehensive survey that her office hopes Georgetown will conduct: 12 �Historic Georgetown. Day One: Inventorying Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources • • • • • • The basic survey form to be completed for every single property in the historic district—about 4,000 in Georgetown—can be filled out by volunteers, many of whom have professional expertise and training. Typically what we do is identify a community group who would be the lead in conducting the survey, and the community group would hire a consultant to put together the survey, to train volunteers, to get the survey forms done, to organize all of that information, to put it on the database, to bring together maps, historic maps, historic photographs." Oral history is an essential part of every comprehensive survey—"oral history not just in the sense that you go out and get somebody's recollections, but you try to back up the facts that are being brought in on the survey from the archives, try to coordinate and link the archival information with the on-site information so that you can come to some true picture." By establishing the historic context of a property, criteria can be developed for evaluating properties whose owners wish to make alterations. "Most Georgetown homeowners have a sense of history. They love their houses, but they do not want to do anything arbitrarily. They need to understand what they are being asked to do. It has to make sense." While the formal survey yields factual material, "also we would love to see somebody do a real historic district nomination of the Georgetown National Historic Site for the National Register of Historic Places, one which included all the things that are here—modest houses as well as great houses—that included the industrial waterfront, the open space, which is such an important part, and the very rich black history, which is among the most important black history in the country." Beauchamp's office would like to see as much community involvement as possible. There are many community groups in Georgetown that want to be fully involved, but we need to have some lead group that would organize and pull things together." Designation of individual properties. The Historic Preservation Review Board, which keeps the inventory and holds designation hearings, has made it a policy not to list individual structures within a historic district unless they merit recognition for some reason having nothing to do with the historic district nomination. A few years ago, the Georgetown Incinerator was refused designation because the Review Board felt it was covered by the nomination. "We were not able to designate it separately because it was part of the Georgetown Historic District." The only way to acquire the kind of information necessary to achieve individual designation is through a comprehensive survey. SUMMARY OF REMARKS B Y CARTER BOWMAN As Carter Bowman walks the commercial streets of today's Georgetown, he often sees, in place of the fancy restaurants and bars and boutiques, what was there before—small businesses, many family-owned, providing everyday services that, these days, are hard to find in the area. For example, at one time, near the hotel where the present meetings were taking place was one of the finest tailors that ever lived in Georgetown. Later he moved his business across the street, 13 �Historic Georgetown, Day One: Inventorying Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources the present location of a savings and loan association. "It is ironic that the person who started a rack store up above him made billions, and Si, who could not get enough money from one of our famous banks in Washington to expand, finally went out of business." Bowman read from an abstract written by historian Patricia Wilson, who did her thesis on the Community House of Mount Zion United Methodist Church, where Bowman is a trustee: In order to convey the true nature of American social experience, ideally historic preservation in this country should be representative and conscious of the contributions of the various people who have participated in this country's development. To date the American preservation movement has failed to fulfill its obligation to provide an accurate and complete account of the contribution of nonwhites to this country's architectural tradition. The presence and impact of blacks or minority groups on the country's historic preservation has been seriously neglected, and a misleading, one-sided interpretation of the American experience has been perpetuated. In Georgetown, Bowman observed, preservation efforts have tended to promote an image of urbanized white Southern gentility. This image leaves out an essential element of Southern culture: black culture. Only through the documentation and preservation of the architectural relics of Georgetown's historic black community will an accurate and complete account of local history be achieved. Bowman credited Georgetown University for its efforts to correct this situation, in the document Black Georgetown Remembered and in an upcoming book on black Georgetown. When Mount Zion's old school building, a small English cottage, was restored, valuable historic photographs were found inside. These have been given to Georgetown University for safekeeping in the school's library. " I am glad you are including the Afro-American community in your formulation of plans for Georgetown," stated Bowman, noting that at one time half the population of the community was black. Yet in 1892 the community had no schools for blacks, and so two were established that yean Phillips, now an international school, and Wormley. In closing, Bowman recalled asking a young black man to stop by Mount Zion to bid on the job of painting the church. Bowman set the appointment for ten in the morning, but when he arrived he discovered that the young man had been waiting since nine. Certain he had misunderstood the address, he had come an hour early so he would have time to find the building. "In his mind there was no way a church belonging to blacks was going to be at 1334 29th Street. He had been in Washington since 194S, and he had never seen Mount Zion Church. This always disturbs me. People—blacks as well as whites—simply do not know. We have to let our story be told." 14 �Historic Georgetown, Day One: Inventorying Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources SUMMARY OF REMARKS B Y P H I L I P O G I L V I E Philip Ogilvie focused on another forgotten—and, by some, consciously avoided—aspect of the community's heritage, titling his remarks "Georgetown as an Industrial City." He said, "We equate industry with dirt, and certainly that ultimately became true. But as long as industry was water-powered, it was clean and relatively inexpensive." Ogilvie quoted Henry Canby's book on the Brandywine River: "The steam industry of the later nineteenth century smeared every natural beauty it touched with smoke, dirt, and waste. This was not true of water power. The capture of the swift currents of the Brandywine for work and profit was more like a seduction than a rape." The industrial legacy of Georgetown and the surrounding region includes examples of water mills employing the most ancient of waterpower technologies, developed in the first century B.C., to the major new developments of the nineteenth-century Industrial Revolution. The oldest dated record of a mill in the future District of Columbia is a petition by Zachariah White to Governor Sharpe of Maryland in the mid-eighteenth century. White indicated that he had "discovered a Convenient Place in the county of Frederick on the Falls of Rock Creek on a tract of Land called Hill Seat to build a Grist Mill upon, and that the same Mill when Completed will be of great Utility and Ease to the neighborhood thereabouts." The petition was granted on October 22, 1759. The last major District of Columbia water mill construction of which Ogilvie has found a record is the rebuilding of the Wilkins-Rogers mill on the Georgetown waterfront after a disastrous fire in 1922. Altogether, his researches so far have yielded evidence of functional water-powered mills in the Maryland portion of the District of Columbia—in the period between 1759 and the present—representing twelve different functions: flour and gristmills, sawmills, textile mills, foundries, paper mills, a bone mill, a cannon-boring mill, a fertilizer factory, a plaster mill, a powder mill, a snuff mill, and a stone-cutting mill. "Nearly all of this industrial activity centered on Georgetown, either within the city limits or in the adjacent Washington County. One of the major lessons I have learned while conducting this preliminary survey is how little work has been done in the field of local industrial history and how much remains to be done." The builders of the C&O Canal saw the sale of waterpower as an obvious source of additional income from the time of the canal's opening in 1828, but amending the canal's charter to make this possible required the approval of Maryland, Virginia, and the U.S. Congress, resulting in a sometimes bitter ten-year struggle. Virginia, which had nothing to lose, agreed in 1829, but Maryland was a different story. Together, the powerful Baltimore milling interests and the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad were able to delay approval until 1833, at which point they sold the concession dearly. Finally, in 1837 Congress amended the charter, and Georgetown had a major source of waterpower. The next fifty years marked the flowering of industrial Georgetown, until June of 1889, when the same flood that wiped out Johnstown, Pennsylvania, 15 �Historic Georgetown, Day One: Inventorying Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources destroyed the key stretch of the C&O canal running from Little Falls to Rock Creek. Two days after the flood, the Washington Star carried an editorial that served as the epitaph of both the canal and Georgetown industry: The injury to the capital by the destruction of the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal is probably greater and threatens to be more lasting than that from the direct effect of the flood upon shipping, wharves, and property along the riverfront and in the submerged district, or that which has been inflicted upon the Potomac Flats improvements! This historic canal, the first of its kind in the country, which Washington planned and which received its starting stroke of the spade from John Quincy Adams, President, has apparently run its course. . . . The competing railroad . . . has no reason to assist in continuing the existence of the waterway. Unless some of the designated parties in interest shall interfere, the canal is dead. To the best of Ogilvie's knowledge there is no organized effort to save the stillextant Bomford Building structure, located on the north side of Water Street just east of the footing of Aqueduct Bridge. It housed a small electricity-generating, water-powered turbine that, until 1975, was part of what had been the largest milling complex in the District of Columbia. This is the last surviving example of the industrial use of the C&O Canal, and it was probably the only hydroelectric plant ever located in the District. One of the factors that persuaded the mill's owners to leave Georgetown was the unreliability of the water supply after the United States Park Service took over the operation of the canal. Ultimately, the Park Service decided to halt the flow of water and to maintain the canal as a "pond." This represents "the type of historical redevelopment I hope you will avoid," Ogilvie stressed. "The canal was an integral part of an industrial complex, not a pleasant ditch for pleasure boating. The current recreational use may be an excellent one, but it does not lead to a better understanding of Historic Georgetown." SUMMARY OF REMARKS BY JOSEPH PASSONNEAU Architect and engineer Joseph Passonneau has been mapping L'Enfant's Washington for about twenty years. The goal is to chart the community at key points throughout its history, starting with the present and moving backward two centuries to 1970, 1940, 1900, 1860, 1820, and 1791. Changes in the City are mapped in three ways. First, maps of the central area, with building uses identified in color, show how uses of the land and buildings have changed over two centuries. Second, axonometric drawings of the monumental core, at very large scale, show when important, individual buildings were built, demolished, and preserved. Third, aerial perspectives of the region, looking north from the L'Enfant city, show how the city grew, reaching beyond K Street by the Civil War, reaching the L'Enfant boundaries about 100 years after L'Enfant, reaching the District boundaries by World War I I , and erupting into the region after the war. 16 �Historic Georgetown, Day One: Inventorying Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources A self-described "Sunday urban geographer," Passonneau ended the session with a brief "impressionistic" slide show demonstrating Georgetown's impressive array of architectural styles. Almost all of Georgetown's houses are variations on a tingle eighteenth-century theme, in both plan and elevation. That is the reason we find Georgetown so attractive—stylistic diversity, urban unity. The styles depicted in the slides included: • • • • • • • • Examples of Washington's traditional two-story brick townhouses, built early in the nineteenth century The only Greek revival house in Georgetown A late-federal-style house, with an altered twin next door, demonstrating how the federal style can be converted to early Victorian with a few simple changes Italianate and Second Empire double houses on Cooke's Row A three-story Queen Anne (Georgetown is, to a considerable extent, a "Queen Anne" town.) Twentieth-century row houses of the same style as the original Washington townhouses, but with the addition of porches A post-World War I I freestanding brick house that could be mistaken for an eighteenth-century, federal row house Aerial views of backyards in Georgetown, converted from their original use as the sites of privies, stables, and warehouses to private gardens, patios, pools, and garages. Finally, a 1973 photograph of a traffic jam on Wisconsin Avenue, following the slides of 200 years of residential architecture, illustrated two key points that Passonneau hoped to make in his presentation: 1) The basic eighteenth-century row-house plan still works in the late twentieth century. In fact, according to Passonneau, this remains "incomparably the most effective way to live in a dense city." Large private investments in gardens, in plumbing, heating, air conditioning, in modern kitchens, have transformed the nineteenth-century dwellings without changing their architectural character. 2) On the other hand, the eighteenth-century grid street pattern does not work today. "It was designed for pedestrians—two-legged and four-legged—and for carts. It would be a miracle if this street pattern worked for massive numbers of large, high-speed vehicles traveling at murderous speeds in all directions. That miracle has not come to pass." This is one of the miracles that Passonneau hopes the current efforts of the Historic Georgetown Foundation and the National Trust for Historic Preservation will bring about. The streets were, originally, forecourts for homes, providing access, storage for local vehicles, public open space. But modern traffic "savages" these ancient streets. This need not be. Simple, inexpensive changes in their management and design could return the streets to their original uses, without compromising the operation of the modern city. 77 �PANEL II: PRESERVING GEORGETOWN'S HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES The panel explored a strategy for the historic preservation of Georgetown that takes into consideration Department of the Interior standards, the needs and interests of residents and businesses, and the numerous tourists who visit Georgetown each year. Panelists: Frank Sanchis (Panel Chairperson), Vice President, Stewardship of Historic Properties, National Trust for Historic Preservation Jay Brodie, Executive Director, Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation Theresa Brown, Executive Director, LeDroit Park Preservation Society Robert Bush, Executive Director, Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Alferdteen Harrison, Professor of History, Mississippi State University, Jackson, Mississippi Patti Wilson, Executive Director, D.C. Preservation League SUMMARY OF REMARKS BY FRANK SANCHIS Not a Washingtonian himself, Frank Sanchis advised that if he was to bring anything of value to the job of moderator, it would be as a "preservationist outsider" unfamiliar with Georgetown, uncommitted to any particular plan, yet eager to learn about and respond to the evolving vision of the insiders for their community's future. The question for this session was: How do we go about structuring the preservation of Georgetown's historical and cultural resources? Sanchis noted that the panel was "marvelously constructed to answer that question from many different points of view." He then introduced the panelists individually. • Robert Bush, currently executive director of the Advisory Council for Historic Preservation, which advises the President of the United States, has also served as historic preservation officer for the state of Wyoming. Prior to that, he worked in New Orleans; he has published a number of books on the history of that city and of Louisiana. • Jay Brodie is involved in preservation on a much more localized level. As executive director of the Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation (PADC), he is responsible for overseeing development on the north side of Pennsylvania Avenue from the White House to the Capitol, and on the south side in the area known as the Federal Triangle. 18 �Historic Georgetown, Day One: Preserving Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources • Patti Wilson is executive director of the D.C. Preservation League, a citywide preservation advocacy group. Previously, Patti was at the National Trust, under whose auspices, as a senior program associate with the Urban Program of the National Main Street Center, she worked at various demonstration sites around the country. • The LeDroit Park Preservation Society, of which Theresa Brown is executive director, is comparable to the Historic Georgetown Foundation in that it promotes preservation efforts in a specific area within the city. Brown is also heavily involved with the Dorothea DeSchweinitz Fund, an important source of support for Georgetown projects. • Both Brown and Alferdteen Harrison are advisers to the National Trust for Historic Preservation, Harrison representing her home state of Mississippi, where she is a professor of history and director of the Margaret Walker Alexander Research Center at Jackson State University. She is currently on leave to the National Endowment for the Humanities. Providing some background on his own career, Sanchis noted that prior to joining the National Trust, he was director of the Landmarks Preservation Commission in New York City, a large municipal regulatory agency. New York has had a landmarks law since 1965, and there are now forty-eight citydesignated historic districts containing thousands of buildings. There also is a very active Historic Districts Council, an alliance of the sort that many people recommend for the historic districts in Washington. SUMMARY OF REMARKS B Y ROBERT BUSH The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation deals not only with the preservation officers of the fifty states but also with seven overseas territories and the Federated Republic of Micronesia, by treaty. In addition, the council's founding legislation, along with amendments thereto and the council's own regulations, provide for and explicitly encourage working with local communities on preservation issues. In fact, Robert Bush reported, at its February meeting the council voted to focus its efforts this next year on federal property management at the local level. An independent federal agency, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation was created twenty-five years ago through the National Historic Preservation Act. Among its nineteen members are the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of the Interior, the architect of the capital, the president of the National Trust, and the president of the National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers. The balance of the council representation—the majority of its members—serves by Presidential appointment. These include federal agency heads, Citizen Expert Members (individuals educated and experienced in preservation), and four members appointed from the citizenry at large. The council, working with the Secretary of the Interior, exists to carry out the provisions of the National Historic Preservation Act, to preserve and protect national historic landmarks. At the local level, one of the problems the council faces is that while there is a great deal of interest, enthusiasm, and willingness 19 �Historic Georgetown, Day One: Preserving Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources to commit of resources, there also is a consistent lack of any formal structure within local government through which lines of communication could be maintained. Bush approaches his position on two levels: the philosophical-intellectual ("preservation as an ethic") and the programmatic ("how the council functions to carry out its responsibilities under the law and the policy decisions of the governing board"). Both levels, he noted, are relevant to the concerns of Historic Georgetown. "One of the things that I am often asked, usually by people who are not that much involved on the positive side of preservation, is, How much preservation is enough?" A useful retort might be, How much clean air is enough? Or, How much green space is enough? How much conservation is enough? But still, eventually the problems of demolition must be faced. Not everything can be saved. What will survive? What must be sacrificed in the greater public interest? How can a project be modified to minimize the damage? Here the council is dealing not with the philosophical-intellectual but, rather, with the programmatic, the pragmatic. "We are dealing with the particulars of an individual project that is going to have an impact on the community and, within that community, its historical resources. How well does our process actually work?" Fortunately, with a quarter of a century of experience behind it, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation has a great deal of institutional expertise in working with other federal agencies, the states, and local governments. As a result, the council has had considerable success in meeting a variety of preservation challenges as they occur. The National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers estimates that during any given calendar year well in excess of 100,000 projects involving preservation issues are being handled at the state level. Of that 100,000-plus cases, the Advisory council will be involved in 3,000 to 3,500. Of that number last year, the council, through its consultation process, was successful in all but eight mitigations. The balance of Bush's remarks provided an Advisory Council perspective on Historic Georgetown and the preservation planning process, and suggested how the council might become involved: • The current trend in the administration is remove the federal government from some of the areas in which it has been dominant, and to return these responsibilities to the states and local communities, where, in the case of preservation, they actually belong. To what extent federal support will be made available to encourage local efforts has yet to be determined. "Having worked in the local communities myself before coming to the federal government, I consider being here with you today a welcome opportunity to get back into the trenches." • Apart from funding, the council can assist Georgetown by working on its behalf with the state preservation office, in this case the D.C. Historic Preservation Office. 20 �Historic Georgetown, Day One: Preserving Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources • • • ' • In the District and in the adjoining areas of Virginia and Maryland, the Council weighs the potential local impact of actions initiated beyond the District boundaries. A major recent example is the Outer Beltway, which will directly affect the city of Washington and its individual historic districts. The Council encourages and contributes to historic preservation education, through workshops and through the dissemination of comprehensive, up-todate information on preservation efforts around the country, projects involving government entities, and useful laws. Limited planning services are available from the council, particularly in regard to clarifying and helping to coordinate Historic Georgetown's work with the myriad of community, state, and federal agencies involved in the planning process. "As a small agency with a budget of only $2.5 million—petty cash for some federal agencies—what we can do best is serve as a broker." The biggest single problem the council faces is constantly being brought into the planning process too late to be effective. "With so many projects, if we had simply been advised that something was going on, we could have advised people how to proceed effectively." The council's Section 106 process (part of the National Historic Preservation Act) is extremely flexible, but it is essential that parties seeking the council's help know what they are planning for, who the players are going to be in the planning process, what the ultimate objectives are, and how much flexibility there is in the overall planning structure. "And we have to know these things in time to be of assistance." SUMMARY OF REMARKS BY J A Y BRODIE Jay Brodie commented that there is only one major historic district in America that has been frozen in time with, arguably, some degree of success: Colonial Williamsburg. But nobody lives there. Visitors partake of a certain kind of experience that represents a "snapshot in time." That is not Georgetown, however. "It never will be and it never has been. Any attempt to freeze it is doomed to failure." Here, the relevant questions are: What aspects of life in Georgetown are fine as they are and should be retained? What aspects are not so fine, and how might they be improved? More specifically, Brodie observed that there is more than one Georgetown. There are several: • Residential Georgetown probably has been the most successful at preserving itself. a Commercial Georgetown, with its largely forgotten heritage, has, since the 1960s, been gradually transformed into "the strip." Why did this happen? How did this important part of Historic Georgetown slip through the cracks of the preservation agencies and laws? • The waterfront, "a whole other section of life," at one time perhaps could have been preserved with grass and trees and cows grazing, as in the old paintings, and with ships hauling off tobacco. But that era ended a long time ago. 21 �Historic Georgetown, Day One: Preserving Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources • Industrial Georgetown, also on the waterfront, may be interesting in retrospect, "but it was not terribly lovable, and it is not exactly on the scale of the residential or the commercial areas." Perhaps each of those Georgetowns needs a different analysis and a different prescription, Brodie advised. An important challenge might be to determine how the four interact, and how they might be made to interact more fluidly. What kind of linkages could be created between them? "That is life on a more complex level than simply saying, 'It's all great and let's figure out how to save it.' There is a strategy here." Although conceding that the concept of the master plan is not entirely irrelevant, Brodie feels that what is needed for Historic Georgetown is a strategy plan. This would consist of two key components, which may at first seem to contradict each other but which Brodie insists do not: 1) Vision. To fight the good fight, you must have a vision that people can rally around. Otherwise, all you can do is react to proposals from others. "It is better to have proposals of your own that other people respond to, proposals informed by a vision that projects into the future." 2) Incremental achievements are equally important. They keep people going as they develop and pursue their grand vision over the long haul. People have to see life improving now. This is particularly important to elected officials. It is also good for all the people who live here and the people who visit—"to see change not just as a planner's dream for your grandchildren but as something that you can realize step by step, through positive incrementalism." Public development, private development, and "that interesting vehicle that PADC represents, the public-private partnership"—all are important to the vision, the plan, and the day-to-day accomplishments. "It has to do with money, obviously, and resources in terms of energy and staff, and it has to do with shared vision by the public agencies, private developers, and the community. It is a triangular partnership, or should be." Noting that the local development market is in a lull right now, Brodie urged the session participants to act as soon as possible. "Take advantage of the present slowdown to accomplish the very best planning you can, so that when the next cycle of development starts knocking at your door, you will be ready with, 'These are our guidelines, the things that make our community what it is, and they are nonnegotiable,' and, 'Here is a list of things that are negotiable.'" Developers do not really like to fight with communities. The better ones want to know what the rules are. If you can make the rules clear, on a micro scale and a macro scale, then you are helping yourselves and the developers who show up on your doorstep. " I think the time is right to do that. Carpe diem—seize the day, and make a better Georgetown." 22 �Historic Georgetown. Day One: Preserving Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources SUMMARY OF REMARKS B Y PATTI WILSON The D.C. Preservation League has the unusual role of being not only the citywide private-sector organization representing preservation, it also is considered statewide. "D.C. isn't even a state, but the feds invite us to national conferences for statewide preservation organizations." How does everything work together? Who talks to whom and how does it all fit? "We have a very good preservation law here, D.C. Law 2-144, which is administered by the Historic Preservation Division, the Historic Preservation Review Board." Monthly, the Board reviews the projects that affect historic properties, and the D.C. Preservation League, along with a number of neighborhood and civic organizations, appears to state its views. As the citywide preservation organization, the league is probably the only one of these organizations that has a staff, "and because we do have a staff we consider ourselves the helpmates to the ANCs (Advisory Neighborhood Commissions], the civic organizations, and those groups that depend upon volunteer work. So that is how we fit in. Hopefully, we can all work together to ensure that our city's resources are preserved." Wilson devoted the balance of her remarks to a discussion of an important and growing trend: the linkage between preservation and the kind of planning that Historic Georgetown is undertaking with its planning forum process. Twenty years ago, when the D.C. Preservation League began, urban renewal was all the rage, and architects, city planners, and government officials were advocating the wholesale demolition of Washington's downtown. Preservationists at that time were considered "fringe folks." Then the Preservation League started encouraging the incorporation of a preservation approach into the city planning process. "In many ways that was the birth of a new era of historic preservation in Washington, D . C , because we linked preservation and planning. That is the trend of the future, and it will strengthen your effectiveness." What is achieved by this linkage is the ability to preserve individual structures, the character of a historic district as a whole, and the definitive details that make a community unique. "The zoning laws are not enough. Everyday now developers are using them to circumvent preservation laws. That means that you, in order to effectively launch a fight against these activities, must incorporate that same language—the language of planning and zoning." In many ways this is already happening. The local ANC has been vigilant in warding off projects that would call for inappropriate variances, and Wilson lauded the Georgetown group as "one of the mightiest we have around." She sees Georgetown as a microcosm for planning efforts throughout the city. "You are talking about preserving and managing your commercial district, and that is what is going on in Dupont Circle. You are talking about ensuring that development along the waterfront is appropriate and compatible. Guess what: Anacostia is talking about the same thing. You are making strides in interpreting the historic contributions of your black community. We are doing 23 �Historic Georgetown, Day One: Preserving Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources that in Shaw as we initiate a historic resource study there. Everything that is happening throughout the city has happened, or will happen, in Georgetown." Finally, Wilson urged the participants to hold up what they do as a lesson for other communities. Too often people stumble over themselves and make the same mistakes that somebody else has learned through hard experience to avoid. Historic Georgetown must share what it learns with the other historic districts in the city and with preservationists around the country. SUMMARY OF REMARKS B Y THERESA BROWN Theresa Brown spoke on two subjects: the Dorothea DeSchweinitz Fund and the need for preservation groups to form alliances. Dorothea DeSchweinitz Fund Dorothea DeSchweinitz was "a wonderful Georgetown lady" who bequeathed her valuable local properties to the National Trust. The funds acquired from the sale of these properties are administered by the Trust, according to DeSchweinitz's stipulation that they be spent only in the District of Columbia. "We in the District are very pleased because, of all the states with advisers, only about three of us have an endowment." Brown has been on the board of the DeSchweinitz Fund since the endowment was first received—"and it has worked wonders in bringing about community participation in preservation that otherwise would not necessarily have happened." She encouraged any organization with a good proposal for a preservation project to apply for this money. To the detriment of some small groups, the money has to be matched, unlike HUD money and many other federal funds, which has kept the fund from dispersing its support over a wider area. There are imaginative ways to achieve the necessary match, including services in kind, but there is no staff to walk people through the process. "We are trying to expose some of the less sophisticated neighborhoods to preservation, to bring before them the fact that they need to survey their neighborhoods and get them on the register before most of them are gone." Alliances k "As you undertake this project," Brown continued, I would strongly suggest that you get to know the other groups who are also doing preservation. Unfortunately so far it has always been, 'There's Georgetown, and then there's the rest of us.' I happen to be in the neighborhood of 'the rest of us.'" Brown lives in LeDroit Park, which has been on the National Register since 1974. She encouraged Historic Georgetown to work jointly with the other historic districts in Washington, including Cleveland Park, Dupont Circle, and LeDroit Park. All are about the same things, she stressed: the quality of life in the neighborhoods and the preservation of historic resources. "We do not need layer upon layer of 24 �Historic Georgetown, Day One: Preserving Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources organizations all duplicating what the others are doing; we need cooperative, mutually beneficial alliances." LeDroit Park is a less affluent neighborhood than Georgetown, and there have been many times when LeDroit's advocates were in serious need of help. Other neighborhoods have terrific resources, but they have either been unwilling or unable to share. "When a community needs help from lawyers, there should be somewhere to go. We have been unable to do that. I had to go and be the lawyer, begging and pleading, 'Poor little old me, here I am again.' I got the response I needed, but I had to appeal to people's sympathy. This should not be." SUMMARY OF REMARKS BY ALFERDTEEN HARRISON On leave from her university professorship, Alferdteen Harrison is currently with the National Endowment for the Humanities, the Office of Outreach, which works with inner-city groups all over the country, with historically black colleges and universities, and with various minority groups that have been underserved by the Humanities Endowment—"and most community historical organizations have been underserved by our agency, according to statistics." Of particular relevance to Historic Georgetown would be the Division of Public Programs, which supports humanities projects in museums and historic sites. Harrison became interested in historic preservation because she wanted to interpret African-American culture. In Mississippi she has helped to start a historic preservation concentration at Jackson State University, and currently serves on the Mississippi State Historic Preservation Review Board. She also helped to organize, and is in the process of helping to interpret, a black historic district in Jackson, Mississippi. "As an African-American mother, if I were to find myself in Historic Georgetown in the year 2000, perhaps with my grandchildren by then, I would like to be able to show them, through your interpretation center, that they were a part of America's heritage as seen in Historic Georgetown. I want us to do more for our grandchildren than we have done for our children. I want them to see themselves in America's historic fabric." She offered two suggestions for consideration as Historic Georgetown develops its master plan. First, as part of the planning process for interpreting the historic district in an interpretation center, the following questions need to be asked: • What part of the nation's story can best be told through this neighborhood? • How is Georgetown's story different from other stories that are told in other districts of Washington? How is it different from what can be told in other areas of the country? I f this neighborhood disappeared, what part of' America's heritage would be lost? • What historical personalities from this district help to tell the nation's story best? How would the story be incomplete if you did not interpret the lives of these individuals? 25 �Historic Georgetown, Day One: Preserving Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources • What ethnic groups have contributed to the uniqueness of Georgetown? Was there—is there—an African-American presence? • What places, what buildings are best suited for telling Georgetown's story? Second, special, sensitive attention must be give to the minorities who live in the community. Are they interested in or have they been invited to become involved in Historic Georgetown? I f they once lived here, find them and get their stories for the libraries and for your interpretive center. Cultivate their interest and participation through special events focusing on their culture and their history. " I think you will feel better about having included minorities and ethnic groups, whoever they are. They will certainly feel better by being involved in a positive way. And there will be times when you will need political allies. They will be there to help you fight whatever battles must be fought." Cultural understanding, preservation, and dissemination become increasingly important as the nation's cultural remains deteriorate. These records of the past—books, letters, personal papers, material artifacts, architectural monuments, old neighborhoods—are important for each succeeding generation. T h e stories of our lives and those of our ancestors are told through them. Because seminal cultural vestiges are available on Greece and Rome we have studied and learned the lessons from their past. America's culture can be studied through similar cultural remains today and in the future." QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS Comment: (Frank Sanchis) Interpretation is something that we at the National Trust are very focused on right now. The Trust owns seventeen house museums, all around the United States, and for the past couple of years we have been taking a good hard look at what we say to the public when they visit those house museums. Why are we so anxious to preserve our historic resources in the United States? So that we can learn from them. How can we learn from them? Through what we are told about them. So interpretation is really at the core of what historic preservation is all about. Unfortunately, misinformation about historic buildings in the United States is delivered daily by the ton. We need to clean up our act. It might be interesting for you to seek out representatives from a couple of comparable historic districts in the United States. I would suggest Charleston, South Carolina, the Vieux Carre in New Orleans, and perhaps Society Hill in Philadelphia. Prior to the creation of the National Register even, these districts were already being presented in one way or another to the public. They have dealt with multicultural history for a long time. So there must be much to learn from them. This could save you a lot of trouble and point you in the right direction at the outset. Comment: (Kathleen Lesko, Georgetown University) In 1986 one of our black faculty members, Valerie Bath, proposed a community outreach project for the bicentennial celebration: a documentary film on the history of the African-American community of Georgetown. Surprisingly, a lot of people 26 �Historic Georgetown, Day One: Preserving Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources ' did not even know that there had ever been a sizable black presence here. We decided to make this our main community outreach project for the bicentennial, and by default I became executive producer. In 1989 Black Georgetown Remembered premiered on channel 32. It was a tremendous experience. We had reached out and met close to 200 current or former black Georgetowners. Sadly, we had learned that there were only sixteen black families still residing here. But we had also learned that every September a Black Georgetowners Reunion dinner dance is held at St. Lukes Catholic Church; last year close to 500 people attended. Our documentary was very favorably received, and because of that and because of the wealth of cultural and historical resources we were unable to put into the film format, we decided to seek a grant to do a book to supplement the film. It has taken us two years. We just took the manuscript and over a hundred original photographs to the Georgetown University Press, and the book, which will also be called Black Georgetown Remembered, will be coming out in August. We intend to distribute copies of the video and the book to all the schools in the metropolitan area, and we are also printing enough books, financed by our grant, to give copies to churches and other organizations around the community. This kind of thing takes a lot of time, a lot of hard work. But the funding sources are out there if you have a good product. Q. (Alferdteen Harrison) What have you done with the resources you gathered for these project? A: (Lesko) Georgetown University has agreed to create an archive at their library, a Georgetown black history archive. We have been working closely with John Reynolds, the university archivist, and these materials will go into the special collections room on the fifth floor of the library, where they will be available to the public. None of this could have ever happened without the trust and the cooperation among all the groups and individuals involved, primarily Carter Bowman, the archivist here at Mount Zion United Methodist Church. The visual part of the book is largely the result of his time and generosity in working with us and sharing his resources. Comment: (Patti Wilson) As neighborhoods move forward in their revitalization processes, certain people have a specific vision for the community, and often they believe that historic district designation will help them to fulfill that vision. That is true. But there are times when that vision does not include some of the existing residents—all of which comes under the moniker of gentrification. In Georgetown and in other communities, as the complexion of the community changed, historic district designation came pretty much at the same time. Some people fear that designation causes that to happen, although studies indicate that is not true. But what I as a black preservationist always advocate is that it is time for members of the black community to start seeking that designation, to ensure that they get the recognition they deserve, that their resources are preserved, and that their story is appropriately interpreted. 27 �Historic Georgetown, Day One: Preserving Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources Q: (Peter Armato, BPAG) I have a question about the citywide coalition idea. I thought the Preservation League served that function in some way. Could someone clarify that for us? A: (Wilson) Although the Preservation League is a citywide organization, with members from throughout the metropolitan area, we do not serve as an umbrella organization. All the other organizations are not members, though we encourage them to participate. There was at one time a group called the Preservation Alliance, and the idea was that all the various preservation organizations would send one representative and we would talk about citywide preservation issues. That is now pretty much defunct, so there is still the need for a citywide linkage of preservationists, especially when issues come along that are going to touch us all. Q: (J. L . Zaring) We have enjoyed some really interesting presentations today, but although I presume we are undertaking this exercise because we perceive some sort of threat to Georgetown, I do not clearly see from any of the presentations what that threat is perceived to be. We have many problems. We went through a long period of rather disastrous development over the past twenty years. But does anybody really see a threat of new development in the Georgetown area, and if so where is it going to occur? What other problems should we be guarding against? A: (Wilson) Georgetown, like other communities, must continue to be vigilant about warding off inappropriate large-scale developments. In addition, there is a management issue that does not necessarily involve large-scale development, but it involves the tremendous number of people coming into your community, both the commercial sector and the residential sector. How can your very fragile historic resources survive that influx of population and traffic? Effective planning requires that you lay out plans before serious problems take hold. A: (Tanya Beauchamp) From the point of view of our office, and probably of the Commission of Fine Arts as well, the biggest threat to Georgetown's character is the infill of open space, the destruction of gardens. After the buildings, the most important, most definitive assets of Georgetown are the gardens and trees. A: (Armato) Just as there is gentrification in housing, there can be a similar phenomenon in the commercial sector. As property values rise, many businesses that cater to residents, even though this is a very affluent neighborhood, find that they cannot make enough money to justify staying in their present locations. They cannot afford the rents anymore, or they are displaced by national chain stores. We need to be concerned about that if we are going to keep this neighborhood viable and convenient for the people who live here. A: (Ruth France) I see (fegentrification as the current threat to the commercial sector. We are seeing a "mailing" of Georgetown. People do not come to Georgetown for the historic buildings; they come to party. They come to go to bars and restaurants. And that is dangerous, because what follows is disaster. Comment: (Wilson) Acknowledgment of that syndrome has to be part of your management strategy, which must recognize that right now you are undergoing commercial displacement, that the uses targeted for the local 28 �Historic Georgetown, Day One: Preserving Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources residents are being displaced by higher-priced uses catering to people who come into and then leave Georgetown, which contributes to your traffic problem. The fact that you would rather have a multiplicity of services that speak to your historic neighborhood, speak to the fact that you are a residential neighborhood, but also speak to the fact that you are a tourist site, all have to be incorporated into your management strategy, and that is the job of a management entity. Comment: (Kathleen Hunter) When we talk about cultural diversity in Georgetown, although of course we want to begin with the racial-ethnic diversity that has been part of the city from its founding, we also should think about cultural diversity sliced in a different way—the working groups that have been here, the unique kinds of trades that have been here, the economic culture. We also need to begin thinking about the university students as part of the culture of Georgetown, not just another problem. They do in fact contribute to the neighborhood in some very interesting ways. I am president of an advisory group at Georgetown University's Center for Immigration Policy and Refugee Assistance, and I run around with those kids in vans on Wednesday nights when they tutor Hispanic kids all over the city. My second observation is that, as the director of education at the National Trust, when I think about our lack of an inventory for Historic Georgetown, it occurs to me that, strangely perhaps, this may serve us well. We have a much more sophisticated notion now of what ought to be part of an inventory than we may have had ten or fifteen years ago, and we have an opportunity to do a much richer cultural inventory than we probably would have done earlier on. 29 �DAY TWO: OPENING REMARKS AND KEYNOTE ADDRESS This session focused on stimulating and harnessing community commitment to urban revitalization through the establishment of a central Main Street management program. Opening Remarks: Ronald Lee Fleming, President, Townscape Institute, Boston Keynote Speaker: Norman Mintz, Project for Public Places in New York SUMMARY OF REMARKS BY RONALD FLEMING The concept of Main Street management is much more than simply hiring a consultant to stop by every couple of weeks or so, hear complaints, and make some suggestions. The Main Street manager manages his or her program from an office on the street, working closely and day-by-day with the merchants over an extended period—as long as it takes. Ronald Fleming credits Norman Mintz with doing a great deal to establish the credence of this concept, beginning in the early seventies, when for a number of years he managed the Main Street Program in Corning, New York. "Norman was there to hear what the merchants had to say and to work with them on the design of individual signs and facades. He was able to see the results of his work, and so were many of the rest of us who made pilgrimages to Corning, one of the earliest examples of a successful Main Street program." SUMMARY OF REMARKS BY NORMAN MINTZ "For those of us who are involved in downtown revitalization, the most important thing for the street and for the community is to get things done. I am not happy unless I see results." According to Norman Mintz, this takes commitment from the community, a sound organization, and an individual willing and qualified to assume responsibility for carrying out the program: the manager. To demonstrate the scope and magnitude of the downtown revitalization process, and to show some positive results in specific communities, Mintz used four cases studies, which he illustrated with slides. All were projects in which he and the firm with which he is associated, Project for Public Spaces (PPS), have been involved. PPS, a not-for-profit design and consulting firm based in New York City, works with downtowns all across the country. 30 �Historic Georgetown, Day Two: Opening Remarks and Keynote Address Hoboken. New Jersey Washington Street, in the heart of this square-mile community across the Hudson River from Manhattan, is a mile long and similar in many ways to Georgetown's main thoroughfare, M Street. Because of its length, Washington Street has strong commercial anchors on either end, but in the middle it goes through a residential neighborhood, resulting in a lively mix of homes and businesses. Among the pressures on Washington Street in recent years was the opening, only half a mile away, of the Newport Center Mall, which stole away several businesses and swarms of customers. In addition, major renovations of the waterfront near Newport Center were being planned in conjunction with the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. Fortunately, the Community Development Agency of the City of Hoboken was sensitive to these pressures and determined to do whatever was necessary to ensure a future for Washington Street. PPS was hired to help with the analysis and planning. "Basically we spent a lot of time just observing the changes that had been taking place on Washington Street, the people who had been moving in, the people who had lived there for decades, the types of shops, and the changeover of stores that has occurred in the last couple of years." Mintz and his colleagues discovered a number of unhealthy trends: • • • • • • Real estate speculation was driving up rents and driving out some of the longtime commercial occupants. Stores were being boarded up, and many buildings were up for sale. Because no one was coordinating the pickup of commercial refuse by the city, overflowing cartons of garbage remained on the street for days at a time. Graffiti and litter and people hanging out in front of abandoned stores gave the impression that crime was beginning to take hold. "This was not a real problem, it was a perceived one, but the public was beginning to feel unsafe." The Washington Street infrastructure, including the sidewalks, was decaying. Streetscape improvements made years before were being allowed to deteriorate. Many of the attempts over the previous ten years to rehabilitate building facades had been misguided, corrupting the architectural integrity of the street. Motorists had become accustomed to ignoring parking regulations, and double parking was exacerbating traffic problems. To counter these trends, and to restore viability and vitality to Washington Street, PPS pursued the following strategy: 1) Gathering forces. Mintz's firm began immediately to cultivate the interest and trust of merchants, citizens, and community leaders by talking to them individually and in small groups. Gradually the frequency of and participation in the group meetings increased as people became excited about the revitalization process. 31 �Historic Georgetown, Day Two: Opening Remarks and Keynote Address 2) Management association. A new organization, the Hoboken Advantage, was formed to replace the loose confederation of a few "fiercely independent" merchants that previously had been Washington Street's only alliance. The board of directors of the new organization represented the public and private sectors equally. 3) On-site manager. One of its first actions, "and something we advocate strongly," was to hire a downtown manager to set up an office right on Washington Street, in a vacant storefront. 4) Immediate results. To show the community some immediate visual results, first, a simple but attention-getting promotion was organized for the Christmas shopping season: Ho-Ho-Hoboken. "Where they had nothing before, now they at least had a Santa Claus walking up and down Washington Street. The community got a big kick out of it." In addition, of the many storefronts and other facades that had not been properly cared for over the years, some had been covered over, and others were being "improved" in ways that destroyed their architectural integrity. The immediate push of the Hoboken Advantage and PPS was to identify properties that could be improved right away simply by uncovering the architectural treasures buried behind false fronts or by halting and reversing misguided changes. 5) Education. A longer-term, ongoing effort was initiated to educate property owners and merchants about what they had that was worth preserving, to make them aware of the need for facade rehabilitation and storefront improvements, and to convince them of the value of the architecture that existed on Washington Street. "In many cases, it takes very little time and not too much money to give a storefront some dimension and excitement. The idea war to convince the community and the merchants that something could be done." 6) Vision: long-term goals, intermediate improvements. People wanted a vision of what Washington Street could look like someday, "so some fancy renderings were put together to get people excited." To encourage property owners to make incremental improvements, a low-interest loan program was put together by the Community Development Agency. PPS provided free design consultation and worked closely with contractors through the implementation stage to ensure that the work was done correctly. 7) Ongoing problem solving. The street litter problem was a major priority for the Hoboken Advantage. On the advice of PPS, a company was hired to supplement—but not to take over—the city's collection services, a strategy that Mintz recommends for other communities. "If the city comes by twice a week to empty the trash, and you feel that it needs to be done more often, if you have your own organization, you can supplement those services with additional pickups." The city used the police department to counter the fear of street crime and to attack traffic problems, particularly those caused by illegal double parking. A patrol car was posted on the street to make sure the cars were always moving, and a number of foot patrolmen were hired to show a security presence. 32 �Historic Georgetown, Day Two: Opening Remarks and Keynote Address Corning. New York It was on Market Street in Corning, where Mintz himself served for nine years as the Main Street project manager, that he worked out and tested many of the techniques that he has since applied in communities across the country. In 1974, when he arrived, the street was already listed on the National Register of Historic Places: "four blocks of really terrific buildings, but nonetheless in the early seventies nothing very exciting was going on, and about 25 percent of the stores were vacant." During the first years, Mintz's job was to assure the merchants, property owners, and the community that preserving and rehabilitating what they had was a worthwhile approach to revitalization. This was accomplished through walking tours, workshops, and individual visits and consultations. "Education is paramount. It takes a lot of time to get to know the merchants on a one-to-one basis, and you do not see instant results, but it pays off in the long run." Educational outreach into the community at large was accomplished with newsletters and by getting the local newspapers interested and involved. The manager whom Mintz hired to replace himself when he left Corning provided programmatic continuity but also initiated his own new types of improvements. Where Mintz had worked primarily on the storefronts, the new manager concentrated on the upper floors of the buildings, most of which had been vacant for years. Many are now used as design studios, galleries, and apartments. Such new uses of real estate and other benefits to the community have been further stimulated by a special $100,000 fund, administered by the Market Street Restoration Agency, to encourage artists from across the country to move to Corning. Through the fund, approved artists—many of whom work with glass—have been given low-interest loans to pay for relocation. Tourism is another important component of the Corning project. Over 600,000 people visit the Corning Glass Center each year, and the Market Street Restoration Agency works with the Corning Company to ensure that tour buses make stops in the downtown commercial district. Not only are Colorful banners visually exciting for visitors and residents, the process of designing and constructing them gives the agency a chance to work with all the local tourist attractions, who also help to pay for such projects. Another successful program encourages people to set up bed and breakfasts in Corning. This is far more appropriate to the historic character of Market Street than a new ultramodern hotel would be. Pittsfield. Massachusetts All the funds for the Hoboken project come from the city. The program in Corning is funded by a private-sector corporation. In Pittsfield, the management organization, Pittsfield Central, is financed jointly by the city and the private sector. "The wonderful thing about management is that there is no one set way to do anything. All that matters is that the organization be strong." 33 �Historic Georgetown, Day Two: Opening Remarks and Keynote Address The special area of expertise of Pittsfield Central's manager is promotion. She works very hard to ensure that some kind of event is going on all the time—from fence art shows to the annual Christmas parade to lunchtime concerts on the steps of city hall. Like Hoboken, Pittsfield is under pressure from a mall that just opened nearby, along with the closing of North Street's anchor department store. A twopronged effort to counteract these pressures has enjoyed a great deal of success: First. Pittsfield Central's manager works with existing merchants to make their shops more attractive, through facade improvements and lively window displays. They also are encouraged to take out combined ads to entice the public to shop downtown. Second, an ongoing effort was launched to bring in new businesses. Members of Pittsfield Central's board of directors were recruited to the Retail Improvement Committee, and—armed with a colorful brochure—they have managed to attract a number of new enterprises to North Street, including a food store and a clothing shop. Grand Central District. New York City Grand Central Station, one of the busiest crossroads in the world, is the centerpiece of the largest business improvement district in the nation, more than fifty square blocks in the heart of midtown Manhattan. The relatively new management organization, the Grand Central Partnership, already has solved what was formerly one of the area's worst problems—litter—by hiring a crew to "get dressed up in nice clean white shirts with the Partnership logo and keep the streets clean." Where possible, the clean-up crew also removes or paints over graffiti. To finance this and other improvement projects managed by the Grand Central Partnership, property owners pay an annual assessment. " I dare say midtown Manhattan is probably one of the cleanest areas in New York City, as busy as it is." In addition, uniformed security personnel have been hired to combat the perception of street crime in the area. The Partnership's longer-term efforts include overseeing capital improvements to midtown public spaces, such as the planting of trees and the widening of sidewalks, and the development of guidelines for facade restorations and improvements. An illustrated brochure distributed free to merchants and property owners led to the development of a "design-criteria lease attachment," which landlords are encouraged to incorporate into their agreements with tenants. QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS Q: How do you measure the success of these initiatives, both initially and over the long term? A: (Mintz) Although I have no precise dollars-and-cents standards, apart from measurable decreases in vacancy rates, I view results in terms of whether or 34 �Historic Georgetown, Day Two: Opening Remarks and Keynote Address not a community comes to look at its downtown with fresh eyes. Often in the beginning people will be quite negative, but in response to visible improvements, soon a positive attitude begins to take hold. I f the improvements keep coming, particularly the more substantial ones that take more time, eventually the community spirit is profoundly transformed. Q. In Georgetown, for a number of reasons, it is difficult to get the city to work with us. Can programs like these be successfully implemented and maintained by the private sector? A: (Mintz) Although in Hoboken the city took the leadership role, more often than not that role is filled by the private sector. I f you wish to continue pursuing a city partnership, be sure to document everything you do, and then after some success, sit down with the officials and show them what you have accomplished. A municipality is more apt to be lured into participating if some other entity has already achieved some success. Q: What does the private sector need to do to encourage cultural diversity in such an enterprise? A: (Mintz) You have to work closely and proactively with the whole community. Business people can tend to work among themselves, to forget that there are others who share some of the goals of revitalization, who may be helpful in achieving them, and who have unique needs of their own. You must make a conscious effort throughout the planning process to include representatives from all the different constituencies. The initiative for a management organization can come from various sources. In one city it can be the public sector, in another it can be the private sector. Whatever the source, it is important that a balance be reached between the various parties. Above all, be sure to glue the community (i.e., local activities, fraternal groups, cultural institutions, schools, etc.) by making these groups an active part in the board composition. 35 �PANEL III: INTERPRETING GEORGETOWN'S HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES The panel explored the best ways to help residents, businesses, and visitors recognize and appreciate the historical and cultural features of the community. How can an awareness of the community's heritage be integrated into the daily life of the neighborhood, and how can we help visitors develop a stewardship ethic towards the neighborhood? Panelists: Ronald Lee Fleming (Panel Chairman), President, Townscape Institute, Boston Jean Taylor Federico, Director, Historic Alexandria Richard Levy, Businessman, Business and Professional Association of Georgetown Arts Project Richard Longstreth, Professor of American Studies, The George Washington University Gary Scott, Regional Historian, National Park Service Becky Hannum, Director, Art in the Marketplace, The Rouse Company SUMMARY OF REMARKS BY RONALD FLEMING According to Ronald Fleming, the ideal interpretation goes beyond historic places to celebrate every aspects of a community, including ethnic identity, geography, and industry, all of which should be part of the interpretation strategy. He also advised telling the story of their preservation so people can be reminded of past victories, defeats, and policy choices. The techniques of interpretation vary widely, from the prosaic to the lively and innovative. To generate more of the latter, Fleming encouraged direct involvement of artists, artisans, and writers in the interpretation process, to work in concert with historians and preservationists. "Artists have often thought of the past as an impediment, and yet some of the most glorious things have been done by artisans and artists in that past, so there need to be some connections." As president of the Townscape Institute, Fleming has worked in a variety of communities in the last few years on projects that he calls "place making," collaborating with artists and artisans and community residents. "One of the problems with modern American life is that everything is done by organizations and professionals. We need to empower people in neighborhoods to be involved again. I like very much the notion of using senior citizens and students to create pieces of the fabric of the city, which then give them a personal investment in it." 36 �Historic Georgetown, Day Two: Interpreting Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources Fleming also favors the idea of using photographs to show how a place has changed over time. "Often photographic exhibits can be mounted where the public can study the street that the photos depict—in lighted bus stops, for example—so people can look up and see a whole block as it was in 1920, and then look down and see the way it is today." In reference to the proliferation of malls in Georgetown, many in old buildings that have been radically altered, Fleming thought it might be a good idea i f developers were required to interpret the changing condition of buildings as they evolved. "So much instant architecture has been created here, some of which has a nostalgic, quasi-historical quality to it, that it is hard for visitors to interpret what has happened over time. It would be helpful to give people a sense of what is new and what is old." Fleming showed slides to illustrate the wide array of interpretation approaches in use around the country. • • • • • • Washington's Willard Hotel, which has a long and celebrated history, makes use of perhaps the most traditional way of marking buildings, the bronze plaque. This is not as popular as it once was. The metal has become extremely expensive, and frequently the plaques are stolen and sold for their bronze. Fleming suggested anodized aluminum, which can reproduce photographic imagery. The Park Service uses this. Wave Hill, a park in New York containing a series of interesting houses and a garden, features an interpretation of the social history of the families who once occupied those houses, with plaques that lead strollers through a historical review of the area. Similarly, in Washington, James Goode's Capital Losses is one of the few architectural books that goes beyond dates and styles to describe the families who lived in the houses and the extraordinary events that took place in them. Celebrating the humbler aspects of life as well as the great events is part of the new interpretative approach at the Independence Hall National Historic Park in Philadelphia. Visitors are now told about the more modest houses and public buildings and the people who lived and worked in them. Fleming's wife, Renata von Tscharner, developed a unique interpretation tool for the old city hall in Boston, the original site of the oldest school in America, Boston Latin Grammar School. A series of ceramic and bronze squares depicting the history of the school were created by artisan Lily Ann Rosenberg and embedded in the sidewalk to form a hopscotch pattern. Hopscotch is an eighteenth-century game that was played by the children who attended the school. The site is on the Freedom Trail, a line of bricks that leads pedestrians through Boston's historic core. The most comprehensive interpretation of a single building that Fleming has seen is inside the Pension Building, now the National Building Museum, in Washington. On one side a video display tells the story of the building, and opposite that is a vast series of historic photographs and letters, along with other written materials relating to the photographs. In about 1940 a store in Newburyport, where the vast majority of the architecture is federal, installed an art deco front. Recently, when the street was being restored, the question arose about whether the storefront should be 37 �Historic Georgetown, Day Two: Interpreting Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources • • • • • • • removed. The restorers chose to keep the deco look, enlivening the street with the juxtaposition of two wildly contrasting styles while remaining true to the history of a constantly evolving cityscape. For the Cincinnati bicentennial, the Townscape Institute was commissioned to create a computerized information system for downtown visitors. Users could choose among a variety of subject areas, including tours and trails, centennial events, and past and future views. "People were constantly pushing the buttons, getting involved. It made them active explorers rather than passive viewers." For the Brooklyn Bridge centennial, environmental artist Jane Greengold created a series of rooms inside the bridge occupied by an imaginary character from the last century who helped people understand the whole history of the bridge through diary accounts of her life. In Seattle, an artist did a series of ten dance steps on Broadway at the bus stops. "You can literally dance your way down the street." You can interpret the whole spirit of a town, Fleming advised. In Flint, Michigan, his organization helped preservationists celebrate the history of the automobile and the labor union movement, in particular the greatest strike in American history, the Flint Strike of 1936-37. A ceramic-tile mural based on a series of photographs of historic vignettes and interspersed with text, including quotes about labor unions from Abraham Lincoln, became "almost like a religious shrine." Between 1988 and 1990, the organization assisted in the Radnor, Pennsylvania, Gateway Enhancement Strategy by recruiting and coordinating a collaborative design team that included an environmental artist and a landscape architectural firm for the design of a five-mile corridor of historic Lancaster Pike and the intersection of a new arterial highway. The strategy included a megalithic "mental" landscape recalling Radnorshire, Wales, with a dozen sculpture elements including a "Stonehenge" park, a twenty-two-foot cairn, and a twenty-six-foot granite obelisk sandblasted with symbols from the Township seal. In 1988 the organization developed a public art plan and implementation strategy, and juried the resulting public art commissions, for the Marion Street Transit Parkway in Tampa, Florida. Finally, with the James Center Art Plan and Commissions, in Richmond, Virginia, the group addressed the need to humanize the ground level of downtown Richmond's largest commercial complex and defined guidelines and metaphors for public art suited to the surrounding area. It also coordinated five art commissions valued at more than one million dollars. After concluding his slide show, Fleming introduced the panelists: • Richard Levy, a property developer with a background in the arts, would talk about the need for a master plan—a unifying force—for Georgetown. • Richard Longstreth would bring a historian's perspective to the challenges of planning and interpretation. • Jean Taylor Federico, director of Historic Alexandria, "which has the luxury of government funding," would talk about the need for Georgetown and Alexandria to rediscover their common roots. 38 �Historic Georgetown, Day Two: Interpreting Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources u Gary Scott, a historian with the National Park Service and for several years the historian at the National Cathedral, would speak about the interpretation projects in the works at the Park Service. SUMMARY OF REMARKS B Y RICHARD L E V Y When Richard Levy hears Georgetowners pining for the good old days, his response is, " I can tell you they were not good old days. Georgetown has gone through many ups and downs and cycles, but there is no one moment of a glorious past, although the city's evolution is very interesting." He is staggered by the fact that Georgetown sits on top of so many incredible resources but seems unable to come together to catalogue and interpret and make the best use of them. "The diversity that is the history and the present of Georgetown is both its strength and its Achilles heel." Residents, merchants, and property owners are constantly at odds, and what is sorely lacking is some kind of unifying force to pull people together to take responsibility for their community. Unfortunately, responsibility is easy for everyone, including Levy, to avoid. A businessperson and a resident, on weekends he goes home, closes his door, gazes out the back window, "and it looks like I'm in the country. It is totally removed from what goes on on Wisconsin Avenue or M Street. That remoteness encourages me to say, ' I ' l l just give up the streets over the weekends,' rather than take responsibility for what goes on." The merchants respond in much the same way, refusing to be held accountable, to set standards for what they want of and for the community, to encourage visitors to treat the cityscape respectfully. The only way property owners, merchants, and residents will ever work together is through a shared vision, articulated in a master plan that everyone can buy into, so that Georgetown can become the kind of lively but orderly environment that people can be happy in and proud of. SUMMARY OF REMARKS BY RICHARD LONGSTRETH "For whom does Georgetown want to be a retail district?" Richard Longstreth asked, noting that in any redevelopment effort, those in charge must know who their target audience is. And it is never any one group but, rather, a range of people, he insisted. In Georgetown this means people from the community, people from throughout the metropolitan area, and tourists from all over the world. " I do not live in Georgetown. I cannot afford to live in Georgetown. Some of my family and friends do, or used to, and my wife grew up here. Everybody has a very distinct opinion about who should come here, who should not come here, who should shop here, what should be for sale and what should not be for sale here." Although he realizes that there will probably never be a pure consensus, he warned that as long as so many fundamental disagreements remain, there is little hope for the long-term efficacy of the commercial district. 39 �Historic Georgetown. Day Two: Interpreting Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources He stressed the need for a strong central organization to take charge—to supervise the development and strict enforcement of guidelines. "Some of the most draconian measures in managing a retail district have led to some of the greatest long-term successes." Longstreth feels that the target-audience, or target-audiences, question is critical to interpretation because Georgetown has to know whom it is interpreting itself for. It must make itself readable and accessible, and yet it must remain true to itself. It must not be allowed to degenerate into a sideshow, "where the hype wreaks havoc on the historic character." He concluded with some advice on explanatory publications, noting that throughout Europe, even in "minor" eighteenth-century churches in Rome, "the tourist can walk in off the street and get a better publication with better illustrations and more information about that building than you can get at the U.S. Capitol." The European guidebooks are informative, accurate, beautifully illustrated, and affordable, but Americans have never learned how to put their own versions together. " I think one of the best ways for the body public to acquire this kind of information is from something that costs under ten dollars, with lots of color illustrations and a succinct text. These sorts of things should be available at newsstands and bookstores." SUMMARY OF REMARKS BY JEAN TAYLOR FEDERICO From across the Potomac, Jean Federico views Georgetown as a sister city sharing a common heritage with Alexandria, whose historic district she is responsible for, as well as with other historic districts throughout the metropolitan area. One way to rediscover the common roots is to dig into one's own history to the depth at which your roots grow together with those of others. She pointed out a number of areas that are ripe for research and interpretation in Georgetown and gave some advice on how to pursue those efforts: • Georgetown has a wealth of tax records, inventories, wills, and census records—documents from the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century—that everyone in the area needs to know much more about. • Although Georgetown has existed for centuries, in general its past is poorly documented. To correct this situation, people in the community should be encouraged to write histories, to write articles for publication, to document their findings with plaques and wall markers. • Urban archaeology can play an important role in historical research, and Washington's historic preservation officer can advise on what has been done so far, what needs to be done, and how to go about it. • Long-established local institutions such as Georgetown University and Georgetown Visitation School have a wealth of relics from the city's past. Several years ago, Federico discovered Georgetown Visitation's needlework, including early views of Washington City done by schoolgirls in the 1790s. 40 �Historic Georgetown, Day Two: Interpreting Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources Federico laid particular stress on the importance of proper documentation of historic structures that are to be restored. "In the eight years that I have been in Alexandria, we are constantly going back to redo things we thought we had done right. Start with furnishing plans and historic structures reports so that you have all the evidence before you take the first step." She also recommended conducting a paint analysis early on, before plans are drawn up. The depth and breadth of the necessary research on historic buildings will require huge bodies of volunteers. Although Federico has a very large staff and a generous budget, she relies heavily on hundreds of volunteers, for archaeological work, for Historic Alexandria's tourism operation, and to help out at every one of the city's historic sites. In staffing, the focus of research, and the makeup of the board of directors (if such a structure is used), it is crucial to reflect the full diversity of the community's ethnic, racial, and socioeconomic mix. "We all know that in Alexandria and certainly in Georgetown, there were free blacks and there were slaves, and we must not gloss over this." Everyone in the community must have a sense of full participation, including the descendants of the immigrant groups who came to Georgetown in the early nineteenth century. "They should play a major role in how you interpret your history, and they should be involved in the planning from the very beginning." Alexandria attracts over a million visitors a year, and the city is vitally interested in maintaining tourism as a strong component of the economy. "But you must understand that the major role of a tourism initiative is to put people in hotels and restaurants, not to bring them to your historic sites." Getting the tourist out of the hotel to explore local history remains the responsibility of those directly in charge of the sites, who should not overlook the financial and public relations benefits of renting out historic sites for weddings and other social occasions. Georgetown also desperately needs to rediscover its waterfront. On the other side of the Potomac, Alexandria has put considerable money and effort into waterfront redevelopment, not to return things to the way they were in the nineteenth century but to create an inviting modern recreational area with historical resonances. "The fact that we have an anchor, a linchpin, the Torpedo Factory in the middle of the revitalized waterfront, is tremendously important for our tourism." Parking is a problem on both sides of the river, but particularly in Georgetown, which does not have Metro access. Federico recommended organizing shuttle vans to stop at specific sites in Georgetown, to get people moving from one place to another without having to resort to their private cars. Federico strongly advocated conducting a visitors survey to find out what people want of Georgetown. Why did they come in the first place? What specifically did they come to do and see? What improvements would they appreciate? 41 �Historic Georgetown, Day Two: Interpreting Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources Program evaluations are equally important. Find out what people think about what you are doing. Ask them to fill out a survey form to give you some honest feedback so you can determine if you are reaching your target audience. Finally, Federico urged Georgetowners to celebrate their accomplishments. "Even if the only thing you do after this seminar is get together to celebrate the fact that you got together and that you have these things in common to talk about, you get a sense of cohesion from these gatherings." SUMMARY OF REMARKS BY GARY SCOTT Gary Scott began with a story illustrating the power of myths. The historic Old Stone House in Georgetown is the oldest house in the District of Columbia. All through the latter nineteenth century and until 1950, when the Park Service took over, there was a plaque on the building designating it as "George Washington's Engineering Headquarters," and it was commonly believed that in that house L'Enfant first showed Washington his plan for the capital city. Then about the time of the congressional debates over acquisition of the Old Stone House by the Park Service, it was pointed out that, regardless of the plaque, no one had ever proved that Washington or L'Enfant had even visited the house. And there was not a scrap of evidence that the fabled first Washington planning meeting had taken place there. Fortunately, a successful pitch was made for acquiring and restoring the Old Stone House for its architectural merit, and Congress agreed to take it into the National Park Service. But as Scott pointed out, "The legends and myths that surrounded the house were just as interesting as is the rather banal story we tell there today," and without that plaque and the community's acceptance of what it told them, the house would have been torn down decades before. Myths and legends stimulate people's interest in the history of a place, and right now that interest could use some stimulation. Although there are many old publications on Historic Georgetown, including booklets and brochures, selfguided walking tours, and books on architectural history, most of them are out of print. " I submit to you that this is evidence that twenty or thirty years ago people were a lot more interested in Georgetown history than they are today. How can we bring that back? What is the Park Service doing?" • An attempt will be made to reinterpret the Old Stone House, through a study financed by a small grant to examine "how this vernacular house managed to survive so long simply because of the legends associated with it. We want to tell that story." • When the Whitehurst Freeway is finished, the Park Service will acquire a small piece of land next to Georgetown Park, and the plan is to put up "waysides" depicting the story of Georgetown. • The Park Service had an agreement with the city in 1984 to take over ten acres of the Georgetown waterfront, where boathouses were to be erected and a walkway laid down running all the way to the Key Bridge. "But as long as 42 �Historic Georgetown, Day Two: Interpreting Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources the city has their trash trucks there, as long as the parking lots are there—and parking is a problem, perhaps one that cannot be solved—the waterfront will not come over to us." • The D.C. Department of Transportation has assured the Park Service that the main pier in the middle of the C&O Canal is going to be taken out, and some sort of footprint will be established to show where Francis Scott Key's house was. "We intend to interpret the site of Key's house, which was taken down to make room for a ramp of the Whitehurst Freeway in the forties, and now the ramp is being taken out." In closing, Scott returned to the Old Stone House to talk about what he feels is one of the most crucial needs of Historic Georgetown and the District of Columbia as a whole. The 19S0 legislation established that the National Park Service was to receive the Old Stone House for the purpose of establishing inside it a museum celebrating the earliest beginnings of the cities of Washington and Georgetown. This has not happened. "Now we are at a bicentennial, and we are still looking for a site to interpret the founding of the city of Washington and the early history, and we have none." A site must be found, and Scott feels strongly that the most appropriate location is Georgetown. SUMMARY OF REMARKS BY BECKY HANNUM Before coming here this morning, Becky Hannum said that she went back to her copy of Megatrends. In 1982, John Naisbitt said "we must learn to balance the material wonders of technology with the spiritual demands of our human nature. The need for compensatory high touch is everywhere. The more high tech in our society, the more we will want to create high touch environments, with soft edges balancing the hard edges of technology." The Rouse Company translated this high touch need into programs that have given people the opportunity to express themselves where they choose to gather. They added puppet workshops to puppet performances, make-and-take kites to kite displays, quilting demonstrations as a complement to quilt exhibits. They invited the community to learn how paper is made or dance to live big-band orchestras. Why? Because that is what people said they wanted. Several years ago, Hannum worked with Faneuil Hall Marketplace on a specific problem. The Marketplace had lost the locals because of international fame. The Rouse Company went to Plimoth Plantation and asked if the people there would create a pilot program: The Rouse Company's and Plimoth's first urban living history program. Could the Faneuil Hall Marketplace history and story be brought to life and used to reinforce the property's sense of place to the Bostonian? Plimoth Plantation did. It was one of a series of things the Marketplace funded to attract the local market. Four characters—two original marketmen and two of Josiah Quincy's daughters—strolled the market chatting with people. Through them, much was learned about what was missing from the scene, such as a portable setting, 43 �Historic Georgetown, Day Two: Interpreting Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources props, and quiet time. Families especially enjoy meeting visitors from the past—it changes their knowledge of American history. Originally, marketplaces were filled with merchants who, to survive, were theatrical—street cries, bells, drums, all sorts of devices were used to set each one apart from the crowd. Through the ages, merchants lost their sense of theater; thus liveliness has had to be booked into the marketplace. I think Georgetown as a destination, that tastefully uses history as its hook, could become an attractive theater and a splendid place to informally learn while visiting. People want to be with people. And they also want: • Safe interaction with one another • Shopping and browsing • Services • Opportunities to learn about themselves and others—topics of interest, including their own and other cultures' • Communication of new and different ideas • Unexpected encounters • Satisfaction of curiosity The merchants of Georgetown might consider training in theatrical techniques. Hire Arena State or Woolly Mammoth to help. Themes and events that become special traditions might also be developed: • • • • • • Tow-path mule pulling Trolley track walking tours Living history characters Did You Know sheets Maps that reveal the geographic changes and historic features Coach residents to become storytellers—tape them and sell the Georgetown Storytellers Series The criteria used at the Rouse Company for years to develop programs in communities is to listen carefully for what is needed, what is missing. Often the community will not necessarily know, but keep probing the questions. Usually, something emerges. The future of Georgetown as a well-managed mixed-use site requires that it be treated as a people place, a living, vibrant theater, a "high touch" environment. Create the script, the vision, with—not for—the community. Residents must help to formulate it to own it. This can be done by using a core group representing various constituencies. It must first and foremost be a livable community for its citizens. I f that is in place, the visitors will come. Livability needs the unexpected encounter, the surprise, the unpredictable. Through careful interactive programming this can be achieved. The theme in this day and age of "high tech" ought to be about experiential learning, about bringing curiosity to the surface. Examples of what this looks like are living history characters, experiencing Georgetown's historic richness on self-guided 44 �Historic Georgetown, Day Two: Interpreting Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources walking tours with informative maps, theatrical merchants, an interactive interpretation center. Annual events that rally the community, create pride, meet the community's needs, and become special traditions must be established in Georgetown. QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS Comment (Richard Longstreth) There is a widely held perception of Georgetown as a late-eighteenth-, early-nineteenth-century community, and indeed there are marvelous examples of federal architecture here. But much of Georgetown is later than that. Probably the great majority of the buildings were erected in the second half of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The churches, such as Mount Zion, are among the many examples of buildings that do not fit into the popular federal image, and yet people are very interested in them, as the crowded visitors' book at Mount Zion proves. Stylistic variety conveys a sense of change over time, and this is desirable. You do not want Georgetown to look "done." I would beg people to think not only about the cultural diversity but also about the physical diversity of our community, in terms of function, in terms of character, in terms of the different epochs the city embodies. Retaining that intricate matrix is an important objective. Comment: (Norma Davis Smith, Citizens Association of Georgetown) For the record, I would like to tell you a little bit about the Citizens Association of Georgetown, which was established in 1963 and is the oldest civic association in the District of Columbia. Among our many programs and activities, we have been instrumental in obtaining a number of important landmark designations, and we contributed significantly to the successful effort to save the Old Stone House. According to our bylaws, "The object of the Association shall be to preserve the historic character, to develop the aesthetic values in Georgetown as the place in which the nation's capital was planned, to help protect the interests of the residents and homeowners, and to assist in making it a pleasant place to live. To these ends, the Association shall act on matters which affect Georgetown and Washington, including the maintenance of Georgetown as an in-town area of homes and gardens. The Association will assist Congress, the District of Columbia officials, and appropriate federal agencies in the fulfillment of their duties and will gather, preserve, and impart information of value to the members of the Association." Recently we passed a resolution calling the Whitehurst Freeway "totally incompatible with its location on the waterfront" and urging officials to adopt a new plan to remove the present structure. The resolution has been sent to the mayor. The Commission of Fine Arts, the Committee of One Hundred on the Federal City, and the Business and Professional Association of Georgetown all support the removal plan. Q: (Ronald Fleming) In some communities developers have been assessed a percentage of their project budgets to pay for public art. Could such a fund be set up for interpreting this city? 45 �Historic Georgetown. Day Two: Interpreting Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources A: (Richard Levy) There is a movement afoot to create a Business Improvement District in Georgetown, with annual assessments that would bring in revenue for such purposes. Clearly there are resources in this community that could contribute toward bringing our history alive in a variety of ways, not only markers but also special events and ongoing activities. In fact, there are so many different useful approaches to interpretation that ultimately we must bring the Citizens Association together with the Business and Professional Association together with the Georgetown University together with the Historic Georgetown Foundation and the property owners and say, "Hey, we all have a stake and it is time to invest in this part of our future, by resurrecting the past." These things are doable, but only when we find a way to work together to create the master plan we can all buy into. Q. (Robert Lyle, Georgetown Library) While Alexandria has its own government, Georgetown is sort of a stepchild of Washington. We do not govern ourselves. Could the panel talk about the ramifications of that situation? A: (Longstreth) First of all, you are by no means alone. There are many districts with strong individual identities and the ability to get what they want, even though they are within the jurisdiction of larger governmental bodies. With Georgetown, outside your boundaries many people think of you as a force to be reckoned with, and you could take better advantage of that. Of course, counter to this line of thinking is the perception by another set of outsiders, who observe all the internal squabbling and differences of opinion, that Georgetown cannot get its act together. Comment: (Levy) Which makes us not a force to be reckoned with. We could be if we had common goals, which sometimes has happened, but most of the time our effectiveness has been neutralized by all the squabbling. Comment: (Fleming) Your master plan will be one way to encourage unity, which means you must make it accessible to all citizens. You might even publish the proposed master plan as an insert in the newspaper, and perhaps hold a series of public forums. Comment: (Barbara Dodson Walker) Newspapers also should be used to solicit the interest and involvement of groups and individuals who are part of Georgetown's heritage but who may not feel welcome to participate in what you are doing. You need what they have to contribute. My husband, who is a genealogist, once told the Boston Society, "You need to study black history to finish your own personal history." Comment: (Kathy Smith, Historical Society of Washington) You can tell the dynamic story of the growth and change of this whole city in Georgetown, which goes back 250 years. The waterfront at M Street alone we can take from the 1730s, when the first ferry started running, through the canal story, the Victorian story of the development of working-class housing in that area, industrialization, waterpower. It is one of the few places you can tell the story of blacks in Washington, and the relationships between blacks and whites, because it remained a mixed area much longer than other parts of the city. But although the Georgetown of today is a fairly recent 46 �Historic Georgetown, Day Two: Interpreting Georgetown's Historic and Cultural Resources phenomenon, it comes as a surprise to people that here was a real town with representatives of every cultural and socioeconomic layer. Comment: (Fleming) That would make a wonderful caption for a marker "Here was a real town." Comment (Kathleen A. H . Graff) One of our greatest efforts to encourage unity, which has sort of foundered in the past couple of years, has been the Common Committee, consisting of representatives from the business community, the Citizens Association, the universities, some of the developers, and the ANCs. We would get together each month and talk about problems and possible solutions, and we were amazed by how many concerns we had in common. A lot of progress was made. I would like to see the organization revived. Q: (Fleming) Could it work as an ongoing committee of the master plan? A: (Graff) It might be a good foundation for the master plan. Comment: (Fleming) We have talked about the fact that you cannot know your own history until you know the history of the other people whose heritage intersects with yours. Maybe you cannot succeed in interpreting Georgetown until you have a strategy that encourages the interpretation of other neighborhoods as well. 47 �PANEL IV: DESIGNING GEORGETOWN'S FUTURE The panel explored all the diverse elements that need to be considered in designing a future for Georgetown that respects its historical and cultural heritage, and takes into consideration the needs of residents, businesses, and visitors, including transportation, housing, businesses, entertainment, and the Georgetown University campus. Panelists: Marilyn Taylor (Panel Chairperson), Partner, Skidmore, Owings and Merrill John Richards Andrews, Chairman, Old Georgetown Board, D.C. Fine Arts Commission Peter Armato, Executive Director, Business and Professional Association of Georgetown Curtis Coward, Counsel to DART, Northern Virginia David Dutton, Advisory Council on Historic Preservation John Fondersmith, D.C. Office of Planning Robert Marshall, Georgetown University Planning Department Dorn McGrath, Director, Institute for Urban Development Research SUMMARY OF REMARKS BY MARILYN TAYLOR "Urban design for Georgetown—the tobacco port of 1751 and the historic village of 1991—must, as its first premise, define and maintain a careful balance between large and small," Marilyn Taylor began. Although Georgetown consists of more than 100 blocks, a university campus, at least four major parks, and an extensive waterfront, it is the small detail that defines this community in people's minds: "the brick pattern, the newel post, the carefully proportioned window, the front stoop, the flower waiting by the picket fence." Keeping such details in the foreground is critical to good urban design. The large-scale aspects of Georgetown are more difficult to grapple with. Often they seem to run counter to the preservationist's vision. They introduce tremendous pressure for changes, some of which—increasingly dense automobile and pedestrian traffic, buildings with facade dimensions greater than forty-five feet, isolated centers that pull people off the street—are perceived as threats. But change in some form is inevitable. The trick is to control the direction and degree of change. In recent years, urban designers, preservationists, planners, and developers, working more cooperatively than in the past, have developed a great number of effective tools. But without a vision the tools are ineffective; they can even be dangerous. 48 �Historic Georgetown, Day Two: Designing Georgetown's Future How is this vision to be achieved, this set of broad strokes by which incremental proposals can be judged and to which incremental actions can attach? First, it is tremendously important to define the objectives, which must rest on a clear understanding of whom Georgetown is for. The residents, the regional community, visitors to Washington, neighboring historic districts, the next generation—all must be considered, and considered fairly and appropriately. Once the objectives have been articulated, the how-to questions must be addressed. How do the individual historic resources fit into the overall pattern of use and activity that the community wants to encourage? How can the incremental changes that are inherent in vital urban places be channeled toward a coherent future Georgetown? Finally, critical to the development of a feasible action plan is distinguishing between what will happen on its own and what will require intervention. As a framework for the panel discussion to follow, Taylor offered a seven-point urban design action plan for Historic Georgetown: 1) Plan for transportation. "You can use ferries. Use feet. Maybe that great companion of the foot, the trolley, can help out." 2) Protect the residential neighborhoods—their physical qualities, their environment, their life-style. 3) Plan both the public and the private spaces. Take control of the streets and alleys. Make clear what is public domain, where visitors are welcome and where they are not. 4) Plan the retail mix and distribution step by step. 5) Get to the water. "So much of the time one spends in Georgetown you feel that the water is just beyond your grasp. For a port town to be in this situation is a real missed opportunity." 6) Create places where people can have a good time without spending money—learning something, walking, experiencing and understanding Georgetown's history. 7) Cause change: do not fear it. Exercise stewardship of the land and of the built—and yet-to-be-built—urban environment. Taylor next introduced her colleagues on the panel: • Dorn McGrath, director of the Institute for Urban Development Research, would provide a historical context for the critical issue of transportation planning. • Continuing the theme of transportation, Curtis Coward, a lawyer with the firm of McGuire, Woods, Battle and Boothe, would discuss an initiative in northern Virginia that makes use of an interesting implementation technique, one that may be applicable to Georgetown's long-term plan. • David Dutton's responsibilities at the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation include reviewing transportation plans for their impact on historic resources. • Peter Armato, executive director of the Business and Professional Association of Georgetown, would shift the focus from transportation to a wider view of 49 �Historic Georgetown, Day Two: Designing Georgetown's Future a number of key urban design issues and mechanisms for implementing improvements. • One of Georgetown's most prominent long-term "citizens," Georgetown University, would be represented by Robert Marshall, from the university's planning department, who would discuss the relationship of his institution to the Historic Georgetown planning process. • Finally, like Taylor, both John Richards Andrews and John Fondersmith are Georgetown "old-timers." Andrews, an architect and longtime member of the Old Georgetown Board, and Fondersmith, of the D.C. Office of Planning, each in his own way deals with how community objectives can be implemented through the mechanisms and planning procedures that they work with at their respective organizations. SUMMARY OF REMARKS BY DORN McGRATH Having been asked to discuss the diverse elements that need to be considered in designing a future for Historic Georgetown, and in so doing to take into account the needs of residents, businesses, and visitors, Dorn McGrath explained that he would "emphasize the needs of all of those components of Georgetown as reflected in the urgent problem of planning for transportation." He used slides to illustrate his points. Of the first slide, a shot of bumper-to-bumper traffic on M Street, McGrath said that he sometimes asks his students if they recognize the locale. "And a chorus of voices comes back with, 'Why, it's Georgetown.'" Today, this is Georgetown as everyone knows it. But it was not always this way. The next slide was of an old engraving of Pierre Charles L'Enfant sitting on a rock near Mount Albans, looking down the river at a time when much of Washington was still "virgin turf." L'Enfant had been commissioned by the president to come up with a plan for the new capital city, and he started with the unspoiled terrain outside Georgetown. In his mind at the time, the latter city was an afterthought, a subdivision across the creek, a condescending view that is yet to be overcome. L'Enfant's revered grid system for the District of Columbia—"the plan we celebrate, we honor, we protect very carefully"—was produced in a couple of weekends. Influenced only slightly by the extant city of Georgetown, the plan required Georgetown to do most of the adjusting. An 1863 view from the Washington Monument looking toward Georgetown, at the time still quite rural, captured the distinct visual rhythm of the piers and the river bridge near where the Key Bridge now stands. A century later the L'Enfant plan lived on; the definitive coherence of architectural scale had been preserved. But now there was a different rhythm of arches at the river. "The point I want to make is that both the waterfront and Georgetown have changed dramatically." 50 �Historic Georgetown, Day Two: Designing Georgetown's Future A view of the middle seventies showed "a great string of cars" parked downstream from the Key Bridge, all the way to the concrete plant—"not a pretty sight"—with transit trucks and storage yards on the site. The view was not much better upstream, where a tall pile of salt was stored by the District in anticipation of winter snowstorms. In 1978, the concrete plant was gone, but the parking lots remained. Then a few years later the commercial development known as Washington Harbor was completed. "Of course the ever-present feature that defines this waterfront is the Whitehurst Freeway, as the transportation technology of the 1950s emphatically asserts itself." The tremendous positive change that has occurred is the transformation of the Georgetown waterfront from an industrial slum into something that bids to become quite elegant, and may well do so, according to McGrath, "but from almost any angle the Whitehurst Freeway is not an asset." For too long Georgetown has been an afterthought to much of the planning for the city as a whole. In particular, public policy for the waterfront is extremely unclear, and "bit by bit, project by project, we are backing into a future, which, I would submit, is hardly the way to plan for this very special part of the city." Closing with slides depicting how a similar challenge is being met on the West Coast, McGrath noted that in San Francisco the Embarcadero Freeway has blocked the public's view of the Bay for decades, as a result of the "freeway thinking of the fifties and sixties." Now, "with a little nudging from a recent earthquake," the structure is being taken down and the city is recapturing its waterfront. "We need to do much the same for our waterfront. We must overcome the piecemeal activity that, project by project, has characterized the process of development in Georgetown to date." SUMMARY OF REMARKS BY CURTIS COWARD "It is not for those of us who live in northern Virginia, and who enjoy Georgetown perhaps to your detriment, to suggest what the vision for this community ought to be," stated Curtis Coward. Rather, he would share some thoughts on implementing a transportation plan that might prove useful later on, "as you attempt to implement whatever vision emerges from this process." His presentation comprised three key recommendations: 1) Plan vour transportation in context, both internally and externally. There will necessarily be a major transportation component to whatever plan is developed, and two features are essential: an internal transportation plan consistent with the needs and integrity of Georgetown, and an external plan that integrates Georgetown with the rest of the region. T h i s is not an island. It is going to have to be part of an integrated whole, and your plan should contemplate Georgetown's role in the overall transportation context." 2) Explore alternative financing mechanisms. Your transportation plan must include specific provisions for financing your vision. In the absence of that 51 �Historic Georgetown, Day Two: Designing Georgetown's Future component, "no matter how brilliant or focused or insightful the vision might be," the plan will never be carried out. "It is not useful simply to hold up a picture. The picture will have to be accompanied by words, and those words will have to address how the plan is to be implemented." Coward suggested following some of the models around the country with respect to alternative transportation financing, including a nearby example in northern Virginia, the Route 28 Project. This was accomplished with a form of tax increment financing that integrated land use with transportation finance, by putting the locality in a position to negotiate with those paying the additional tax on issues such as density, permissible uses, and other inducements. "The integration of land use and transportation is absolutely critical, and the taxing district model that we, through great pain and agony, ultimately were able to develop has provided a very useful and comprehensive tool with which to address those issues." 3) Create a deadline-driven procedure for the implementation of vour plan. One of the great frustrations for any initiative such as this is the lack of any requirement that a political jurisdiction take action, either implementing or rejecting the plan, by a specific date. In the absence of a deadline, the evolution of these kinds of initiatives tends to be the expenditure of an enormous amount of energy for a prolonged period through the staunch perseverance of those committed to the project, followed by creeping frustration, and then eventually the engineering data and the studies that underlie the vision become stale and'the probability of implementation begins to deteriorate exponentially. To avoid this syndrome, it is crucial to have a mechanism for scheduled implementation in place before submitting a plan. SUMMARY OF REMARKS BY DAVID DUTTON The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, a nineteen-member body appointed by the president, is responsible for reviewing relevant federal projects, as required by Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, David Dutton explained. The act states that federal agencies must take into account how each of their undertakings is going to affect historic properties and must afford the council a reasonable opportunity to comment. For the purposes of Section 106, a relevant undertaking is defined as any federal action—including construction, rehabilitation, repair, demolition, licensing, permits, loans, loan guarantees, grants, and federal property transfers—that affects historic property, which means any property either listed or considered eligible for listing on the National Register. Dutton advised that although the speakers thus far had tended to focus on the waterfront, Georgetown needs to consider the possible effects of changing the transportation design in that location on the rest of the community. For example, are there underwater archaeological resources that would be affected by demolition or new construction? What will be the impact of the new transportation plan on the traffic flow in and out of Georgetown? Will it transfer development pressures to other areas? The council strives for a balance 52 �Historic Georgetown, Day Two: Designing Georgetown's Future between the needs of historic preservation and development, "and we certainly think that the two of them can coexist." But peaceful coexistence does not just happen. It must be planned in the context of an overall strategy that serves the needs of the whole community. Finally, from the council's perspective, the most important component of any transportation planning forum is looking at historic resources as resources, taking them into account from the very beginning in regard to how whatever plan is eventually developed will affect them, both directly and indirectly. SUMMARY OF REMARKS BY PETER ARMATO Peter Armato divided his remarks into four categories: 1) key urban design issues, 2) projects currently being pursued by the Business and Professional Association of Georgetown (BPAG) through its new committee initiative, 3) mechanisms for implementing some of these projects, and 4) the importance of cooperation in developing and implementing a master plan. Urban design issues • The Georgetown waterfront should be recognized as both a recreational and a historical resource. • Ways must be found to make the streetscape more attractive for pedestrians. One of these might be widening the sidewalks. • With new construction, care must be taken to preserve Georgetown's unique vistas. • Special treatments of the boundaries and entrances to Georgetown can provide significant aesthetic links to the rest of the city and the region. • Georgetown suffers from the lack of a town center. "We have no place that we can say is the heart and soul of the community, no one place that has either the historic or the geographic significance of a town square." Projects currently being pursued bv special committees • BPAG's Retail Mix and Business Development Committee is focusing on the issue of marketing Georgetown's commercial district, by trying to entice the right kinds of retailers into locating here—those that residents and visitors alike will frequent. • A committee that works on streetscape and public space management is exploring ways to make Georgetown more pedestrian-friendly. • The new committee for transportation and parking is studying the park-andshop concept, which many Georgetown retailers are interested in. Various ways of linking with the regional transit system also are being considered. • The Clean Georgetown Campaign is putting together a proposal that would involve a voluntary, cooperative litter removal program. • In the area of community safety and crime prevention, special events such as Halloween in Georgetown are receiving particular attention. This past year, the police were persuaded to do what they had been reluctant to do in the past: open up the streets rather than close them on Halloween and provide a 53 �Historic Georgetown. Day Two: Designing Georgetown's Future significant police presence to set the tone for a calm, pleasant, relatively subdued holiday. • One committee is working on event planning, in particular on Christmas promotions designed to stimulate enthusiasm for holiday shopping in Georgetown. Mechanisms for implementing projects • Cities around the country have come up with a new funding mechanism that often is referred to as a Business Improvement District—tax assessments on commercial property within a well-defined geographic area that supplement what local government can do to implement a broad range of capital improvements and new services. BPAG has begun the process of gathering support from property owners, a large number of whom are already committed to the concept. • The other mechanism, Centralized Retail Management (CRM), would answer the challenges in a diverse commercial district by relying on the management techniques of the shopping mall or festival market. Largely through agreements among property owners, CRM seeks to maintain some control over the retail mix in the community, to make sure there is an effective mechanism for dealing with litter, to improve the pedestrian experience, ensure personal safety, and program and coordinate special events. Cooperation Halloween was a good example, as was the hard-won consensus through which a liquor license moratorium was achieved a couple of years ago. But most encouraging has been the recent cooperation on the Whitehurst Freeway. While the District government is moving forward with its plan to rehabilitate this artery, BPAG and the Citizens Association are jointly proposing alternatives that would allow for the eventual dismantling of the elevated freeway. SUMMARY OF REMARKS B Y ROBERT MARSHALL In support of Armato's emphasis on cooperation, Robert Marshall, of the Georgetown University Planning Department, noted that one of his office's major objectives is "to meld the citizens of Georgetown with the university in a cooperative manner to solve some of our common challenges." The university is seeking ways to interact with the local neighborhoods in a more cohesive manner and is working on the campus itself to bring the students back inside, "to confine them somewhat to the university plan and help keep the neighborhoods and the university separate but still intermingling." The second major issue is transportation, including the provision of more parking on campus, controlling ingress and egress, and minimizing traffic flow through the surrounding neighborhoods. The university is also working with the federal government on the development of an economical, nonpolluting transit system. 54 �Historic Georgetown, Day Two: Designing Georgetown's Future The institution is fully cognizant of its continuing impact on the community, positive and negative, current and potential. "We sit up on the hill, we are the western boundary of Georgetown, and we want to help solve some of the problems that occur when you have a university in a historic community." SUMMARY OF REMARKS BY JOHN RICHARDS ANDREWS "Walking through Georgetown, comparing it to other cities—perhaps Charleston, South Carolina, most frequently—one develops a feeling for the place, not just the buildings but the trees, the open spaces, and the people," John Richards Andrews began. About nine years ago, Andrews was invited to sit on the Old Georgetown Board, a panel of three architects established in law by Congress in 1950 to advise the Commission of Fine Arts. "It is a relatively short law, but when it was first written it seemed to be all-inclusive. Since that time we have found out that developers, builders, and architects can think of things that we never thought of before." When he first began attending meetings of the Old Georgetown Board, not as a member but as an architect presenting his own cases, the procedure was to go to a meeting and sit down at a table with the three architects and discuss what one was proposing to do—in those days usually enclosing a back porch or adding a new fence or something equally minor. But over time the scale of the submitted proposals has grown enormously, and so have the problems. As Georgetown became an ever-more-successful urban space—a space that more and more people wanted to come to—developers grew bolder and more ambitious. To counter this, "we keep reaching out to take a little bit more control, and we get our wrists slapped every once in a while." The range of issues confronted by the board encompasses the following: • Trees, especially those that frame the houses, contribute significantly to Georgetown's unique character, everyone agrees. But people are discovering that they can burrow underground to get more space and yet avoid being reviewed because these underground expansions cannot be seen from public space—a necessary condition before the board can demand a review. No new tree can grow over this burrowing. • Many people put up awnings and signs without bothering to consult the Old Georgetown Board, even though by law they can be fined for doing so. • Cooperation. The Old Georgetown Board works closely with the citizens of Georgetown as well as with other committees and community groups. "A good friend is the Citizens Association of Georgetown, although they may not consider us always on their side." To accommodate the new ANC program, the board modified its meeting schedule so that the ANC would be convening prior to board meetings. "We listen to the ANC. This does not mean that we are going to do what they say, but we do weigh their opinions." • Citizen involvement. "When I first started, the citizens were not there. They are there now—wonderful groups that go out and notify people about what is 55 �Historic Georgetown, Day Two: Designing Georgetown's Future happening in the community." They make sure that those who are going to be affected by proposals are kept informed, which is a tremendous help to the board since the staff of the Commission of Fine Arts does not have the time to take care of this. In regard to the master plan, Andrews stressed that, apart from the zoning law, the Old Georgetown Board has no authority to cite against proposed developments that it considers objectionable. The Commission of Fine Arts and the Old Georgetown Board are not proactive. They must react to what is brought before them. "Without some sort of plan, it is difficult to stop the flood. We are not talking about a plan that says no change. We are talking about change where we want it." In the future, the citizens of Georgetown should agree on a shared vision of the visual environment of public spaces in the Historic District. It should contain: • • • • • The rules for development, i.e., acceptable density, volume, and mass to be allowed in buildable areas of existing open space or "underdeveloped" lots. (Save the trees. No burrowing.) Public parking spaces, other than street parking, should be created to ease the load on residential side streets. Particular notice should be taken of sidewalk and street surface (concrete wheelchair-access ramps in brick sidewalks), streetlights and signs, and street trees (new, missing, or sick) to improve the visual environment. On commercial buildings, signs, awnings, security grilles, telephones, and the like that take away from the feeling of place should be "corrected." A building survey should be conducted to establish the historic context. SUMMARY OF REMARKS BY JOHN FONDERSMITH John Fondersmith began by explaining Washington's three-tiered planning system. The comprehensive plan, adopted in 1984-85 and amended last year, deals with issues on a citywide basis, including some objectives and policies that relate to Georgetown. In addition, three of the eight proposed ward plans have been adopted. One of these, the Ward 2 Plan, includes several references to the special nature of Georgetown, "but still not the kind of detailed answers you mfeht want to find." The third tier comprises the small-area plans, ranging from a few to several blocks. Approximately sixty-five small-area plans are proposed to be undertaken throughout the city. With the comprehensive plan adopted and the ward planning process essentially completed, the D.C. Office of Planning is concentrating more on the small-area planning process. Fondersmith felt the small-area process was the most appropriate to what was being discussed at this forum. Georgetown is not presently proposed for a small-area planning study. At some point, Historic Georgetown will have to decide if the plan that is to be prepared is to be an official plan (i.e., go through the process and be adopted by council resolution) or whether it is to be an unofficial consensus report that provides ideas. 56 �Historic Georgetown, Day Two: Designing Georgetown's Future He advised that whatever kind of plan might be adopted, it must deal with a number of key issues, including: • • • • • • • • Green spaces. Washington is fortunate to have so many communities that contain, are surrounded by, or are near parks. However, Georgetown's ring of public parks, cemeteries, and estates is unique. How can that greenbelt be better used? Is it in danger? Can it be enhanced? The unioue character of Georgetown's streets. The character of the streets in the residential neighborhoods is the most important single element defining Georgetown. This pattern must be understood and built into future preservation planning. The overall pattern is more important than just the sum of individual buildings. The new Georgetown. A great deal of change has taken place in a relatively short time. Starting with Canal Square in 1971, approximately twenty new complexes and major buildings have been built in the last two decades, redefining the area south, and in a few cases north, of M Street. It is time to step back and look at these as a whole. How well have they worked? What could have been done better? What can be done better with future developments? Georgetown University. How does the campus relate to the community? How should it relate? The C&O Canal. This historic feature slicing through the lower part of Georgetown definitely can be better used and more accurately, more richly interpreted. The role of this first mile of canal (from the zero milestone to Key Bridge) needs to be stressed. The waterfront deserves careful, cooperative, imaginative long-range planning. The Whitehurst Freeway renovation now under way is by no means necessarily the final solution. Additional issues of open space design, parking, and restaurants need to be addressed and resolved. With continued development of other waterfronts along the Potomac, Georgetown could become part of a larger "waterfront community." Commercial spines. M Street and Wisconsin Avenue must be a vital part of the master plan. Streetscape improvements in other historic communities, such as Alexandria, Fredericksburg, and Annapolis can provide examples. Quality materials and elegant but simple design are important. Community services and facilities. What does Georgetown need in terms of community facilities? What does it share with the city as a whole and with the region? What should it be sharing? In planning for its future, Georgetown must develop a "big picture." Don't be so "precious" or so oriented to an imagined history that you lose sight of real community needs. QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS Comment: (Marilyn Taylor) I would like to underline what Curtis Coward said about establishing deadline-driven procedures. There is a good reason that so many of the large-scale initiatives we have seen over the last ten years 57 �Historic Georgetown, Day Two: Designing Georgetown's Future have come from the private sector, because the private sector has an imperative for decision making that the public sector is often able to sidestep, not necessarily because they mean to do so but because it is so difficult to bring plans to resolution. Another point I want to emphasize is that since the beginning of this country's major road building program in the 1940s, we as designers have learned that roads must be designed qualitatively as well as quantitatively. There is much more to the exercise of laying out a street, a road, or a highway than the number of vehicles that are going to go through it and how many cars are going to turn right or left. Finally, to pick up on Robert Marshall's discussion of Georgetown University's plans, communities across the United States are actively seeking ways in which local universities do not just mean transportation and population problems but function as community resources. For example, students who are motivated to become part of the community, even temporarily, can help with some of the manpower-heavy tasks that a community faces, such as doing some of the initial legwork in researching historic resources. Q: (Mickey Kline) How do we make the two major streets of our commercial area more attractive and useful to pedestrians? A: (Taylor) Although this is a difficult issue, we should remember that sometimes the thing that seems hardest to change is the key that unlocks the problem. I think we have to go back and question whether it is possible to reclaim a traffic lane for the sidewalks. A: (Peter Armato) Apparently M Street has been widened at various times over the years to accommodate the heavy demand for the regional mobility function it serves, which must be taken into account in any plan for significant change. But I think you would garner a lot of support from individual businesses, residents, and maybe even from some people in the District government for the widening of the sidewalks. A: (Dorn McGrath) I agree wholeheartedly. Although folklore and current engineering attitudes in the District of Columbia would suggest that you cannot give up an inch of M Street, the fact is that M Street could give back a lane. In conjunction with an improved K Street, M Street could provide the capacities needed to handle the regional transportation and traffic flow demands as well as accommodate the need for an improved pedestrian environment in Georgetown. Q. (Barbara D. Walker) With regard to all the proposals for redoing the waterfront to make it more attractive for recreation purposes, what about the practical uses to which much of it is now devoted, such as the storing of salt for snowstorms? Where are you going to store the materials necessary to operate our community if they are removed from the waterfront? And what about parking? We will need more, not less, as more people come to Georgetown. A: (Taylor) Certainly we cannot simply push aside all those uses that make our community workable. But there are alternatives. It is the responsibility of the urban design team that you put together to make sure that all those functional aspects of the city are taken care of in the plan. But those 58 �Historic Georgetown, Day Two: Designing Georgetown's Future functions should not be the starting point. The starting point should be: What is it that you want to accomplish? The waterfront has been mentioned by the panelists as a critical element of the plan in at least four different ways: the desire to get people down to the water; the retail opportunities that can occur only on a waterfront; the fact that Georgetown was once an important port, which must be acknowledged as part of a broad interpretation of its history; and the notion of the missing town square, a livability gap that the waterfront might be made to fill. A: (McGrath) There is really only one more building that is likely to be built on the water side of K Street or the freeway: the Rosewood Hotel, which will have its own parking, just as Washington Harbor does, and as all the new buildings on the uphill side of K Street do. So there is no need for any more parking along that street. The important thing is to return the waterfront to park use; if need be, a park could even lend itself to a ferry landing. But storing trucks and salt is hardly the most enlightened use of that land. There needs to be a place in the city for those housekeeping items, but not the Georgetown waterfront. Comment: (Jim Thackaberry) Following up on Peter Armato's concern about the lack of a public square, perhaps the C&O Canal could be used as a kind of long, linear square. Even now, summertime concerts near the foundry treat the canal as the equivalent of a public square. Originally it was the driving force of Georgetown's industrial energy, an element of interpretation that if stressed in the town square concept could connect contemporary Georgetown to an important part of its history. Q: (J. L . Zaring) Yesterday one of the panelists challenged Georgetown to make its own contribution to resolving some of the social problems of the city as a whole. Does the panel have any specific suggestions in this regard? What sort of social contributions might the master plan make? A: (Taylor) One thing you can do is use the master plan to express, if not to resolve, important social issues, and to articulate the connection between Georgetown and other areas of the city, including other historic districts. As Georgetown begins to explain and express itself and its history, if the connections to other places are made clear, that is a significant step toward expressing the larger social responsibilities. A: (Armato) One of the major attractions of Georgetown through the latter part of the nineteenth and early part of the twentieth century was the availability of affordable housing, which meant that people could live within walking distance of where they worked. That is not the case today, and unfortunately for most people who work here, we do not have an adequate link to the regional transit system. Improving connections with metro-rail, along with solving some of the parking and traffic problems, would also improve the pedestrian environment. I do not expect to see more affordable housing in Georgetown, however, without substantial government subsidy. A: (McGrath) No neighborhood in the city wants any part of the homeless, and this ward has been more effective than most in keeping them out. I do not think this is something we should take pride in. Georgetown should consider the example set by two of its neighbors, who have developed a useful 59 �Historic Georgetown, Day Two: Designing Georgetown's Future mechanism based on the knowledge that homelessness is far more profound than simply putting a temporary roof over someone's head or providing some sort of floating public housing. Through the Anacostia-Congress Heights Partnership for the Prevention of Homelessness, those two neighboring communities are taking on their fair share of the responsibility, and a Georgetown partnership could be formed along the same lines. There is a citywide committee of business and neighborhood leaders who are dealing with this critical social need, and this is an effort in which I think Georgetown would be well advised to "become involved. SUMMARY OF CLOSING REMARKS B Y K A T H L E E N HUNTER As our forum draws to a close, I want to say that the National Trust is extremely pleased to have supported this community effort. We are a national organization, but we are in Georgetown's backyard, and if we cannot be relevant to our own community we are not going to be relevant across the country. A number of issues have come up again and again over the last two days. One is the importance of recognizing, celebrating, and giving witness to the preciousness of your resources, your history, and your cultural diversity. Another is that although in the end what you are dealing with are your own community issues, you must seek new partners outside your community to help you develop and carry out your plans and to work cooperatively with you on such enormous citywide and regional issues as homelessness and the Whitehurst Freeway. You must form alliances that will allow you to become problem solvers rather than reactive advocates. You must become proactive planners. I hope we will continue to be one of your partners. SUMMARY OF CLOSING REMARKS BY B . J . GERBER New challenges lie ahead. If the historic district is to survive, vital programs must be developed to meet them. These should bring aesthetic, economic, and educational benefits to Washington, to the region, and to visitors from across the nation and from other parts of the world. In addition to preservation and interpretive activities, we should be concerned with creative urban planning to achieve harmony, beauty, and integrity as we relate the city to its tidewater setting. We should encourage economic development appropriate to the community's needs as a dynamic place to live, work, and visit. Georgetown, as a museum without walls, is a major feature of the local economy. Visitors attracted by scenic, attractive, and informative surroundings bring prosperity to the community. It has exceptional resources for interpreting the founding of the nation's capital. The purpose of this planning forum is to develop unique and innovative programs to interpret that history without disruption to its contemporary functions. 60 �Historic Georgetown, Day Two: Designing Georgetown's Future I want to thank the extraordinary panelists who have worked so hard to help us get this process started. I hope you will stay with us as we move on through the process of developing the documents and submitting them to various citizens groups, business people, and professionals and scholars for consideration and refinement. This process will continue over the next year until we come up with the projects that are going to be acceptable to the community as a whole. I also want to thank the National Trust for its support, without which these meetings could not have happened, and the Morris and Gwendolyn Cafritz Foundation, which provided the funds to begin our process, and MMP International Corporation for its steadfast financial and administrative support. The individual who will be responsible for preparing the initial document, based on these two days of meetings, is William Keens, president of Keens Company. I want to thank him for recording our discussions, which, in written form, will be made available to all of you for your deliberations and input. Finally, I want to close with the observation that, in this process, we are celebrating not only our city, our community, and our families; we are celebrating ourselves as a people, as Americans. We are seeking out and promoting the connections of this wonderful city, the symbol of George Washington's extraordinary vision of nationhood, to all Americans. The story that we are going to be telling is the story of our emerging and evolving nation. It is in our shared heritage that we, at last, catch a glimpse of Historic Washington's glorious future. 61 �OFFICERS. STAFF. AND ADVISORY COMMITTEE Co-Chairoersons J . Jackson Walter President National Trust for Historic Preservation Betty Jane Johnson Gerber President Historic Georgetown Foundation Project Manager Kathleen Ann Hunter National Trust for Historic Preservation Project Assistants Alice Davis National Trust for Historic Preservation Mary Sullivan Historic Georgetown Foundation Advisory Committee Peter Brink, National Trust for Historic Preservation Kennedy Smith, National Trust for Historic Preservation Betsy Jackson, National Trust for Historic Preservation Jeannine Clark, D.C. Bicentennial Commission Adam Foster, National Park Service Kathy Graff, Citizens Association of Georgetown Jim Hemphill, Citizens Association of Georgetown Peter Armato, Business and Professional Association of Georgetown David Levy, Business and Professional Association of Georgetown Richard Stauffer, Business and Professional Association of Georgetown John Blackburn, Business and Professional Association of Georgetown Dorn McGrath, Committee of One Hundred for the Federal City Charles Sullivan, Georgetown University Bob Marshall, Georgetown University Al Wheeler, Civic Leader (Continued) 62 �Historic Georgetown: Officers, Staff, and Advisory Committee Advisory Committee (Continued ) Ken Kerznar, 1st Chicago Bank Juan Cameron, Citizens Association of Georgetown Bill Cochran, Advisory Neighborhood Commission (former) Richard Howland, Smithsonian Institution Wilton Dillon, Smithsonian Institution Pauline Mitchell, African-American Churches Jane North, Historical Society of Washington, D.C. Flo Stone, Earth watch The National Trust for Historic Preservation and the Historic Georgetown Foundation wish to express their appreciation to the Morris and Gwendolyn Cafritz Foundation, which has partially funded the public forum program through a generous challenge grant. 63 �INDEX Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, 18, 19, 49, 52 Affordable housing, 59 African-Americans see blacks African-American culture, 25 Alexandria resurveying boundary stones, 6 Torpedo Factory, 41 Alliances, 60 American Association for Geodetic Surveying, 6 American Congress on Surveying and Mapping, 6 Anacostia, 23 Anacostia Park, 5 Anacostia-Congress Heights Partnership, 60 Analostan Island, 5 Andrews (John Richards), 55 Annapolis, 3 Archaeology (urban), 11 Armato (Peter), 28, 53, 54, 58, 59 Artemal (Janice), 11, 12 Beauchamp (Tanya), 12, 28 Bicentennial Commission District of Columbia, 2 Black cultural history in Georgetown, 14 Black Georgetown Remembered, 14, 27 Black Georgetowners Reunion, 27 Black history, 13, 27 Black tailor, 13 Blackburn (John), 8 Blacks, 1.1 free, 41 see also African-American Culture slaves, 41 Bowman (Carter), 13 Brandywine River, 15 Brodie (Jay), 21 Brooklyn Bridge, 38 Brown (Theresa), 24 Bush (Robert), 19 Business and Professional Association of Georgetown, 3, 8, 45, 46, 49, 53 Business Improvement District, 54 64 �Historic Georgetown: Index Cafritz Foundation, 3, 61 Canada, 8 Center for Washington-Area Studies, 5 Centralized Retail Management, 54 Charleston (South Carolina), 10, 26 Chesapeake and Ohio (C&O) Canal, 11 Chorographical &. Statistical Description of The District of Columbia, 5 Citizens Association of Georgetown, 3, 55 Clark (Jeannine), 2, 3 Clean Georgetown Campaign, 53 Cleveland Park, 5 Collecting strategy, 6 Colonial Williamsburg, 21 Commission of Fine Arts, 55 Common Agenda for History Museums, 3 Community Development Agency (Hoboken), 31 Community safety and crime prevention, 53 Corning Glass Center, 33 Corning (New York), 33 Coward (Curtis), 51 Cultural Alliance of Greater Washington, 3, 7 Cultural diversity, 60 C&O Canal, 11 as a town square, 59 destruction in 1889, 16 last surviving industrial use, 16 Delaware (Dover), 12 DeSchweinitz Fund, 24 DeSchweinitz (Dorothea), 24 District of Columbia Bicentennial Commission, 2 watermills, 15 Division of Public Programs (NEH), 25 Documentation of historic sites, 41 Dover Gaslight Company, 12 Dumbarton House, 3 Dupont Circle, 23, 24 Dutton (David), 52 D.C. Historic Preservation Office, 12 D.C. Law 2-144, 23 D.C. Preservation League, 19, 23 Ecomuseum, 6, 8, 9 Evaluation of programs, 42 Evelyn (Douglas), 4 Event planning, 54 Evidence (historical), 6 65 �Historic Georgetown: Index Federal property management at the local level, 19 Fleming (Ronald), 30, 36, 45, 46, 47 Flint Strike of 1936-37, 38 Fondersmith (John), 56 Forrest-Marbury House, 3, 9 Foxhall Foundry, 11 House, 9, 11 Foxhall (Henry), 11 France (Ruth), 28 Francis Scott Key Park Foundation, 3 Free blacks, 41 Freedom Trail (Boston), 37 Furnishing plans, 41 Georgetown as an outdoor museum, 6 black architectural legacy, 14 black community history, 13 black history archive, 27 black tailor, 13 Citizens Association of, 3 commercial, 21 federal Indian trade, 5 federal versus local issues, 7 Halloween, 53 historic black culture, 14 industrial, 22 lack of town square, 53 location for federal offices, 5 master plan, 39 seven-point action plan, 49 target audience (retail), 39 urban design, 48 waterfront, 5, 11, 15, 46, 50, 58 waterfront as town square, 59 waterfront recreation, 53 Georgetown Incinerator, 13 Georgetown University, 14, 40 Georgetown Visitation School, 40 Gerber (Betty Jane Johnson), 2, 8, 60 Graff (Kathleen A.H.), 3, 47 Grand Central District (NYC), 34 Grand Central Partnership (NYC), 34 Green (Constance McLaughlin), 2 Hannum (Becky), 43 Harrison (Alferdteen), 25 Hemphill (Jim), 3 Historic Districts Council (NYC), 19 66 �Historic Georgetown: Index Historic Georgetown Foundation, 3, 46 seven-point plan, 49 Historic preservation education, 21 Historic Preservation Fund, 12 Historic Preservation Review Board, 13, 23 Historic structures reports, 41 Historical evidence, 6 Historical resources process of inventorying, 7 Historical Society of Washington, D . C , 5, 6 Hoboken (New Jersey), 31 Homelessness, 59 Partnership for Prevention of, 60 Housing (affordable), 59 Hunter (Kathleen Ann), 3, 29, 60 Interpretation strategy, 36 Interpretation (historical), 7 Irish, 5, 11 Jackson State University, 25 Jefferson (Thomas), 4 Keens (William), 61 Key Bridge, 50 Key (Francis Scott), 43 Kline (Mickey), 58 Landmarks Preservation Commission (NYC), 19 Latrobe (Benjamin), 4 LeDroit Park, 5, 24, 25 Levy (David), 3 Levy (Richard), 39, 46 Longstreth (Richard), 39, 45, 46 Lyle (Robert), 46 L'Enfant (Pierre Charles), 50 L'Enfant's plan, 4 Main Street management, 30 Market Street Restoration Agency (Corning), 33 Marshall (Robert), 54 Maryland Society of Surveyors, 6 Massachusetts Pittsfield, 33 Master plan and social issues, 59 Master plan for Georgetown, 39 McGrath (Dorn), 50, 58, 59 McNulty (Robert), 9 67 �Historic Georgetown: Index Merino sheep, 5 Micronesia, 19 Mills (Robert), 4 Mintz (Norman), 30 Mississippi, 25 MMP International Corporation, 3, 61 Montgomery County Historical Consortium, 6 Morris and Gwendolyn Cafritz Foundation, 3, 61 Mount Zion United Methodist Church, 14 National Endowment for the Humanities, 25 National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, 12, 19, 21, 52 National Museum of American History, 3 National Park Service, 12, 39 National Postal Museum, 4 National Register of Historic Places, 13 National Society of Professional Surveyors, 6 National Trust for Historic Preservation, 3 Neighborhood history, 7 New Jersey Hoboken, 31 New York Corning, 33 New York City Grand Central District, 34 Grand Central Partnership, 34 Project for Public Spaces, 30 Newport Center Mall (New Jersey), 31 Ogilvie (Philip), 15 On This Spot, 3 Open Wide the Door: George Washington's Vision for America, 3 Oral history, 7, 13 Outdoor museums, 6 Paint analysis, 41 Parking, 41 Partners for Livable Places, 9 Passonneau (Joseph), 16 Pedestrian improvements, 58 Philadelphia, 26 Pittsfield (Massachusetts), 33 "Port Town to Urban Neighborhood," 5 Presentation of historical evidence, 7 Preservation philosophical concerns, 20 Preservation Alliance, 28 Preservation League, 28 Process of inventorying historical resources, 7 68 �Historic Georgetown: Index Project for Public Spaces (New York), 30 Publications, 40 Retail mix, 10, S3 Sanchis (Frank), 18, 26 Scott (Gary), 42 Section 106 process, 21 Slaves, 41 Smith (Kathy), 46 Smith (Norma Davis), 45 Social needs, 10 Social problems, 59 Society Hill (Philadelphia), 26 Socioeconomic diversity, 10 Stauffer (Richard), 3 Survey historic (basic form), 13 Surveyors Historical Society, 6 Target audience (Georgetown retail), 39 Taylor (Marilyn), 57, 58, 59 Thackaberry (Jim), 59 Theodore Roosevelt Island, 5 Thornton (William), 4 Torpedo Factory, 41 Town square, 59 Transportation planning, 50, 51 Transportation policies, 10 Universities as community resources, 58 Urban archaeology, 11 Video databases, 7 Vieux Carre (New Orleans), 26 Visitors survey, 41 Walker (Barbara Dodson), 46, 58 Walter (J. Jackson), 3 Warden (David Bailey), 5 Washington Historical Society of, 6 Washington at Home, 5 Washington Monument, 4 Washington (George), 4 Washington-Area Studies (Center for), 5 Waterfront Georgetown, 9, 5, 11, 15, 21, 41 Hoboken (New Jersey), 31 "Waterpower in the District of Columbia," 9 69 �Historic Georgetown Index Whitehurst Freeway, 42, 43, 45, 54 Williamsburg (Colonial), 21 Wilson (Patricia), 14, 23, 27, 28 Zaring ( J . L . ) , 28, 59 70 � 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 Historic Georgetown : a nation's heritage, the community's future : a public forum Subject The topic of the resource Georgetown (Washington, D.C.) Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Georgetown Heritage Trust Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource March 1991 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Citizens Association of Georgetown Georgetown University Historic Georgetown Foundation 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 town meeting to discuss a master plan for the Historic District of Georgetown as a follow-up to the March 19th, 1991 planning forum. This project was undertaken with a grant from the Cafritz Foundation as part of the Bicentennial Celebration of Washington, D.C. https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/81f5f46d831775f826d9d36f2138cfdf.pdf?Expires=1782345600&Signature=uDxOPgpgA6g%7ECP%7EEzQdPZBM5MFxQfGvYAAo9DmdIw44KIQt6q3Jys0Kg4Yn9pkX3pW0az%7EvAhjIxq5D4ZBN74vnMqm-gV1VImRv%7EC1QRsHcfKYiE6pJjHZYjRrJprSbf8M56E9zkAK3PkX9WFEn1bw6RtjJ0MmvaB7WrjTpKZjJ3IdXk-r85qKSNt8NPnQv3FOF11x3ZVMEGx%7EhX0BUGuuNfLETLXcwMx1MUFkD8%7ECfilb0PvD16v4MYqkXSiEpQoweoWZaAUWV8QRMXshyJKDbVolFs1lTQ322mFdtxrsNqQoVwgDYsg5tPlGSdLF8L0y4VUx7BY6BbJNIh7PnGLQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM aef77bf2228a5dd5d87de7ffbe0bdd43 PDF Text Text 4 a z Xlfr.g LsI tl I ,¡tß I ¡ t;l ai¡C%t tatf¡t3 é 0 ( E g0r [] n [p' t t GEORGETOWN PARKING PLAN DECEMBER 1986 6 ÆÉ^' l'.8rBft¿qft-f FiË ili;ij'ï ] i.URi{ TÚ 0íilCl-: tìF PCt.lCY ,ô.ND Pl/'ri:i:i:i'!û t'Tfjlì:(¡i t)ãPT' CIÎ: Pufli'lC G0VT. 0t TllE DISTRICT 0i: dt'tulltìlÅ ,/ F|LE l'!0: l,t/" I �GEORGSIOïN PARXIT¡G PLAT¡ Slf'DY ÀI¡D REæIIHE¡{DAIIONS @: l¡lichelLe R. LaViolette, Transportat,ion Planner DPI{, Off ice of Policy and Planning t¡lark Brownr Í{ard 2 Planner Office of Planning Tom VanVechten, Senior Parking Analyst DPlt, Bureau of Parking Services Contr i butors Wallace DPw, J. Cohen, Deputy Administrator Office of Policy and Planning Jill Dennis, Special Assistant Office ot Planning %rb <L of Frederic R. Caponitir Chief DPÍ{, Bureau of Parking Services o. q eciation to Barbara Smith' Secretary DPf{, Office of Policy and Planning Soecial aù", a 9litliams, Secretary Office of Planning Donna eof P C. Bernard Gilpin Administrator Off ice of Pl.anninq I 4"4 / Fred L. Greene Director Robert O. Admini D. strator Thompso �GEORGETOWN PARKING PLAN STUDY AND RECOMMENDATIONS II|TROIX'CTION In order to permit creation of a Georgetown $laterfront parkr transfer of jurisdiction over District, owned property arong the Georgetown waterfront to the u. s. National park Service was approved by the city councir on the District of columbiar Resolution 6-284r on. September 10r I985. A parking lot management firm currently operates a 400- s¡nce public parking lot on pait of tþis Property under a lease which witt Ue eñaea ny the traãsfer. The City CounciL provided, in Section 4 of the trãnsfer Resolution, that the transfer is contingent upon development of a ptan which am.eliorates.any adverse ef f eõts on the comnuñity aùã to the loss of those parking spaces. This report presents such a plan. ft: Ànalyzes the present parking situation and docunents current conditions; rdentifies the probable effects of the transfer ¡nrking conditions¡ and on Presents recommended approaches to deal with the transfer of land and addresses additional parking issues. PRæLEüS STBüTIT¡G FROtr CSANGB Ir LÀtfD T'SE severar probre¡n areas have been ident,if ied for the parking pran, such as: a User group variations - Several types of users, with different parking needs, exist in Georget,own. a varying time demand Peak demand for ¡nrking occurs during weekday o Limited distribution of ¡nrking ca¡ncity throughout the area off-street ¡nrking facilitiee are concentrated south of M afternoons. SÈreet. o Enforcement, igsues - There is a proble¡n with illegally parked vehicles in Georgetown. The many, varying parking demands in Georget,own create a multiplicity of parking problerns. Each of these problems are detailed in t,he following paragraphs. �-2Parking is needed in Georget,own for re sidents, commercial uses (office and retail) r university usêrsr and various types of short term users. Each of these groups has different parking needs. The elimination of the parking lot on K Street and lrlisconsin Avenue Northwest will have the greates t lmpact on the commercial users due to the weekday afternoon pea k demand for parking and the locaÈion of the lot near com¡nercial of f ices. Demand for parking availability varies at different times during t,he day. Peak demand occurs during_weekday afternoons. A highpercentage of the ¡nrking spaces off-street and on-street are fitled from l:30 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. The greateet need for all existing parking facilities occurs during these hours. off-street parking facilities are not evenly distributed throughout the study area. Off-street parking Iots are concentrated along t,he southern portion of Georgetown (south of M street) with few lots north of t¡! st,reet. The aiea south of M Street has the highest demand during the weekday afternoon peak period. The highest frequenclz of on-street parking violations occurs in the eveningg when there are more than enough off-street parking sPaces available to accommodate all the violators. This-problem may _þe. caused by negative percepÈions of off-street parkiñg conditions such as distance to destination, the desiie to park for freer and safety concerns. Increased parking enforcement ãt night and inproved ¡narket,ing strategies to educate drivers of actual off-street ¡nrking- conditions would help alleviate such problems as blocked crosswalks, driveways, and fire hydrants causéd by illegal evening parking, and should encourage the illegal palkers to use the many vacant, off-street spaces. However, additiónar enforcement would not alleviate the problems on weekday afternoons which are caused by heavy demand. The change in use try to park. south is expected to inpact ¡nost commercial users who of M Street during the weekday afternoon peak parking periodr 1:30 to 3:00_p.m. To relieve the parking pioblems associated with the change of land use, we must fiist anãtyze these ¡nrticular areas of concern and the existing parkingconditions in Georgetown. PARßITre @.rDIIIONS Field studles were made in October 1985 of both off-street and on-street parking condlt,ions in Georgetown. For the pur¡nse of this study, the Georgetown area was defined as the eniirè area �-3FIGURE I I'ÀRKING STUDY SYNOPSIS OF RESULÎS OF 1985 GEORGE'rOI'TN R Street, ì'¡w ÀREÀ 8 ÀREA À }leekday Daytime Àfternoon !{eekday Daytime ÀfÈernoon - | Off-Street Off-Street Spaces = 220 å Vacant Spaces Off-St = 20 Ë å Vacant, Ratio Vacant/IIlegaI Ratio Vacant,/fllegal On-Street Spaces = LL/26 ¿J o o ¡.r L) |t) On-SÈreet Spaces = LI/6 l{eekend Evening o Í{eekend Evening Ê ; Off-Street Sp".." s 220 i Vacant Spaces Off-St = -I3 Ratio of VacanE/Íllegal On-StreeÈ Spaces = 2/83 o 4 s t,re e t H - ; Off-Stre€t E L) rtt avì |Ú = 55 å Vacant Spaces Off-St = I Ratio of Vacant,/IIlegal On-SÈreet Spaces = 2/89 Spaces 3 x ¡.6 À NW ÀREÀ D ß.Jeekday = 55 Spaces Off-St = 9 Spaces AREÀ C Daytime Àf ternoon l'leekday Dayt.irne Àfternoon å Off-Street Spaces = 1428 i Vacant Spaces Off-St = 206 Ratio of Vacantr/Illegal On-Screet Spaces - 6/Ls å Off-StreeÈ Spaces = I5I7 c o o (, u, I{eekend Evening å Vacant Spaces Off-St Ratio of Vacant/Illegal 9 On-SÈreet Spaces = L4/L0 I.leekend Evening ç Off-Street Spaces = 1129 I Vacant Spaces Off-St = 126 Ratio of Vacantr/f 1legal On-Street, Spaces - 0/68 . Potomac ; Off-Street - 832 å Vacant Spaces Off-St = 188 Ratio of Vacant,/Illegal On-SCreet Spaces = 3/26 River Spaces x o o I,t U J( o o ú �aL- J .-- c) -F---ì t::)l :il o ¿l -' tr- t\\ ra\r'r: ' ¡ r¡. ^gEr-Íl ' - I -, :*'-q] ffi ==r +J e.- o l:. !l a --J ,t (>o ( I I I t ti I I I I - I 5 I I STI.ÐY AREA BOI.õIDARY t¡llfllllllt STEAREA BOUNDARY STUDY AREA AND SUBAREAS o. pob+<c o 0 A THROUGH D o a ,e/y€/? \ -4- o �- t---l t- Ë¡ t¿ ¡ - a er -a1 îi\ I I -) a L J ? :ll-l E.i-- ==r le¿2 lo a '/ 1\ t= - -..) .J oo I I ì I ¡ I I I , ( I vl i I ') 1 o PAR(ìIG LOT r' PARKING LOT D!STRIBUTION ð. þotoe<c ¡ e/y¿7P i¡ o �-6nort,h of the Potomac River, sout,h of R Street N.W., east of 35th st¡eet, N.w. ¡ and west of Rock creek. To perrnit analysis of any differences between conditions in differenL ¡nrts of lt¡is study' arear it was subdivided along M Street and Wisconsin Avenue, N-.W. into four subareas. These were: Subarea A: north of !t Street and west of Ílisconsin Avenue; Subarea B: north of M Street and east of t{isconsin Avenuei Subarea C: south of M St,reet and east, of Wisconsin Avenue and D: South of M St,reet and west of hlisconsin Avenue. The off-street sÈudies were made daily from Wednesday, October zlld through sunday oct,ober 27Frr. vehicres parked iñ each off-street public parking^IoÈ or public aarage in the entire study area rrere counted. every 90 minutes f rom 9:00 â.r[. through g:00 p.m. On Friday the 25Èh and Saturday the 26th, an additional count was made between 10:30 p.Ír. and 12:00 midnight of each public parking facility in Georgetonn that was open. The results of the off-street surveys are shown in Tables I through 5. Tabre I shows thg supply of off-street, parking spaces in Georgetown aa a wholer and the usage of those spáces a[ vãrious times during the week and on weekends. Table 2 shóws the average conditions in each subarea during the day on wednesday, Thursdaf and Friday. Table 3 shons the average conditions in éach subarèa on wednesday and.Thursday evenings. Table 4 shows the average conditions on Friday and Saturday nights in each subarea. rã¡te S shows conditions in each subarea during the day on saturday. Table 6 shows the eituation on Sunday. Parking condit,ions on-street were observed during four different litS pgliods on both Thursday' October 24th and Saturday, October 26th, 1985. The time periods studied were: (a) the 9:30 - r0:30 â..ttì. pgliod to observe norning conditions af ter the rush hour; (b) the 1:30 - 2:30 p.r. early afternoon period; (c) the 6:00 - 7:00 p.n. dinner hour¡ and (d) the 9:00 - r0:00 p.m. evening period. A representative sample of 18 street segments was setected- for study. This sample consists of a representative mixture of arterial. streets and both commercial and residential blocks. lIB STT'DY OP IOFF-STRBBTI PÀRIING SPACB The total off-street parking supply in Georgetown is 32zo spacea. During weekdays, 37 9 of those spaces are reserved under long-term Subarea �-7leases, eo 284r spaces are available to the general public. This number varies slightly from time to time during the day because several small lots are reserved part of the day, but open to the public at other tÍmes. One of those lots belongs to a restaurant which reservea s¡nce for customers during some hours and opens the Iot to the general public at ot,her times. The geographic distribuÈion of the_public s¡nces are signÍficantly unbal.anced. In subarea Ar north of ltl Street, and west of Wisconsin Avenuer one ¡nrking garage and one parking lot with a combined ca¡ncity of 220 vehicles are located in the 3200 block of prospect Street. In subarea B' north of M Street and east of WisconsinAvenue, there is only one parking lot with a capacity of 55 vehicles. This lot is located on the north side of tne g000 block of l¡l Street (on the southern border of this subarea) , which places it at, a considerable distance from rnany of the residences, religious institutions, recreational facilities and small businesses located in the center and northern portions of subarea B. The motorist who wishes to visit a residence or church on say Q. Street wil.l have a considerable waLk to reach that off-street ¡nrking. seven parking garages and two parking rots are fairly well geographically distributed throughout subarea C, sout,h of- M street and east of wisconsin Avenue, and give a combined pubtic capacity of 11182 vehicLes. In subarea D, south of M Street and west of ftisconsin Avenue, four parking garageg and three ¡nrking lots give a combined public ca¡ncity of 11384 vehicles. Htnougn there are several smaller facilities along M Street, moet of thé off-street parking capacity in subarea D is concent,rated arong K./Water Street. AlI of the above figures are for the middte óf a weekday. These public capacity figures change from time to time throughout the day and evening as facilities open or close and as some spaces become reserved t ot reservations for daytime users end. During the evening and on weekends, some facilities south of M Street, cIose. The geographic dist,ribut,ion of reserved spaces is also unbalanced. The majority of the reserved spaces are in subarea C, south of tit Street and east of l{isconsÍn Avenuer where 335 spaces out of the total supply of 1517 are reserved. The remaining 44 reserved spaces during the day are in subarea D, south of M Street and west of Wisconsin Avenue. Off-street parking charges in Georgetown typically run in the range of $1.75 to S2.75 for the first hour and S3.50 to $5.00 for the two hours¡ eight hour rat,es are in the $6.00 to 98.50 range, depending on location. �TABIE 1 Off-street Parking c_onditio^ns Throughout AII of during 0ctober, lggs Situat ion During the OctoÞ¡r. tgb! OFF-6IRLET ¡|ÊEKDâY AVEÍTAGE OFF-6IRÉ,EI l'Akx¡N6 COND¡TIONS ¡N TIH€ ùúackd¡y Avcr.ga fot¡l ¡{eckd.y Al I 6' Torn H.cké¡y ¡ IG 'forn t{eckday Al IG 'ïown lÈckclay Al t6 'fown lJaekdey Al ¡G 'Torro $æ¡(day Al t6 '?orrn roF roå' RË,S¡DG,NÌ6 CLOSÊLr or TY Ol{LY RE Sf,t{vLD OBSÊRVED 6PACE6 SPACES f'Ê(,fr6È,lO]dN AR€A tESIGN CTIPAC¡ PER¡OD Georgetown Day on l{eekdays lC ta PUIrL lC C,IPAC¡fY SPAC€S llutrl- OSSERVED VACAN| ,A PUEL¡C CAPACTTY vAcâNr H&I IIANY H(,{' Lot6 rooz oR + FLl-L xol. NANY LOIS 957. ÌHRU 99.¿ Fr¡-L rrâ|tY LOIS BgZ ¡Hru 942 ÍULL fOtAL I LOt6 a5z . oR FULL V¡luo¡ {or All of Georgetown. 9: Oe-¡er 30 l(¡¡ SO-Noon Noon- I ! SOa,! tt3O-3rOO po 3¡OO-¿l¡30 pr¡ 4130-6rOO pr s220 o 3220 o J220 3220 3220 3220 o <t o o 3e2 37e 37e 379 379 364 ¡8ì8 2a4 t ôôB lB4 r ^B4r 534 2e52 ótr 38¡l 49t 25.6 59A I 24 2 2 L7 4 2 2 t2 I l¿t 2t 5 i) ? o 5 5 7 s s 5 2 4 9 ¡t t3 t3 to 7 I æ I situat ion in the Evening During the Middre of the l{eek l'lld-¡rræk Êitu¡tIon in At¡ Ofl-6trcrt Parking F.cf¡it¡Gr Thro{rghout Gaorgcto¡rn At Nfght. Avo Alt 6'torñ órOO-7r3(t pr 3220 o s¡l t 2A79 t2ó3 Ar9 Af¡ 6'toïn 7r3O-9rOO gr s22(J Itt 38t 272? t27l Avg All 6'to+rn 9rOO-tOrSO p. s220 ttt 493 2ó't7 t37ó 44 47 o 53 2 o 2 2 o o 2 3 4 I o I t t s a Situat ion on Friday and Saturday Nights ¡t'kcnd ¡l'lend l{'k?nct ¡{'k.õd Ngt Avg r{gt Avg Ngt Avg N9È Avg ôrO{r-7r30 po 7r3O-9rOO pn 9rOú-l0r3O pa lOs 3O-ñr ónl9ht 322(, s220 322C, 3220 5ô ¡tt rtt t¡t óo7 632 792 673 2558 2437 23r' 223ô ¡ t4s 929 475 30a 45 38 ?o ta I 4 ó I 3 3 2 7 o Io �TABLEl(Continued) Off-Street Parking Conditions throughout All of during October, 1985 Georgetown Situation During the Day on Saturday and Sunday (ktobar. t9ti3 OFF-51ÊËE1 PAR.<tlß IF TOF 8Y AREA| ¡ lN A-L 6EOr{6ETOùht DESlGll ftESID€NrA CLOSEI¡ or CâPâCTTY OI{.Y RE6EßVED AREA T¡}€ PSR¡OD DAY O8SER\rED EPACES SF'îCES S¡t S¡t S¡t DAY ltrTAL DAY TOTAL DAY TOlAL S¡È ¡}AY TOïAt Sct S¡t I'AY ÏOTAL DAY TOTAL TOTfl. 5uo DAY Sr¡o Sr¡o Sun Sun DAY TOTAI- 9¡n DAY lOTA. DAY 1(}1AlDAY lflÏArDAY lOTAL ?¡ OO-tO¡ 3O lO¡ 3O-Noor¡ Noon- l¡SO¡o l¡30-5¡(lO p¡ 3rOO-413O po 4r3O-ôrOO pr 9¡ OO-IO¡ 3O lO¡ 3o-Noon ¡tooñ- 1¡ soa¡ lr3O-3rOO pr 3¡OO-4¡3O p¡ 4r3O-órOO pr 3220 3220 3220 3220 322(, ¡tt trt 32æ tlt ¡¡t !lt ttl 3220 3220 3220 3220 3220 3220 ttt Itt ¡rl tlt t¡ I ttt FUBL¡C PUA-¡C ' CíTPACITY SPACES OtiSErrv€D VACA¡ÍÍ c93 ?2tê 3?tå 22të 893 a73 223r' 893 ee3 e7l 2t94 tâ¡ó 22s6 ¡g¡t9 tó4ó a3 74 s2 70? 77 84 7ë 57 9¡5 t8¡14 r370 ro52 t8¿01 ¡ ?toa VACAù{T ¡ 162 r2ôS t2æt roos CâPACITY ê2 45 rStl rsrS t{or{ ñANY Hf¡t{ rråNV PUTIL¡C r3B3 999 93ô r29ó t29é Z tg.2o tos ¡9t. 4S ôo 72 t{oüt ñâNY LOTS LOTS LOï5 tooz oR 932 Tlnu e:ia Tr*r, o o 3 2 (, o o o C, o o a LOTS Fr.iJ- asz m + FlLL o 2 ¡ 2 ¡ I 2 6 + FL¡LL t9Z Ftt-L ?42 a TOTí{ o o I o o o o o o ct I 2 3 o o o 2 o o I I I o o o 2 o o I \o I �_t0_ Na.a7t?t ÊJ fno.J 'Jl- t CO,{tr l- J l¡1 o @. OCNN-O eâo0o0 > :J :O¡fJ /tÞff ¡:OF¡! 3 ñN o lllc OONNTO .>ooooo oooooo oooooo N¡¡l,)ÐN O-ONOO ooÐoâo oâoooo N!'(?nNO o00000 ,,tr1000À a,-1 tlN -C{À@N€ .tnr-a(' ç-<â-N Ì\trNNcO N< NOO.:./rÍ) <N({ -OO.i-t'l Nç€ O- 0Ð.?.)Ðo ({Nc{ô'NôI oon¡tnYtúr fr tf¡ fl n f¡ r{f{l.lfvltc'l (D@o@oo r oo > f J zttrífJ <t)-Il Eo¡-t! J 3 ¡.tñ o où r oo É q) t z atJ 4.to f EÞ J oNl¡ 3Jâ o .3+ :¡d (J>Þ áÞz I o t I t Ò0 J-4 q¡UU þ oUl Éy .Å (lt- ol ¡tl þæ <CD ooF -uz J(Jc aD4(J c) (D :¡ 0. <t ¡L(,l> É a O >ô t¡, JUG iD t¡, xx 〠ä'-: f .:ð .E¡- L' t- u P = r-Ê è0t c É"o ,'â o q) L O P 3/' L o.) tn u, lrÊ>l¡, Ot¡rCU U,Jr{ 30t,l0, Ju uú v, o Þ io r¡l¡;rþ c'OJIJ - z<L al/!ôa! r4(,l a >ô ZFt¡, t0-) rcrú o<t¡ u¡0.o ê<tlD (JO o z 3 z eoocoo IrÞG l! ¡¡¡ o O ¡t l¡, c(9 L(l ttt J' tt, ÉC (D I z Ot! -t¡gl o2 ..o t.¡J- ooF O€x oüo .tuz u>o o<¡u C ¡ c c c c I l¡ ú c o U ll ooc.9eÐ c c c o U ! 3 c ooo'too (\¡NNNôIôI o u I I NNNNNN o rc c a ¡, l¡ û L at at E o C L o z e€€€ a o'o,o, I69ooo - O -Olîo Oz?¡--d I nrf € rol r I orlcooô O ¡ Otâ6Ð -o o - o<z<rrç ¡ r <r<c(tc<t aan(¡a¡ú llrûttû L\LLIL <l(t<r<t<f(t '!lot,0.!'f EDD!DO ¡JJJ*j. å 3:¡3333 oû,ûù0ro ll¡ û û, 0, 0r !, c ÀÀÀr\Nt\ nYtn¡ì9lr¡l l<-<-d ! c a l¡ t € an E o Ê at t' o z tD a ù tr, rôt ¡ I I 9lt cooo â - Ot4OYt -ô O - ¡ O<Z-ttrl - o f oz---d I nco &ia@¡¡QóQ atlaa ùû,3ûC a LLLLL ¡ <¡<r<(t<t å I>>>>> !oõ!fto 9DÞÞþE -ll3¡l.gJ {rtoùero ar¡ûoûù è 333333 ! c I l/' E o c t o att o ¡ L o u oÐoo@o 1r'{r{r{ññ .tçç<?çrl t --<-t< 3 a C€€€ õ o co o.oo, r1 0ltooo -O-Orl) OZ- - - < I ÞC{ roltrt ovtcooo O OÌâOr1 ¡oo--OrZ-t,'rt rJ(JorJoo daa.¡{,¡ t¡¡¡ùüo IltLL¡.L <r(l<t(lc<t n u a c o o €g€e ocâa o,oè vt orrÐoo - O -Ol/lO )oÐ0.)o c Úl u, I 2 ü o a õ o 3 a .t a c oll'r¡útút¡t r¡f)nnnf¡ o ¡ i¿6 O r¡, < l¡, 3Ë t¡l o Èz 0. l¡lÉz ¡¡J ¡(3 U, ¡f(OE ÞCt-x o0.urÞ ro z ÀçCçç(? ulçÇ<?çc '¿ rt¡ 3 €'ooooo o 3 ã 1ì11l);l"¿1 '¡ '. t¡ lt t1 ,1 ta ì7 ln ì1 l¡ a I qoâo.fo â ? o.).f t o (t, l+¡ l+¡ ---d<- uo -g oÊ ct(l Ê.2 -çrtl'!tC r\OiDO@(D ltr,tn"1nFl -a--a-d-<-< < cèc.É Þ &.|rY olNÑNf\lN -ÀO{ái ¡ÐO9ûa tlrt.'{NNr) - J.LrD I!Cú L).¡ ..r Àô<o<o ¿C{N<NN <t ñu ! Ée.flt NrnôLE 1'l N'lCNfIN '/!a¡¡<N eis ox (..'(l' af\t\aoe û ¡ ! C a €GG' oc3è40 14 OIlOOO s.Q -Ot'tÕ ¡ <| lol I 'JÁ--â- L o E o c J o o r?('óa r r ? - OÐOå -Ð O O-Z-taç - o11 cûoÕ Êooaoo raaaaaa 0rù¡¡oùt åè&ååå a ¡!{õ{at rt!oDort JJJ¡¿J !OOAr0'û ¡¡rùCrù1, 333333 a¡ a t å aaatoa þltoD!D ;i¡:.I¡J Qrùgùùû ü¡,lrùta 333t3¡ �-11TEBXDAY 'OPF-S1'RBBTT COIIDITIONS DURIRG TEB INY For Georgetown as a wholêr _the period of greater parking demand does not come on a weekend_nigñt, but rafher during the afternoon on 3 weekday-_ Tþe period of greatest, demand starts-around noonrpgqbs in the l:30 Èo 3:00 p.m. period¡ and drops offices empty in the 4:30 to 6rô0 p.m. period.- off strãiprv-ãä' As shown in Table lr the three-day (I{ednesday, Thursday and Friday) average !9taf number of vãcant spaceË off-streêt in all Georgetown,was 491 in the 10:30 to noon þeriod; 334 in the nòon of ió from |:lo period¡.256olry 9t:30 to 3:00; and gga from 3:00 to 4:30. This means that percent of the total suppry oi spaces throughout Georgetown wère vacant during the ri¡o'tã-3:itO p.r. peak. Comparisons of the day-by-d9V. observations showed that Friday the 25th was the busiest d"y., ,¡!h only lg3 spaces empty, and l{ednesday the 23rd was the rightest weekdãy obserieä with 322 vacancies. There were significant differences in the differgnt.parts.of Georgetown. Subarea c situations in the and (south oi-u east of Wisconsin Avenue) had the highest int,ensity ofStreet *iããÀV-ü"e of _parking spa99s with 97-percenÈ of-the available'spac"s in use on f{ednegdayl _ 99_ percent in use on Friday¡ and 103 pårcent in use 9It Th9lgday (l'215 vehicles ¡nrked in l rlgz spaces). rte more than 100 percent use came about because cars ùere parked in aisles and access ramps. _ 9uç! parking in excess of capacity was observed in subarea c from l0:30 ã.m. tõ 3:00 p.m. rn èontrãst, subarea B (north of ltt SÈreet and east of $tisconËin Avenue) has thê towest midday g9e of its off-street parking with only 78 rã gl pãiceñi of its smalr number of. spaces being uséd (43 vehicres parked on wednesday.and 50 vehicles ¡nrked on Friday in the tðtar 5s-"p.ce" available) . lf!"t 9i00 p.nì. on the wednesday and Thursday studied, the intenslH-of uae of off-st,reet þrking spaceè droppeã'shãipty. L,?09 fpaces in Georgetown îerg t"I. Èhe total spaces were vacant-by ip"ñ bur vacåñr; a4 pãiêenr of 6:0ô p.[ì. and sl þrcent of the total Bpaces were vacant by 9:00 þ.m. As shown by Tabl€ 3r there nas a noticeable difference in conditions on midweek evenings between the differen|-subareas. general, evening demand was stronger in subarea A and B north of In M Street'r and was weakest in subaiea C South of l,t Street and east �TABLE 3 Off-Street Parking Conditions By Area in Georget own during October. 1985 Situat lon in the Evening During the Middle of t he l{eek ruF rOF CLOS€D or CAPâCIIY ONLY FË.6LKVLD AR€A TI¡T€ PERIOD DAY OBSERVED sPACTS SPACES Are¡ A ¡r North of ll 6trect ¡nd lle¡t ol Hi¡con¡¡n Ava.. ltl. flctot¡ert &Y AREAi Ar9 4"9 Avg 1985 OFF-SrkEE,f PARKINO & lN Al.L Area Arol 6t¿t A â A 6€OR6ÊTOtn{ 6rOO-7r30 po 7t30-9rOO po 9¡OO-lO:5O pr DE6¡6N f{ES¡DEN¡5 220 220 2æ o o o âra¡ I is North of ll Strect ¡nd E¡rt of ¡'rlaconr¡ñ Avc., Are¡ B Avg. 6¡OO-7¡3O pr 53 o Are¡ B Avg. o 7r5O-9rOO pr Avg. Arc¡ I 9¡(to-lO¡ SO pr 55 o r PUFLIC OF8€RV€D VACANI FUSLIC cruAC¡TY SlAcEs Hot{ tlANt HgX ñA¡ìty HÛTI LOÏS LOTS ',IAI{V LOTS CAPAC¡ ¡oo1 (n 951 T|{RU 8J1 T}IRU VACA¡¡T 'Y + Fu-L 992, Ft[-L 9'I, FILL 7. PUBL¡C o o o 22i) 220 220 9ó a8 69 ¿ls o o o 55 26 a6 40 3t o o o o o o o o o o TOT,TL r LolS B9Z OR + FI,LL o o I ¡ o o o o I t Nhl. 53 2t t2 s8 2t o o I I I À) I A¡'r¡ C ¡r South of l't Strrat Avg Avg Avg î<l.e¿ Are¡ Arc¡ C C C .nd E.rt of hll¡conrfn âv1., ô¡OO-7¡3O 9c 713O-9rOO po 9rOO-lOr30 pr t5t7 t5t7 t5t7 o o o Nlrl. 304 395 46,7 r2¡s I t63 roSt so9 42 53E ¿lg o I o I 7t4 óa 2 o é34 604 5a2 4ô 45 o o o o o 44 o ¡ ! I 2 o o o o ? a I Arc¡ D ¡r South ol ll Stræt cnd hlr¡t ol hl¡¡coo¡¡n Avr., Avg. A¿r¡ D ô¡OQ-7¡3O pn r42A o Arg. Arc. D 7r3O-9rOO ga ¡429 tt¡ Avg. ârc¡ D 9¡OO-lOr5O p¡ l¡r?8 ttt Nll. ñ¡d-wrck Situ¡tio¡r Throughout Georgetown At Nfght. 4"9 Av9 AvE in All Off-Strut AlI G'toLô ó¡OO-7¡30 pa All G'tom 7r3O-9rOO pr âll 6'to*n 9rOO-lOr5O pr Perking F.cilitica 3220 5.220 3220 o ttl Itt 37 26 2ó s4t 39r ¿l9s t39l l29t tzftt 2e79 2729 2617 t263 t27t t57ó 47 17 s3 I 2 o o o o ¡ o 2 I I 2 3 a �-13- of Wisconsin Avenue. At 9¡00 P.m.r the vacanclr rate was 21 percent in subarea B, 3l percent in subarea A, 45 percént in subarea- c, and 68 percent in subarea D. The fact that subarea c had the highest. int,ensity of use during the dqyr but the lowest intensity of use in the evenings (and on weekends) appears related to the high intensíty of comnerciar development in subarea c and the higher concentration of residences and of eating and evening recreational attractions in other areas. It is worth noting that in subarea D 111 spaces available to the general public during the day on weekdays are reserved for resident8 at night and on weekends. This policy ¡nakes maximum use of tfege spaces by assuring !þat !!¡e residènÈs have a place to park at night. and on weekends' while allowing the general puUtic to üse spaces that are vacated by residents duiing tlie day. .OFF-SIRBEEI PÀRßING @TIDITIOT|S OT FRIIIAY AND SÀTT'RI}AY IIIGETÍ' If all of Georgetown is treated as a singte arear then the usage of off-street-parkilg spaceg on Friday and Saturday nights is less intense then it is during the early afternoon peak-period on weekdays. Th_" highest^level of Georgetown-wide off-street parking observed was betneen 10:30 p.r: and midnight on Friday night when 87 percent-(1'940) of the total of 2t236 spaces open to tñe public etere occupied. Usage on Saturday night was closely similar with Lr925 vehicles ¡nrked off-street. There nere 304 spaces vacant, during the 10:30 to midnight period on the average ót these two weekend nights. Howeverr if the 873 other spaces that were closed due to lack of demand on weekend nights were opened, there would have been an average of IrL77 vacant spaces available on weekend evenings. Er/en without opening those closed lots, there is not a shortage of spaces off-street at night in Georgetown as a whole at the present ti¡ne. six hundred and eighty-five (695) of the g73 closed spaces are in subarea c, and the rernaining lB8 are in subarea D. However, Table 4 shows dra¡natic differences between the off-street parking sltuat,ions in different ¡nrts of Georgetown, and t,hat nost of the probren ie north of !l street. None of the spaces in subarea A or Br are ever cloeed for lack of demand. In subarea A (north of l¡l street, and west of wieconsin Àvenue) the demand exceeded the supply on both Friday and Saturday nights with extra cars parked brocking garage aisles and ramps when arl. normal spaces were full. In subarea B (north of lrl Street and east of $Iisconsin Avenue) the one small lot was full from 9:00 to l0:30 p.m. (109 percent full on Friday night and 95 percent furr on Saturday night). In subarea Cr the de¡nand peaked at 77 percent of Èhe open spaceg occupied (r88 spaces vacant) with 685 spaces �-14O¡Nôl ÞJ¡'I qr{ltlt7 O<¡O OO¡ô rOl<< -N-(T ()ooo O-Oo O{-- O-frr oo<N OO-¡ g -NN O<¡ôl rt-¡\o | ¡4'-7 ÀÜ'ôlU¡ Ì1 - ooeTt UIC'1N O-c< ùll,t<a .o{ft À{¡- I lrll o ô¡<< -6-l1 N r1 |,tco o.Àoô f'lt'N- €ô!tO 3tl\a\ñ (lfâi- -'âJla o+ ãETJ EOÞtr l'ËË I8FÉ J I rtN i88 ÍesJ or.tlr É t o 3JO o ot 1- o è0 o c, E É = (9 ..1 cú o¡n þ@ -t l¡l )¡ co F o>Þ -Þ2 J¡C .tt k {o¡ à tO. k B?H o.o.> Þ0 *E x .ú lJOIil¡¡:? JlJ< ¡¡ <l Ct 'o ¡. fÀc Àul> +t >o (JÞ r¡¡ Ðooo NNNN $ ft bo O ¡¡l oooo oooo a .ú Ë-> Jqrat ¡& c r¡¡ t¡(¡l Àcf¡ JO n) ÉÞ .o É (t ¡U .¡O € € U¡o oo Éà0 oÊ: (J.,¡ þ è0ã É€ x ct 1. f¡. o É o È act (t ar It, o þ l¡¡ .OUDG Jl¡¡l! L'É o Þ É ¡r å¿ lrC¡>l¡¡ õUIIU<l (,l z(¡ Õ:dg o 2 t c otoo 3 2 ¡ c oÐoo C I frnnû o.'oo art€o oÐoo NNt{- l,) ÈÀO -oêO , t <t lrT¡,>¡I C C c .goà a 6 u ll a 6 u o U a fl¡¡a C a c o ú >ê 2þt,¡ OÉ> = .- -IJG O(lI¡l (r, HÈ8 31, I llt q{ I 2 3 oooo {-rôl /}NI\N Nl\,'IYI oo o@ J:t út nrìnn N'{l\lN 2 s 3 Ð00â N(INN NI{NÑ Ë¡r ãtË lÉ Þ rl.J bd ttz DU¡ r¡ ôx (¡ ã L(t ¡ l¡, ôil oc .r> 8ìs oñôo 0 b ccc€ z aaaa o¡a¡ a åååå ! c a ¡ Ð!)rà c flO¡o ¡ ¡ ¡9 .) f¡ E o ß t L o 2 a Nô<E ååå¿ OràOl/¡ .ãñ;ð .¡¡o.0 tala ¡f¡¡ åååå ! C I t a ¡ L ., o E o a at ð rt r¡ t I @(DofD N({NC{ (t(?!?(l o 4 a rl a ae ¡aot o oo.9 { ¡ nlrnn ¡ 3 l¡¡ ¡d E c a 3 r, o a o a t¡ o E 3 fl út ú!trro ul ùl o o t I ato èÊ eÀ c'< a¡ ¡ Ogr't C a râê r! ¡ ¡O'¡ Þt¡¡ G L ,\o-t l¡l 19 l¡, trll u¡c c at o900 llc, t OrtgÞ - lt C ttola,o cê Ðr'Ðrû c flÕ -o ¡ ¡O ¡ FOTE åsåå OrâOÐ {]\OO Þ c tl a¡ a 3 (rt E ò 1., aacr oÀ .' O.¡ ooÈ1 c ¡'1O¡E ¡ ¡O< Àô-E t¡tt oôoo ofl0r¡ oñDo ß { Êooo IJlJC'U I) åèåå a |,taa ¡¡D¡ € o o a 3 I ¡ oooo a åååå â a aa.la ¡to¡ ¡ oooo å <Iccc t'ooo å c<¡cc å cccc ¡ oooD cccc å �-t5OO9N-- oooo00 N-{NñN oooNN0 OOOOO- ooo0Ðo N-<-rN gOO¡¡O OOOTOO o0000ô 000000 OOOO-O o90<<o 000000 oôg<<o OOOTOg ONN-<O €rrm <N t¡ñonNò O€Þ<NN -€<tfrotl ot\N€{€ (D(DÞoyto OÌ\€(';1tt¡ Oç-frllt1 !l-ñ Ét\-.DN.o frttßl ¡¡ nnç0.Àç t\Ì1OçCç çoÀ{oô t\Oôct\r¡t oooooo NNNNNN Jll,lnnnül nu!btl)ftft NNNNNN NNNNNN nnf1r4r/,v, r0@ooo@ oooooo ooooNN ---------<< o co000 lesJ coñrr ÞJrô oo.?0l'0 nnonl'rr o!D@o(Do @oo@@o c, lDt ãsrJ EOÞtr I O I J Nlt tlç .0o. ãsÍJ EOI-lÀ I O 3 o o>Þ -ÞZ J¡d iDO'J c) o0 ¡. o 0) (9 É (lt or Ltl t{@ <Or ñN t r¡lô oG 2 GJ cooJ 3 EÞ Oñt! 3JO o o+ ¡< tcc c ño GrL> >. (t € þ cr(oÞ -ul 2 d8s 2ù<t ç¡ a o ct ¡D<r¡' Ðô,o rL<laû oo r,: 〠.g :tè0 Ë ..1p É = (-).,¡ tâ oÉ Þ0t É€ .Ç. !.a þþ qt Àt tt q, o L rh I r}. >o r¡¡ Þ -É> JIJC þ .'{ li A É O qt {, oo (¡ ¡¡¡ r¿o>l¡¡ OJ¡dCO U¡q'<l .coù J¡¡¡O uiÉ l' 2aD t^ i¡¡ > l¡¡ oêJo -z< aoclù lrl '¡, t¡ 3 = 3 000000 t, c c 5 .to0000 u ú O(f¡¡ fJcl ¡ ., 3 ! c É.2 ct o Ào o l- l¡¡ ¡:É Cl i¡¡ l¡¡ C l¡¡ G o¡9 Ê, a ,t 3 L l¡, À o ¡¡, E f ¡rJ o c¡C c a lrJ ¡ìz Oô -ú c t¡l tr c lC ¡ l¡¡ r{ ú> oa¡ b $ c¡8e a Ào,o I58o.'o - ô -ôl,ro Ql<rrr .tO d I Yl rol ¡ I orâ cooo r O OÞOrâ ¡o- o OiZ<t1 - - ç o A à E c a l| t L at r¡ t o L o t aaaaaa ooool¡lo a û à I d<---'\¡\Àl\ÀÀ Ú'str'ltlnft d--<-< I <<td<--<ã<- ------ €ttt ao,o.ô o co Þ otrooo - O ¡OlrlO OZ--¡< ¡ l.¡<to r tot I orrl cooo r O OÉôl/¡ -o o 6-Z<Y)c -- OlrOi¡Oe ¡!aaaat ocû¡¡¡ LLLLLL c{c{{c Þ c a l o L a¿ to E o E at J o ú¡ a aaaaaa ant¡oUll,lrô a 3 å o @ooo(D@ NN(rl{({N cçe!tr?ç r<i--- a eeÉt a o co ooo, tl ôt"lôôô - o -ôf¡o O2r--r | ø(l{ tot ¡ | I on cooo O ¡ OtlOY¡ -c)o--6<Z-l'lrl ooouoo aaaaaa ¡¡ûtl¡a, Tl'LLLl. cc<tc<tc D c a eÊe€ o o Êô o,o,o. o Þ or1ooo ¡ O2<-..- O -OÞO l. | -lôlrrrÐa{ o Ol'1 cOOô E o r a o o o O - Ot'rO11 ¡ô O - ¡ O<Z<l.rç - êQAOAO |,fóata c!rot¡ù¡ LLLLLL <tcc<t<tc a o 9tatatat9 3 c I a tÞ atatUatUaa I l¡, E cc€ccc aa4aaa 0r¡cr3Ü¡ LLLLLL <tc<tccc 6 u a o t¡¡ c a 3 e a 0¡ t- flornútnuì n u? r¡ ul !l t/) o NNNNNN NC'¡({NNÍ{ ooo\?(D(D 1{NNGl¡< a c o u o 2 a, <t a 3 o ooo000 c ¡¡¡Ào Ø. I c I z l¡ t c >â c¡É> -rJC ul<u, 'd oâoôoo ooooo{ c c o IJ 6 3 2 = z ZÞl¡¡ r+1 o oooat?fl oo¡'ll¡otfl (\o> u) É \\ É¡(ú Ê r,' ,ôã = N(' at¿atatt4 aaa<a4 l¡l(,lortt¡lo I t, å U.ttattt a|Úaaaa l,)u¡olDorr¡ �-16- cloaed. fn subarea Dr the average demand peaked at 89 percent of the open capacity, wit,h 188 spaces closed. rnterestingly, whire sone garages were closing their doors on night,s and weekender one not only stayed open but raised its rates at night. IlAIfIl,lB'OFF-SIIRßEEI PARXIIre ON SAIT'RIIAY For the total. Georgetown area, the peak period of daytime off-st,reet parking use on_saturday came between 3¡00 and 4:30 p.m. when 57 percent of Èhe off-street spaces open to the pubtic weie in user leaving 954 vacancies (43 percent) . The data- in Tabte 5 show that, yet againl there were dramatic differences in conditions between the different subareas. In subarea A, no spaces vrere closed gnd 99 percent of the spaces were occupied during the peak period QL7 vehicres ¡nrked out of 220 spáces), and more than two-thirds of the spaces were fitled at all times after Doon. Dernand was also strong in subarea B. However, in subarea Cr 685 ppaces wele closed due to lack of denand, and only 35 percent of the remaining open spaces nere used. PÀRKIIre @IIDIIIONS "OFF-SÍREBIII ON STINDAT will be seen from Tabl€ 6r there is ample ¡nrking space available off-street in arr subareas of Georget,own on sundays. The highest de¡nand on Sunday was 43 percent of Georget,own's tot,al ca¡ncityr while the Sunday afternoon subarea peaks ranged from 60 percent of capacity in use (40 percent vacant) in subarea A, to 29 percent (71 percent vacant) in subarea C. As ¡OTI-STR,BSIII PÀRf,ITIG @IIDITIONS A study was conducÈed of on-street parking conditions at 9:30 â.n.¡ and 1:30 p.ír.r 6:00 p.r[. and 9:00 p.n. on Thursday October 24, and Saturday October 26, 1985. Thie survey covered a set of sample blocks distributed through arl four subareas. t{hile studying conditions on every block in Georgetown would have consumêd far more personnel than was available, the results of this sample study seen typical of on-etreet parking conditions throughóut Georgetor{n. rn considering t,he on-street parking situation, it is important to remember that the number of tegal spaces changes from time to time through the dayr due to such factors as nrush-hourn restrict,ions coming into force, or spaces that were reserved for commercial loading during the day becoming available for parking during the night or weekends. It shoul,d also be noted thãt in this stuQt we counted the number of vacant, and occupied regat spaces, not whether the vehicle in the Epace was legalty using it. The intent of this study was to determine the number of vacant legal spaces, and the demand for those spaces. �-t7- tr5J oOo-OO ooo0r'0 oo0000 OôO¡ôô ooo<oo oooooo oo0000 ooo<oo oooooo ooo000 oooooo oooooo o00000 oooooo 000000 oooooo Àootflo JÞ 3 COñl! ÞJn o or zl¡tJt:¡ F EOFII I NÑ o ,¡? I OÈ <r zoú,J cÞtf EOFrr 3 N¡{ O J¡O I OÈ z g,J <¡ooJ El- f clNlr lJ0 o o+ É t o ¡d U>lÂ'.2 JxC Ð(J(J f<tc Àû.> ID o0 k o o (, à fit õ É , tt, c (ú ¡, þ \o l¡¡ F¡ É F JL.t<l e(lLl 3ù<l r\¡o> a >c¡ IJ Þ I¡' -F> JoÈ &<ll¡, fùo x> GA¡clt ' f.Ê 0) arU .oÊ (ú Þ., o t¡ê)l¡l ouir(J .nu¡C .oo0. J ¿]'' l¡ ¡l zaD 1¡¡ > l¡, t! clOJIJ áZ<t ori +t . .ooùl¡ l¡, ¡l >c¡ tra o {ooooo t?(DONNN N{{t\f\À oooo.Gû. ççc.'('o ç(DOOO- útoo000 r@Of\Àt\ f\1ll({600. N(D@ÀÈl\ oo@o@o oooooo c ¡ oooooo c c c C C a c o a a c o u a a c o c {ì 000000 fìNNIìNß' CINNôINN Ëz 0 c3 o 0.o Þ t¡l ¡¡l O l¡¡ a o t ats G ¡L a Þ l¡¡ oo ¡¡¡ E l¡.J rrJ o(3 F Z (l ro Ê c oGI¡, G -.f c l.<t L o z a .o É, a (l oo o ¡ å fl t¡l ú¡ ¡l úl rfl !l úl ¡'¡ n !t ¡ 3 o tr3¡ oo,o, ocoa OOO Yl Ol'1 - ô -omo .JZ<-¡< | ;â{€ rot I r I or', cOgO O - ortg.'l -oo--$<!atlC cccccc aaaaaa oocûlrú LLLLLI <tccc€<t CCCCCC ttStt: gtoúor¡l lo o 000000 c t\f\Àf\f\f\ ----iulUlnþtnuì ------ f 3 ! ! ¡rta a oêo, c' co t ¡ 7t or"tooo ¡ OZ-¡Or/¡g -O --I | ,ttt€ at a o a o -totrtt c.'oo O - OlJ'Of) -o o - ¡ ô¡Z<t)Ç or? c oüoooo z aaaoaa ¡¡ùù0,¡ LLLLLL a ccc(lc( L o (¡ a ¡ å c I aa 3 3 L to a o c , t o I cg¡€ ocoa o'co. ft orto00 - ô -OY¡C oz<--i I Y¡A{ r a t, L c a .9 c t 4 tol r orâ cooo o - o]âl)11 ¡OO¡¡¡ aZ <(lcl o .JOU(J(Ju aaaafa ù¡¡ù¡l¡o 4 r G LLLLLL .fdc<tc<t E o 1 o o ú o (J CCCCCC ttJttt rô.ôl¡lrtrôo 3 l--<<aÅ-aaa ot0@o@o NNNNNN crlrttlctt --<--- ú a a t¡l E c u a o at t¡l c Òu, oc .t> u> o 3 o a a ¡ c a o a D a1 c o u rJ 2 t¡¡ o900Ðo 3 .¡ .D(tçr?9N z z z o aJc, o€oo.oo 3 3 3 Cl(l¡¡ tf¡ 3 3 -uC (¡crt l¡, ô- l,,l k .n l¡a ofttfrnr!ü) ùl rfl úl fl tt JINNNNN l¡¡ Z llllx) cr) Q) I d€oNON <(lçNNÞ r?¡\{(?rtl\ oûoooo I{Ñ.\.llNN o 1D ã (ú ¡OODO@ l\{tâo/rü¡ <úlnnnú¡ -dá bo ut@ è0 ''i å o05 X ,- oor'N€fttâ.? ç ç r¡ tfl uo É Þ0 .-r oÉ lr .Ío N@{\'OG@r\b'lçl\ { ar(tü¿ 0) ooÆ .,{ O ONO-úlO t\OÀf\ñÀ À<iDO-i ôlOIâ@-N ooþ Âattz æÉ olO Êþ t @Ol,)ON tì :€ fJ ¡,/l ut CDrtìôooyt r\ <? yl cccccc tttttt o(ooosru¡ a ¡ å IE¡E a o co o,o,o t7) ov¡o00 - ô ¿¿ Q2a -oÞo ¡ d I l?rl€ tot I l I c'tâcôoo ô ¡ 0l'¡ô1") ¡o o - { I¡ g.<!,ap1 oQooao ar!aaat¡ tro¡a¡a ååååèå cccccc aa)aaa ¡nloøatt¡l,i � 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 Georgetown parking plan : Study and recommendations Subject The topic of the resource Parking Transportation--Research--United States Georgetown (Washington, D.C.) Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Michelle R. LaViolette, transportation planner Department of Public Works, Office of Policy and Planning Mark Brown, Ward 2 planner Office of Planning Tom VanVechten, senior parking analyst Department of Public Works, Bureau of Parking Services Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource December 1986 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Wallace J. Cohen, deputy administrator Department of Public Works, Office of Policy and Planning Jill Dennis, special assistant Office of Planning Frederic R. Caponiti, Chief Department of Public Works, Bureau of Parking Services 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/085eaf86e28297701377c0d0351b65d8.pdf?Expires=1782345600&Signature=ID6TqfWivEr2tYDhp-rw4eCyuj3ZozC3VM3778pUrMY0qs00uIplR51BV%7EiDTHpnFMzLz--6UrBzcl3bJQEE6CUYW3KsqatcJjAo1k30yK835MY7AsPnwS9gOFTdEX1c13IlQ9b2riOZFvD6YzvryY7uV9Wqt6URl4MQ7-hc%7EDuRBEEets5%7ELIUCUtYSzCXRKlLyTl2PVgZ66P0-tAqEwRWN9XW39WLh9W3Yz4Su4-xComYVYEv1oMAJkXHLQaOdsWkqr4Op7C2lD8cAFtqokJ0e--Q1q2O5g70JRtajPpIyFS-z2sWNFFjjVbfhXDsB0cGBvAN57-fzqwI7fIUglw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM d4e6a3f60dcf3c5e62f6e246377222a0 PDF Text Text GEORGETOWN AREA ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS an analysis of alternatives for: D i s t r i c t of Columbia Department of Transportation Jlliv & a s s o c i a t e s �GEORGETOWN AREA ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS AN ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES Prepared f o r D i s t r i c t of Columbia Department of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Prepared by JHK & A s s o c i a t e s June 19 8 0 The p r e p a r a t i o n of t h i s r e p o r t has been f i n a n c e d i n p a r t through a g r a n t from t h e U.S. Department o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n , Urban Mass T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , under t h e Urban Mass T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A c t of 1964, as amended. �GEORGETOWN AREA ACCESS ALTERNATIVES STUDY STEERING COMMITTEE James E. C l a r k I I I Steven F. S t u b i t s Joseph Anderson Suat Basaran A l b e r t o P. B a s t i d a Harvey B e r l i n C. H. B r o l e y D. M. Burk A l f r e d o D. E c h e v e r r i a A s s i s t a n t D i r e c t o r , D.C. DOT O f f i c e of P o l i c i e s and P l a n s P r o j e c t Manager, D.C. DOT O f f i c e of P o l i c i e s and P l a n s Maryland N a t i o n a l C a p i t a l Park and P l a n n i n g Commission D.C.DOT - T r a f f i c E n g i n e e r i n g and Operations D.C. O f f i c e of P l a n n i n g and Development M e t r o p o l i t a n Washington o f Governments W i l l i a m T.Fauntroy, J r . David R. Gehr ANC 3A F e d e r a l Highway A d m i n i s t r a t i o n D.C. Department of Environmental S e r v i c e s Washington M e t r o p o l i t a n Area T r a n s i t A u t h o r i t y V i r g i n i a Department of Highways and T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Robert W. H a r r i s N a t i o n a l C a p i t a l P l a n n i n g Commission A r t h u r Hatton George R. J i v a t o d e Frank J . L e t k i e w i c z , J r . D.C. O f f i c e of P l a n n i n g and Development D.C. DOT - P o l i c i e s and P l a n s D.C. DOT - P o l i c i e s and P l a n s Stephen A. Levy Lawrence L. Lorch Roger P. Mingo Jon Nowick ANC 2A Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y ANC 3B ANC 2A D.C. DOT - Mass T r a n s p o r t a t i o n B u s i n e s s and P r o f e s s i o n a l A s s o c i a t i o n of Georgetown, I n c . C i t i z e n s A s s o c i a t i o n of Georgetown M e t r o p l o l i t a n Washington C o u n c i l of Governments Anthony Rachal David Roffman C h a r l e s A. Schneider A r t h u r J . Smith Douglas S t a l l w o r t h James S t u r g i l l Katherine S u l l i v a n Thomas VanVechten D.C. DOT - Mass T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A r l i n g t o n County Department of P u b l i c Works ANC 3A D.C. DOT - P a r k i n g �GEORGETOWN AREA ACCESS ALTERNATIVES STUDY T e c h n i c a l Memoranda T e c h n i c a l Memorandum No. 1 : Georgetown Area P o t e n t i a l Access Improvements, JKK T e c h n i c a l Memorandum No. Trolley Service: T e c h n i c a l Memorandum No. and A s s o c i a t e s , F e b r u a r y 1979 2: The R e i n s t i t u t i o n o f Georgetown An Overview, JHK and A s s o c i a t e s , March 1979 3: E x i s t i n g T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o n d i t i o n s i n Georgetown, JHK and A s s o c i a t e s , March 1979 T e c h n i c a l Memorandum No. 4: Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n S u r v e y , R i v k i n A s s o c i a t e s I n c . , August 1979 T e c h n i c a l Memorandum No. 5: Packaging A l t e r n a t i v e s , JHK and A s s o c i a t e s , March 1979 T e c h n i c a l Memorandum No. 6: C r i t e r i a f o r t h e E v a l u a t i o n o f A l t e r n a t i v e s , JHK and A s s o c i a t e s , March 1979 T e c h n i c a l Memorandum No. 7: E x i s t i n g Weekend T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o n d i t i o n s i n Georgetown, JHK and A s s o c i a t e s , J u l y 1979 T e c h n i c a l Memorandum No. 8: Implementation C o n s i d e r a t i o n s f o r the Recommended Georgetown Area A c c e s s A l t e r n a t i v e s , JHK and A s s o c i a t e s , August 1980 �ihk & -J TABLE OF CONTENTS Page CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION CHAPTER 2. CANDIDATE PHYSICAL ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT ACTIONS 13 CANDIDATE TRAFFIC OPERATION IMPROVEMENT ACTIONS 28 CANDIDATE PARKING MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 53 CANDIDATE TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT ACTIONS 69 CANDIDATE GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY SOUTHERN ENTRANCE ACTIONS 96 CHAPTER 3. CHAPTER 4. CHAPTER 5. CHAPTER 6. 1 OTHER CANDIDATE GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY ACTIONS 126 CHAPTER 8. TRAVEL DEMAND ANALYSIS 146 CHAPTER 9. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 179 CHAPTER 7. associates �L I S T OF FIGURES F i g u r e No. Page 2 1. Map o f Study Area 2. Proposed W h i t e h u r s t Freeway Ramps 16 3. Proposed K S t r e e t E x t e n s i o n 22 4. Proposed Depressed K S t r e e t 25 5. Proposed Georgetown One Way S t r e e t System 30 6. Proposed P and Q S t r e e t One-Way O p e r a t i o n s 35 7. Key B r i d g e R e v e r s i b l e Lanes 38 8. Proposed R e q u i r e d R i g h t Turn on Key B r i d g e 42 9. Proposed Canal Road HOV Lane 48 10. Georgetown P a r k i n g I n f o r m a t i o n 65 11. Glen E c h o - F a r r a g u t S t a t i o n 73 12. Chevy Chase C i r c l e - F a r r a g u t S t a t i o n 74 13. K S t r e e t - P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue Loop 81 14. K S t r e e t - G U Loop 82 15. K Street-GU H o s p i t a l 83 16. Foggy Bottom-GU Loop 84 17. Rosslyn-GU H o s p i t a l 85 18. R o s s l y n - W i s c o n s i n / M a s s a c h u s e t t s Avenues 86 19. Rosslyn-Dupont 87 20. Rosslyn-Foggy Bottom 21. Foggy Bottom-Dupont 22. Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y P a r k i n g Circle 88 Circle S9 101 �associates L I S T OF FIGURES (Continued) F i g u r e No. Page E x i s t i n g Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y Canal Road E n t r a n c e 104 Time of Day o f Campus A r r i v a l s and Departures 109 AM Peak Hour T r a f f i c a t Georgetown Southern E n t r a n c e i f P r o s p e c t S t r e e t Remains Open 111 AM Peak Hour T r a f f i c a t Georgetwon Southern E n t r a n c e i f P r o s p e c t S t r e e t i s Closed 112 27. Proposed GU Southern E n t r a n c e 117 28. Proposed GU T r a n s p o r t a t i o n T e r m i n a l 123 29. Proposed GU T r a n s p o r t a t i o n T e r m i n a l 124 30. GUTS A r l i n g t o n Loop Route 131 31. GUTS Lee Highway Route 132 32. GUTS Route 50 Route 133 33. T r a f f i c A n a l y s i s Zones w i t h i n Georgetown Cordon 156 23. 24. 25. 26. �& associates L I S T OF TABLES T a b l e No. Page 1. Candidate Georgetown Area Access Improvements 6 2. Candidate Georgetown Area Access Improvements 147 3. Georgetown Land Use P r o j e c t i o n s 157 4. Mode Choice o f T r i p s t o and from Georgetown 162 5. Mode o f Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y T r a n s i t T r i p s 167 6. Mode o f Georgetown N o n - U n i v e r s i t y T r a n s i t T r i p s 168 7. 24 Hour T r a f f i c L i n k Volume E s t i m a t e s 172 8. Georgetown Through T r i p 175 9. VMT and A i r P o l l u t i o n E m i s s i o n s A n a l y s i s w i t h i n Georgetown Analysis 177 �jhk* CHAPTER 1 . associates INTRODUCTION T h i s r e p o r t p r e s e n t s t h e f i n d i n g s of t h e a n a l y s i s o f a s e r i e s of c a n d i d a t e a c c e s s improvement a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r t h e Georgetown area of Washington, D.C, and p r e s e n t s a l i s t o f recommended changes designed t o improve t r a n s p o r t a t i o n i n Georgetown. The a n a l y s e s p r e s e n t e d i n t h i s r e p o r t were performed as p a r t of t h e Georgetown Area A c c e s s A l t e r n a t i v e s Study by JHK and A s s o c i a t e s under c o n t r a c t t o t h e D.C. Department of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n . Throughout both t h e development and a n a l y s i s of a l t e r n a t i v e s , t e c h n i c a l and p o l i c y guidance was p r o v i d e d t o t h e study by a s t e e r i n g committee w h i c h c o n s i s t e d of r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f government a g e n c i e s i n v o l v e d w i t h t r a n s p o r t a t i o n i n Georgetown, c i t i z e n r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s from t h e Georgetown a r e a , and r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of t h e Georgetown Businessmen's A s s o c i a t i o n . Georgetown p r e s e n t l y e x p e r i e n c e s a number of a c c e s s r e l a t e d problems which a r e l i k e l y t o worsen over t h e n e x t s e v e r a l y e a r s i f t h e growth p r o j e c t e d f o r t h e a r e a o c c u r s . Solutions to Georgetown's t r a n s p o r t a t i o n problems must be developed w i t h i n the c o n s t r a i n t s of a number of p h y s i c a l , e n v i r o n m e n t a l , i n s t i t u t i o n a l , budgetary, and h i s t o r i c a l p r e s e r v a t i o n f a c t o r s which l i m i t what actions are f e a s i b l e i n the area. Many of Georgetown's a c c e s s problems a r e r e l a t e d t o i t s l o c a t i o n (see F i g u r e 1 ) . I t i s s i t u a t e d j u s t t o t h e west o f 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 of Washington, D.C, a t t h e end of one of o n l y f i v e b r i d g e s which c r o s s t h e Potomac R i v e r between V i r g i n i a and Washington, D.C. Georgetown i s surrounded on t h r e e s i d e s by p a r k s and on t h e f o u r t h by t h e Potomac R i v e r , r e s u l t i n g i n a l i m i t e d number of e n t r y and e x i t p o i n t s . Because i t i s s i t u a t e d between t h e second b u s i e s t Potomac R i v e r c r o s s i n g i n t o t h e D i s t r i c t o f Columbia and 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 , a l a r g e amount of t r a f f i c p a s s e s through Georgetown which i s d e s t i n e d to or coming from p o i n t s o t h e r than Georgetown. ��Georgetown i s an h i s t o r i c a l d i s t r i c t , having been l a r g e l y b u i l t up d u r i n g the n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y , p r i o r to t h e advent of the automobile. T h e r e f o r e many of i t s s t r e e t s a r e q u i t e narrow and t h e r e i s r e l a t i v e l y l i t t l e o f f - s t r e e t p a r k i n g , d e s p i t e the f a c t t h a t the a r e a i s q u i t e d e n s e l y developed. Because Georgetown i s so r i c h i n h i s t o r y i t has been e n t e r e d i n the Department of I n t e r i o r ' s N a t i o n a l R e g i s t e r of H i s t o r i c a l P l a c e s and any changes t o the t r a n s p o r t a t i o n system should attempt t o p r e s e r v e or enhance Georgetown's h i s t o r i c a l f e a t u r e s . Georgetown i s an a r e a which i s not d i r e c t l y s e r v e d by M e t r o r a i l , and t h e r e f o r e t r a n s i t passengers t o or from Georgetown must t r a v e l by bus on congested s t r e e t s f o r a l l or p a r t o f t h e i r t r i p . Because i t s s t r e e t s a r e narrow and f i l l e d w i t h t r a f f i c , i t i s d i f f i c u l t f o r f u l l s i z e buses t o maneuver i n Georgetown. As a r e s u l t of t h i s l a c k of m a n e u v e r a b i l i t y and a f o r c e d t r a n s f e r f o r t r a n s i t p a t r o n s u s i n g M e t r o r a i l , t r a v e l times by t r a n s i t t o and from Georgetown tend t o be slow. Georgetown i s an a r e a w i t h an abundance of shops, r e s t a u r a n t s , and e n t e r t a i n m e n t s p o t s , a l l of which a t t r a c t a l a r g e number of t r i p s , p r i m a r i l y by automobile. A high percentage of t h e s e t r i p s a r e made d u r i n g evenings and on weekends and r e s u l t i n congestion a t a l l times of t h e day and h i g h demand f o r the l i m i t e d number of p a r k i n g spaces a v a i l a b l e t o r e s i d e n t s , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the b l o c k s immediately a d j a c e n t t o t h e M S t r e e t and Wisconsin Avenue commercial a r e a s . Georgetown's r e s i d e n t i a l s t r e e t s a l s o c a r r y a s i g n i f i c a n t amount of s p i l l o v e r t r a f f i c from i t s a r t e r i a l s t r e e t s , as w e l l as a s u b s t a n t i a l p r o p o r t i o n of the t r a f f i c d e s t i n e d t o or coming from Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y ' s Main Campus, which does not p r e s e n t l y have f u l l a c c e s s t o a major a r t e r i a l s t r e e t . I n a d d i t i o n to being a commercial and r e s i d e n t i a l c e n t e r , Georgetown i s an o f f i c e c e n t e r , so a l a r g e number of d a i l y commuters make t h e i r way t o and from Georgetown, and they do so �;hk & associates p r i m a r i l y by auto. A r e s i d e n t i a l p a r k i n g p e r m i t program has been i n s t i t u t e d i n Georgetown i n order to p r e v e n t commuters from f i l l i n g the o n - s t r e e t spaces i n Georgetown's r e s i d e n t i a l a r e a s . Land use i n Georgetown i s undergoing a number of changes, most of which w i l l add to the demands on i t s a l r e a d y s t r a i n e d t r a n s p o r t a t i o n system. These changes f o r the most p a r t are conc e n t r a t e d i n the a l r e a d y congested a r e a between M S t r e e t and the W a t e r f r o n t . Major e x p a n s i o n s a r e f o r e c a s t i n r e s i d e n t i a l , commercial, and o f f i c e land use i n t h i s a r e a , r e s u l t i n g i n f o r e c a s t 1985 Georgetown t r i p g e n e r a t i o n being 40 p e r c e n t h i g h e r than i n 1979 . S o l u t i o n s to Georgetown's t r a n s p o r t a t i o n problems must be developed w i t h i n the c o n t e x t of a s e t of c i t y w i d e p r i o r i t i e s , a l l of which compete f o r funds i n a l i m i t e d budget. P o t e n t i a l s o l u t i o n s must be e v a l u a t e d w i t h r e s p e c t to the f u l l range of t h e i r impacts both upon Georgetown and i t s s u r r o u n d i n g a r e a . D e c i s i o n s r e g a r d i n g money t o be spent i n Georgetown w i l l need to be weighed a g a i n s t needs i n o t h e r p a r t s of the c i t y as w e l l . I n o r d e r to develop and e v a l u a t e a s e t of c a n d i d a t e a c c e s s improvement a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r the Georgetown a r e a , i t was f e l t t h a t a s e t of o b j e c t i v e s f o r improving t r a n s p o r t a t i o n i n Georgetown should f i r s t be developed. Although i t was r e a l i z e d t h a t no one s e t of o b j e c t i v e s would a c c u r a t e l y r e f l e c t the g o a l s of every i n t e r e s t group concerned w i t h t r a n s p o r t a t i o n p l a n n i n g i n Georgetown and t h a t d i f f e r e n t o b j e c t i v e s would be weighed d i f f e r e n t l y i n terms of importance by d i f f e r e n t i n t e r e s t groups, an attempt was made to develop an o v e r a l l g e n e r a l i z e d s e t of o b j e c t i v e s which c o u l d be used i n d e v e l o p i n g and e v a l u a t i n g a l t e r n a t i v e s i n t h i s s t u d y . T h i s s e t of o b j e c t i v e s i s as f o l l o w s : Improve t r a n s i t a c c e s s w i t h i n Georgetown between Georgetown and M e t r o r a i l Reduce t h e impact of v e h i c u l a r t r a f f i c through Georgetown Improve Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y a c c e s s and passing �.jhk* associates Improve Georgetown p a r k i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s I n c r e a s e modal s h a r e s f o r t r a n s i t and o t h e r high occupancy v e h i c l e s f o r t r i p s t o , from, and through Georgetown Reduce the d e t r i m e n t a l socio-economic and environmental impacts on Georgetown's q u a l i t y of l i f e caused by t r a n s p o r t a t i o n . I n c l u d e d w i t h i n t h i s o b j e c t i v e a r e the f o l l o w i n g subobjectives : Improve a i r q u a l i t y Decrease o v e r a l l energy consumption Reduce n o i s e l e v e l s Reduce neighborhood d i s r u p t i o n caused transportation by A s s i s t i n Georgetown's e f f o r t s a t h i s t o r i c preservation Keep t o a minimum d i s r u p t i v e impacts of a c c e s s changes on a r e a s surrounding Georgetown Improve t r a n s p o r t a t i o n a c c e s s f o r the m o b i l i t y l i m i t e d i n Georgetown Spend monetary r e s o u r c e s i n the most c o s t e f f e c t i v e manner. Based upon t h e s e o b j e c t i v e s and i n p u t from the members of t h e Study S t e e r i n g Committee, a p r e l i m i n a r y l i s t of c a n d i d a t e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n a c c e s s improvements f o r the Georgetown a r e a was developed and p r e s e n t e d i n " T e c h n i c a l Memorandum No. 1 : Georgetown Area P o t e n t i a l Access Improvements." Based upon i n p u t from Study S t e e r i n g Committee members t h i s l i s t was r e v i s e d and an a n a l y s i s of t h e c a n d i d a t e improvements begun. As the a n a l y s i s proceeded new a l t e r n a t i v e s became apparent and were added t o the list. The f i n a l l i s t of c a n d i d a t e a c c e s s improvements which were a n a l y z e d i n t h i s study i s p r e s e n t e d i n T a b l e 1. I n t h e f o l l o w i n g c h a p t e r s each of t h e s e c a n d i d a t e improvements i s a n a l y z e d i n detail. The a n a l y s i s of a l t e r n a t i v e s was done i n two phases. During the f i r s t phase each i n d i v i d u a l a c t i o n was a s s e s s e d w i t h r e g a r d t o t r a f f i c o p e r a t i o n i m p a c t s , socio-economic i m p a c t s , �jhk Table 1. & associate Candidate Georgetown Area A c c e s s Improvements CANDIDATE PHYSICAL ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT ACTIONS (1) T i e t h e e x i s t i n g s t u b - e n d ramps a t t h e e a s t end o f W h i t e h u r s t F r e e w a y t o M S t r e e t and P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue. (2) E x t e n d lower K S t r e e t t o i n t e r s e c t w i t h C a n a l Road o p p o s i t e t h e S o u t h e r n E n t r a n c e t o Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y . (3) Repave l o w e r K S t r e e t , moving t h e r a i l r o a d t r a c k s t o e i t h e r t h e north o r south s i d e of K S t r e e t . (4) Depress (5) C o n s t r u c t a d o u b l e l e f t t u r n l a n e a t t h e C a n a l Road - F o x h a l l Road i n t e r s e c t i o n f o r u s e by westbound C a n a l Road t r a f f i c d u r i n g t h e PM p e a k . (6) Upgrade S o u t h e r n E n t r a n c e t o Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y . (7) P r o v i d e p e d e s t r i a n a c c e s s a l o n g K S t r e e t between Georgetown and t h e West End. K S t r e e t between Washington C i r c l e and W h i t e h u r s t CAUDIDATE (1) One-way TRAFFIC OPERATION IMPROVEMENT Freeway. ACTIONS streets. (a) South o f M S t r e e t ( 2 9 t h , 3 0 t h , 3 1 s t , Thomas J e f f e r s o n (b) North-south s t r e e t s north of M S t r e e t 31st Streets) (c) East-west s t r e e t s north of M Street signal (28th, 29th, Streets) 30th, (N, P, Q S t r e e t s ) (2) Upgrade t h e t r a f f i c system. (3) R e v e r s i b l e l a n e s on Key B r i d g e . (4) Remove r e v e r s i b l e l a n e s on M S t r e e t . (5) E x t e n d bus l a n e s on M S t r e e t from W i s c o n s i n Avenue t o Key B r i d g e . (6) Make r i g h t l a n e o f Key B r i d g e northbound r i g h t t u r n o n l y a t W h i t e h u r s t F r e e w a y ramp. (7) High o c c u p a n c y v e h i c l e l a n e s on Key B r i d g e . (8) High o c c u p a n c y v e h i c l e (9) H i g h occupancy v e h i c l e l a n e s on C a n a l Road and W h i t e h u r s t from C h a i n B r i d g e t o W a s h i n g t o n C i r c l e . l a n e s on W h i t e h u r s t Freeway. (10) H i g h o c c u p a n c y v e h i c l e l a n e s on P and Q S t r e e t s . (11) Reduce t h e number o f l a n e s on Key B r i d g e t o f o u r . (12) Reduce t h e number o f l a n e s on C h a i n B r i d g e t o two. Freeway �_jhk* Table 1. Candidate Georgetown A r e a A c c e s s (CONTINUED) CANDIDATE PARKING MANAGEMENT associates Improvements ACTIONS (1) E x t e n d r e s i d e n t i a l p a r k i n g p e r m i t program t o e v e n i n g s and weekends. (2) E x t e n d peak hour o n - s t r e e t p a r k i n g r e s t r i c t i o n s a l o n g M S t r e e t and W i s c o n s i n Avenue t o midday, e v e n i n g s , and weekends. (3) C o n v e r t a p e r c e n t a g e o f p a r k i n g s p a c e s a l o n g M S t r e e t and Avenue t o l o a d i n g z o n e s . (4) B u i l d a p a r k i n g garage i n t h e W i s c o n s i n Avenue c o m m e r c i a l a r e a north of M S t r e e t . (5) Park-and-ride Wisconsin lots. (a) G l e n E c h o Amusement Park (b) McLean, V i r g i n i a (c) Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y area (6) Remove peak h o u r o n - s t r e e t p a r k i n g s p a c e s s o u t h o f M (7) Convert a percentage of o n - s t r e e t parking spaces south of M S t r e e t to l o a d i n g zones. (8) M a r k e t i n g o f p r i v a t e garage s p a c e s , p a r t i c u l a r l y on weekends evenings. (a) (c) (9) (10) post parking signing for parking information I n c r e a s e p a r k i n g m e t e r r a t e s and e x t e n d hours. I n c r e a s e t h e number o f o n - s t r e e t p a r k i n g s p a c e s w h i c h a r e m e t e r e d . CANDIDATE (1) New or modified TRANSIT l a r g e bus IMPROVEMENT ACTIONS routes. (a) G l e n Echo p a r k and r i d e e x p r e s s (b) (2) and expand p a r k i n g v a l i d a t i o n programs (b) Street. Chevy Chase C i r c l e - T e n l e y C i r c l e - A m e r i c a n U n i v e r s i t y Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y - F a r r a g u t S q u a r e R e i n s t i t u t i o n o f Georgetown t r o l l e y service service. - �& associate 8 Table 1. Candidate Georgetown A r e a A c c e s s (CONTINUED) CANDIDATE (3) TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT ACTIONS Improvements (CONTINUED) S m a l l bus r o u t e s , (a) Xb) K S t r e e t - Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y (c) K S t r e e t - Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y M e d i c a l (d) Foggy Bottom - Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y (e) R o s s l y n - Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y (f) Rosslyn - Wisconsin/Massachusetts (g) R o s s l y n - Dupont (h) R o s s l y n - Foggy Bottom (i) Foggy Bottom - Dupont C i r c l e v i a W i s c o n s i n (j) (4) K S t r e e t - P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue E x t e n s i o n o f above r o u t e s t o Kennedy C e n t e r and o t h e r p o i n t s i n Foggy Bottom, o r t o F a r r a g u t S q u a r e Transit loop loop Center loop Medical Center Avenues Circle Avenue marketing. (a) T r a n s i t information centers (b) T r a n s i t i n f o r m a t i o n p a c k a g e f o r Georgetown employees (c) Employer s u b s i d y o f t r a n s i t (d) Transit (e) T r a n s i t i n f o r m a t i o n b r o c h u r e f o r p a t r o n s o f Georgetown s h o p s , r e s t a u r a n t s , and e n t e r t a i n m e n t s p o t s fare validation CANDIDATE Physical (1) Intersection fares scheme GEORGETOWN U N I V E R S I T Y ENTRANCE ALTERNATIVES SOUTHERN Alternatives N u l l a l t e r n a t i v e : t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n would be l e f t a s i t i s t o d a y w i t h no l e f t t u r n s from t h e U n i v e r s i t y t o e a s t b o u n d C a n a l Road o r from e a s t b o u n d C a n a l Road t o t h e U n i v e r s i t y a l l o w e d . �;hk T a b l e 1 . Candidate Georgetown Area Access (CONTINUED) & associates Improvements C A N D I D A T E GEORGETOWN U N I V E R S I T Y SOUTHERN ENTRANCE A L T E R N A T I V E S (CONTINUED) Physical Intersection Alternatives (continued) (2) A t g r a d e s i g n a l i z e d i n t e r s e c t i o n a t p r e s e n t a c c e s s l o c a t i o n w i t h no w i d e n i n g o r change i n C a n a l Road a l i g n m e n t . Under t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e an o p e n i n g would be made i n t h e e x i s t i n g median s t r i p t h r o u g h w h i c h l e f t t u r n s c o u l d be made, b u t no t u r n b a y s would be i n s t a l l e d . (3) At grade s i g n a l i z e d i n t e r s e c t i o n a t p r e s e n t access l o c a t i o n w i t h p r o v i s i o n o f a 200 f o o t l e f t t u r n bay from e a s t b o u n d C a n a l Road i n t o t h e U n i v e r s i t y and a r e a l i g n m e n t o f westbound C a n a l Road t o a maximum o f 12 f e e t n o r t h o f i t s e x i s t i n g a l i g n m e n t . (4) A t g r a d e s i g n a l i z e d i n t e r s e c t i o n 200 f e e t t o t h e e a s t o f t h e e x i s t i n g U n i v e r s i t y e n t r a n c e w i t h p r o v i s i o n o f a 200 f o o t l e f t t u r n b a y from e a s t b o u n d C a n a l Road and a r e a l i g n m e n t o f westbound C a n a l Road t o a maximum o f 12 f e e t n o r t h o f i t s e x i s t i n g a l i g n m e n t . (5) G r a d e s e p a r a t e d i n t e r c h a n g e w i t h f l y o v e r ramps c a r r y i n g movements i n t o and o u t o f Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y . (6) A t h i r d roadway w i t h t h r e e l a n e s would be b u i l t a l o n g t h e c r e s t o f t h e Potomac P a l i s a d e s . T h i s roadway would be u s e d by westbound C a n a l Road t r a f f i c , w i t h p e r h a p s a r e v e r s i b l e l a n e t o accommodate AM peak l o a d s . The e x i s t i n g westbound l a n e s would become an a c c e s s road t o serve U n i v e r s i t y t r a f f i c . Operational left turning Alternatives (1) Allow a l l turning at a l l times. (2) P r o h i b i t l e f t t u r n s i n t o and o u t o f Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y by a l l v e h i c l e s d u r i n g peak p e r i o d s , a l l o w i n g f u l l a c c e s s d u r i n g t h e remainder o f t h e day. (3) P r o h i b i t l e f t t u r n s i n t o and o u t o f Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y by a l l v e h i c l e s , e x c e p t b u s e s and emergency v e h i c l e s , d u r i n g peak p e r i o d s , a l l o w i n g f u l l a c c e s s d u r i n g t h e remainder o f t h e day. (4) P r o h i b i t l e f t t u r n s i n t o and o u t o f Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y t i m e s , e x c e p t t o b u s e s and emergency v e h i c l e s . ata l l (5) Prohibit l e f t turns t h e AM peak o n l y . i n t o and o u t o f Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y during (6) Prohibit o u t o f Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y left movements i n t o and o u t o f Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y turns d u r i n g t h e AM peak. �& associates 10 T a b l e 1 . Candidate Georgetown Area A c c e s s (CONTINUED) Improvements C A N D I D A T E GEORGETOWN U N I V E R S I T Y SOUTHERN ENTRANCE A L T E R N A T I V E S (CONTINUED) A l t e r n a t i v e s t o Overcome G r a d e D i f f e r e n t i a l Between C a n a l Road and Main Campus (1) Use t h e e x i s t i n g (2) A t t h e m i d p o i n t o f t h e e x i s t i n g roadway r e v e r s e t h e roadway t o make a U-shaped roadway. (3) B u i l d a s t r u c t u r e c o n t a i n i n g ramps t o overcome t h e g r a d e Complementary roadway. direction differential. Alternatives (1) I n c o r p o r a t e a d o u b l e l e f t t u r n a t t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n o f C a n a l and F o x h a l l Roads f o r westbound C a n a l Road t r a f f i c d u r i n g t h e PM peak. (2) M a i n t a i n t h e P r o s p e c t S t r e e t E n t r a n c e t o t h e U n i v e r s i t y a s a major e n t r a n c e f o r v e h i c l e s a c c e s s i n g t h e campus from t h e n o r t h and e a s t and t o p r o v i d e a r e l i e f v a l v e t o t h e C a n a l Road E n t r a n c e d u r i n g p e r i o d s o f peak t r a f f i c f l o w . (3) B u i l d a n e n t r a n c e t o t h e p r o p o s e d Main Campus p a r k i n g from R e s e r v o i r Road. OTHER C A N D I D A T E GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY structure ACTIONS (1) R e o r i e n t GUTS V i r g i n i a r o u t e s t o a v o i d d u p l i c a t i o n w i t h B a l l s t o n Metrorail line. P r o v i d e f r e q u e n t s h u t t l e s e r v i c e between R o s s l y n s t a t i o n and Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y a t lower f a r e t h a n f o r l o n g e r t r i p s . (2) A c c e p t M e t r o r a i l o r Metrobus t r a n s f e r s i n l i e u o f payment o r a s a d i s c o u n t toward payment o f f a r e . (3) A l l o w f o r f a r e payment system. (4) R e v i s e GUTS s c h e d u l e s t o b e t t e r c o o r d i n a t e w i t h t h e s t a r t o f c l a s s e s and a c t u a l r u n n i n g t i m e s . (5) Change V i r g i n i a and Law S c h o o l GUTS r o u t e s s o a s t o a c c e s s t h e U n i v e r s i t y a t t h e Southern E n t r a n c e . (6) E s t a b l i s h a t r a n s i t and c a r p o o l i n f o r m a t i o n c e n t e r on campus. (7) C r e a t e a t r a n s i t i n f o r m a t i o n p a c k a g e t o be d i s t r i b u t e d t o s t u d e n t s a t r e g i s t r a t i o n and f a c u l t y and s t a f f t h r o u g h t h e campus m a i l . on GUTS b u s e s , i n s t e a d of present ticket �& associates 11 T a b l e 1. OTHER Candidate Georgetown Area A c c e s s (CONTINUED) CANDIDATE GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY ACTIONS c o s t s and u s e a d d i t i o n a l r e v e n u e s Improvements (CONTINUED) (8) Increase parking GUTS s e r v i c e . (9) Reduce t h e d i s c o u n t f o r monthly o r y e a r l y p a r k i n g t o e n c o u r a g e p a r k e r s t o pay d a i l y and u s e t r a n s i t when f e a s i b l e . (10) R e s e r v e most c o n v e n i e n t more p e r s o n s . (11) Expand GUTS s e r v i c e . (12) parking to subsidize spaces f o r carpools with three or V a n p o o l i n g program. e n v i r o n m e n t a l i m p a c t s , neighborhood i m p a c t s , c o s t s , community a c c e p t a n c e , and i n s t i t u t i o n a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . D e t a i l e d t r a v e l demand a n a l y s e s were not performed f o r each i n d i v i d u a l a l t e r n a t i v e , b u t i n s t e a d a g e n e r a l i z e d assessment of impacts on t r a v e l demand was made. During t h e a n a l y s i s o f i n d i v i d u a l a l t e r n a t i v e s , s e r i o u s f l a w s were i d e n t i f i e d f o r a number o f c a n d i d a t e a c t i o n s which w a r r a n t e d t h e i r being dropped from t h e second phase of t h e a n a l y s i s . The a l t e r n a t i v e s which remained f o l l o w i n g t h e i n i t i a l phase of t h e a n a l y s i s were grouped i n t o one of f o u r packages of c a n d i d a t e improvements, and each of t h e s e packages was then t e s t e d u s i n g a computerized t r a v e l demand modeling p r o c e s s . Based upon t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e f i r s t and second phases o f t h e a n a l y s i s , a s e t o f recommended t r a n s p o r t a t i o n improvements f o r t h e Georgetown a r e a was developed and p r e s e n t e d t o t h e D.C. Department of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n and t h e Study S t e e r i n g Committee. The remainder o f t h i s r e p o r t i s d i v i d e d i n t o e i g h t c h a p t e r s . The f i r s t s i x c h a p t e r s f o l l o w i n g t h i s i n t r o d u c t i o n p r e s e n t t h e f i n d i n g s of t h e a n a l y s i s o f i n d i v i d u a l a c c e s s �_jhk* associates 12 improvement a l t e r n a t i v e s . These c h a p t e r s a r e d i v i d e d by g e n e r a l c a t e g o r i e s of c a n d i d a t e a c c e s s improvements as f o l l o w s : Candidate P h y s i c a l Roadway Improvement A c t i o n s Candidate T r a f f i c Operation Improvement A c t i o n s Candidate P a r k i n g Management A c t i o n s Candidate T r a n s i t Improvement A c t i o n s Candidate Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y Southern Entrance Actions Other Candidate Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y A c t i o n s F o l l o w i n g t h e assessment of i n d i v i d u a l a c c e s s a l t e r n a t i v e s , t h e t r a v e l demand a n a l y s e s performed f o r each o f t h e f o u r packages o f a l t e r n a t i v e s a r e d i s c u s s e d . The f i n a l c h a p t e r p r e s e n t s JHK and A s s o c i a t e s ' recommendations f o r improving a c c e s s i n t h e Georgetown area. �.jhk* associates 13 CHAPTER 2. CANDIDATE PHYSICAL ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT ACTIONS Over t h e c o u r s e o f the p a s t t h i r t y y e a r s a l a r g e number of p h y s i c a l roadway improvement a l t e r n a t i v e s have been proposed and a n a l y z e d i n the Georgetown a r e a . I n c l u d e d among t h e s e were the Three S i s t e r s B r i d g e , which would have c r o s s e d t h e Potomac R i v e r n o r t h w e s t , o f Georgetown, and t h e Potomac R i v e r Freeway, which would have connected t h e Three S i s t e r s B r i d g e and Upper Northwest Washington w i t h Downtown and would have passed through Georgetown underground. F o r a v a r i e t y o f r e a s o n s t h e s e p r o p o s a l s have been dropped from f u r t h e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n and were not i n eluded i n t h i s study. There are,however, two major roadway c o n s t r u c t i o n p r o j e c t s t h a t w i l l o c c u r i n the near f u t u r e t h a t w i l l have a d e f i n i t e imp a c t on t r a v e l w i t h i n Georgetown. These a r e t h e opening o f I n t e r s t a t e 6 6 i n Northern V i r g i n i a between t h e C a p i t a l Beltway and t h e Theodore R o o s e v e l t B r i d g e and the r e h a b i l i t a t i o n of t h e W h i t e h u r s t Freeway between Canal Road and Rock Creek P a r k . Because both of t h e s e p r o j e c t s a r e committed and e i t h e r under c o n s t r u c t i o n or n e a r i n g t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n s t a g e , they were not d i r e c t l y c o n s i d e r e d a s a l t e r n a t i v e s i n t h i s study. However, t h e i r e f f e c t s on t r a v e l p a t t e r n s i n Georgetown w i l l be s i g n i f i c a n t , and t h e r e f o r e have been c o n s i d e r e d throughout t h e a n a l y s i s o f Georgetown a c c e s s a l t e r n a t i v e s . Because of Georgetown's i n t e n s e development and because of i t s abundance of h i s t o r i c a l s i t e s and e n v i r o n m e n t a l l y sens i t i v e p a r k l a n d s , t h e r e a r e o n l y a l i m i t e d number of opportun i t i e s f o r p h y s i c a l roadway improvements i n t h e a r e a . JHK and A s s o c i a t e s , t o g e t h e r w i t h Study S t e e r i n g Committee members, i d e n t i f i e d seven p h y s i c a l roadway improvement a l t e r n a t i v e s which w a r r a n t e d a n a l y s i s i n t h i s s t u d y . These a l t e r n a t i v e s a r e as follows: (1) T i e t h e e x i s t i n g stub-end ramps a t t h e e a s t end of W h i t e h u r s t Freeway t o M S t r e e t and P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue. �J ihk (2) Depress K S t r e e t between Washington C i r c l e W h i t e h u r s t Freeway. (5) 14 Repave lower K S t r e e t , moving the r a i l r o a d t r a c k s to e i t h e r the n o r t h or south s i d e o f K Street. (4) associates Extend lower K S t r e e t t o i n t e r s e c t w i t h C a n a l Road o p p o s i t e the Southern E n t r a n c e t o Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y . (3) & C o n s t r u c t a double l e f t t u r n l a n e a t the C a n a l Road - F o x h a l l Road i n t e r s e c t i o n f o r use by westbound C a n a l Road t r a f f i c d u r i n g the PM peak. Upgrade Southern E n t r a n c e t o Georgetown University. (6) (7) and P r o v i d e p e d e s t r i a n a c c e s s along K S t r e e t between Georgetown and the West End. The f i r s t f o u r of t h e s e a l t e r n a t i v e s a r e a n a l y z e d i n t h i s c h a p t e r . The l a s t two a r e d i s c u s s e d i n Chapter 6, the chapter d e a l i n g w i t h the Southern E n t r a n c e to Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y . (1) T i e the e x i s t i n g stub-end ramps a t t h e e a s t end of W h i t e h u r s t Freeway t o M S t r e e t and P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue. A t the p r e s e n t time stub-end ramps e x i s t a t the e a s t end of W h i t e h u r s t Freeway which were o r i g i n a l l y designed t o connect to a freeway which would have f o l l o w e d Rock Creek t o the n o r t h . F o l l o w i n g the d e c i s i o n t o drop the freeway from t h e r e g i o n a l t r a n s p o r t a t i o n p l a n , c o n s i d e r a t i o n was g i v e n t o the c o n n e c t i o n of t h e s e ramps t o P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue and/or M S t r e e t j u s t t o the e a s t of Rock Creek P a r k . The eastbound ramp was never b u i l t because i n s u f f i c i e n t t r a v e l demand was f o r e c a s t along the ramp t o j u s t i f y i t s e x i s t e n c e . The westbound ramp was never c o n s t r u c t e d because e x i s t i n g c a p a c i t y c o n s t r a i n t s a t t h e west end of W h i t e h u r s t Freeway e f f e c t i v e l y l i m i t e d the amount of a d d i t i o n a l westbound t r a f f i c which could be added t o the freeway d u r i n g the PM peak p e r i o d . Because of t h e d i f f e r e n t i s s u e s and impacts i n v o l v e d w i t h t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n of the two s e p a r a t e ramps they a r e d i s cussed s e p a r a t e l y . �jhk. & associates 15 U n t i l r e c e n t l y t h e r e has been l i t t l e j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r the c o n s t r u c t i o n o f the eastbound ramp from W h i t e h u r s t Freeway c o n n e c t i n g t o P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue because the v a s t m a j o r i t y of t r a f f i c which could p o t e n t i a l l y use such a ramp ( t h a t which i s d e s t i n e d to Downtown D.C.) has a more d i r e c t r o u t e t o i t s f i n a l d e s t i n a t i o n by s t a y i n g on the W h i t e h u r s t Freeway and p a s s i n g under Washington C i r c l e . However, i n the p a s t few y e a r s t h e r e has been i n t e n s i v e development i n the West End a r e a between P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue and M S t r e e t and i n the e a s t end of Georgetown which would be d i r e c t l y s e r v e d by a ramp from the W h i t e h u r s t Freeway t o P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue. The a l t e r n a t i v e r o u t e s f o r v e h i c l e s d e s t i n e d t o e i t h e r of t h e s e a r e a s i s t o e x i t from K S t r e e t a t 24th S t r e e t and t r a v e l t o e i t h e r P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue or M S t r e e t , or t o t r a v e l through Georgetown along M S t r e e t . Thus the c o n s t r u c t i o n of the eastbound ramp from the W h i t e h u r s t Freeway t o P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue c o u l d o f f e r the p o t e n t i a l to reduce v e h i c l e m i l e s o f t r a v e l both i n Georgetown and the West End from the l e v e l s which would e x i s t w i t h o u t the ramps. The number o f ways i n which an eastbound ramp from W h i t e h u r s t Freeway c o u l d be l i n k e d to P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue a r e l i m i t e d by p h y s i c a l c o n s t r a i n t s i n the a r e a . The e x i s t i n g s t u b end ramp and K s t r e e t a r e p r e s e n t l y c o n s t r u c t e d i n such a manner t h a t i t should be f e a s i b l e t o c o n s t r u c t a ramp under K S t r e e t (see F i g u r e 2) w i t h o u t s u b s t a n t i a l r e c o n s t r u c t i o n of e i t h e r the e x i s t i n g stub end ramp or K S t r e e t . From the p o i n t a t which the ramp would pass under K S t r e e t i t appears t h a t i t would be most l o g i c a l f o r the ramp to connect i n t o the ramp from I n t e r s t a t e 66 which t e r m i n a t e s a t the i n t e r s e c t i o n of 26th S t r e e t and L S t r e e t . The o n l y o t h e r a l t e r n a t i v e would be t o b r i n g the ramp up t o a merge w i t h 26th S t r e e t a t a p o i n t south of L S t r e e t . However, t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e would i n v o l v e b i s e c t i n g and t a k i n g much of the l a n d i n t h e West End Park along 26th S t r e e t and would g r e a t l y i n c r e a s e t r a f f i c volumes along 26th S t r e e t , which i s p r e s e n t l y a q u i e t r e s i d e n t i a l s t r e e t w i t h l i t t l e through t r a f f i c . �PROPOSED WHITEHURST FREEWAY RAMPS �ihk } ~~ & associates 17 Connecting the eastbound W h i t e h u r s t Freeway ramp w i t h the I n t e r s t a t e 66 ramp a l s o poses problems because the I n t e r s t a t e 66 ramp i s a l r e a d y s e v e r e l y congested d u r i n g the AM peak p e r i o d and would l i k e l y need t o be widened to two l a n e s . I n t h a t case L S t r e e t would a l s o need t o be widened t o two eastbound l a n e s d u r i n g the AM peak p e r i o d . The d e s i g n of a westbound ramp from M S t r e e t and/or P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue t o W h i t e h u r s t Freeway a l s o p r e s e n t s a number of problems which may be d i f f i c u l t t o r e s o l v e . The primary purpose of such a ramp would be t o d i v e r t through t r a f f i c from M S t r e e t onto the W h i t e h u r s t Freeway, and thus o f f of Georgetown s t r e e t s . T h e r e f o r e i t i s n e c e s s a r y t h a t M S t r e e t t r a f f i c be g i v e n easy a c c e s s t o t h i s ramp. S e v e r a l a l t e r n a t i v e s were a n a l y z e d t o connect M S t r e e t t o the W h i t e h u r s t Freeway. One a l t e r n a t i v e would i n v o l v e the c o n s t r u c t i o n of a ramp which would begin j u s t t o the west of the c o r n e r of 26th and M S t r e e t s , pass under P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue and connect t o the e x i s t i n g s t u b end of the W h i t e h u r s t Freeway ramp. A c r i t i c a l problem w i t h t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e i s t h a t i t would pass under P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue a t t h e p o i n t where the P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue b r i d g e over Rock Creek Park ends, t h u s r e q u i r i n g r e c o n s t r u c t i o n of t h a t b r i d g e . T h i s a l t e r n a t i v e would a l s o r e q u i r e the i n s t a l l a t i o n o f l a r g e r e t a i n i n g w a l l s and would pass through an e x i s t i n g park west o f 26th S t r e e t between M S t r e e t and P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue. Another o p t i o n would be t o c o n s t r u c t the ramp along a s i m i l a r alignment t o the above o p t i o n , but t o c r o s s P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue w i t h an a t grade i n t e r s e c t i o n . Such an o p t i o n could prob a b l y be designed so as t o e l i m i n a t e the need f o r complete r e c o n s t r u c t i o n of the P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue b r i d g e . However, i t would r e s u l t i n t h r e e v e r y c l o s e s i g n a l i z e d i n t e r s e c t i o n s on P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue between 26th and 2 8th S t r e e t s . T h i s o p t i o n a l s o has the d i s a d v a n t a g e of c u t t i n g through t h e e x i s t i n g park west o f 26th S t r e e t . �A t h i r d o p t i o n would be to c o n v e r t 26th S t r e e t t o twoway o p e r a t i o n , have v e h i c l e s t u r n south on 26th S t r e e t from M S t r e e t , west on L S t r e e t , and l i n k i n t o the westbound W h i t e h u r s t Freeway ramp from L S t r e e t . T h i s a l t e r n a t i v e would r e q u i r e some r e a l i g n m e n t o f t h e e x i s t i n g stub end of the W h i t e h u r s t Freeway ramp b u t would i n v o l v e much l e s s impact on p a r k l a n d and would not i n c r e a s e the number of i n t e r s e c t i n g s t r e e t s w i t h P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue. However, i n order t o c o n v e r t 26th S t r e e t to two-way o p e r a t i o n and to connect L S t r e e t t o the W h i t e h u r s t Freeway, p a r k i n g would have t o be removed from 26th S t r e e t between L and M S t r e e t s and from L S t r e e t west of 26th S t r e e t . The ramp from westbound W h i t e h u r s t Freeway t o southbound Key B r i d g e could be redesigned so i t could c a r r y a h i g h e r number of v e h i c l e s per hour. A b a r r i e r could be extended a t the p o i n t where the ramp meets Key B r i d g e t o reduce c o n f l i c t s between ramp t r a f f i c and v e h i c l e s a l r e a d y on the b r i d g e . The s i g n a l a t the i n t e r s e c t i o n of the westbound W h i t e h u r s t Freeway ramp w i t h Canal Road could be retimed t o f a v o r W h i t e h u r s t Freeway t r a f f i c t o a g r e a t e r degree than a t the p r e s e n t time. Even i f a s i g n i f i c a n t i n c r e a s e i n c a p a c i t y a t t h i s p o i n t proves t o be i m p o s s i b l e , i t would be d e s i r a b l e t o attempt t o d i v e r t as much M S t r e e t t r a f f i c to W h i t e h u r s t Freeway as p o s s i b l e d u r i n g a l l o t h e r p a r t s of t h e day other than the PM peak and on weekends, i n order t o reduce t r a f f i c through Georgetown proper as much as p o s s i b l e . I t i s e s t i m a t e d t h a t a t o t a l of 2,000 t o 3,000 v e h i c l e s would use the eastbound ramp per day and 3,000 t o 4,000 v e h i c l e s would use the westbound ramp per day. The t o t a l c o s t of t y i n g the e x i s t i n g stub-end ramps i n t o L S t r e e t i s estimated to be between $1,000,000 and $1,400,000 i n 1979 d o l l a r s . I f t i e d w i t h c a p a c i t y r e s t r a i n t a c t i o n s w i t h i n Georgetown, the W h i t e h u r s t Freeway ramps could s e r v e t o p r o v i d e an e f f e c t i v e �bypass of Georgetown proper f o r a number of through t r i p s w h i c h p r e s e n t l y use M S t r e e t and P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue. However, the ramps r a i s e a number of concerns among West End r e s i d e n t s w i t h r e g a r d t o n e g a t i v e i m p a c t s , which should be s t u d i e d i n d e t a i l b e f o r e a d e c i s i o n i s made whether to b u i l d the ramps. Concerns have been r a i s e d r e g a r d i n g the r e d u c t i o n i n o n - s t r e e t p a r k i n g spaces on 26th S t r e e t , N.W.; changed t r a f f i c p a t t e r n s w i t h i n t h e West End; and p o s s i b l e e n v i r o n m e n t a l impacts. Although i t i s f e l t the net e f f e c t of the r e v i s e d t r a f f i c p a t t e r n s would be to s h i f t some t r a f f i c from s t r e e t s which run through the middle of the West End to s t r e e t s which run along the n o r t h and west edges of t h a t community, the t r a f f i c p a t t e r n s r e s u l t i n g from the opening of the ramps should a l s o be s t u d i e d i n more d e t a i l . The p r i m a r y j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r b u i l d i n g the ramps would be to reduce through t r a f f i c volumes on M S t r e e t i n Georgetown which d e t r a c t s from the h i s t o r i c and commercial v a l u e s of t h i s a r e a . The need f o r t h i s s h i f t i s g r e a t e r i f t r o l l e y s e r v i c e i s r e i n s t i t u t e d or o t h e r c a p a c i t y r e s t a i n t measures a r e a p p l i e d along M S t r e e t w i t h i n Georgetown. I f t h e s e a c t i o n s a r e implemented and the ramps a r e not c o n s t r u c t e d , the n e t e f f e c t w i l l be t h a t through t r a f f i c w i l l , t o a g r e a t e r e x t e n t than i t even does today, use l o c a l r e s i d e n t i a l s t r e e t s to get through the West End. The c o n s t r u c t i o n of the proposed ramps a t the W h i t e h u r s t Freeway, i f t i e d w i t h c a p a c i t y r e s t r a i n t measures w i t h i n Georgetown, would r e s u l t i n s i g n i f i c a n t b e n e f i t s i n terms of t r a f f i c o p e r a t i o n s and the impacts of through t r a f f i c upon Georgetown. However, t h e r e a r e a number of l e g i t i m a t e concerns r e g a r d i n g the impacts of the proposed ramps on the West End which need to be addressed i n d e t a i l . I f the ramps were to be c o n s t r u c t e d , i t would be n e c e s s a r y t h a t a l l impacts of the proposed a c t i o n , both p o s i t i v e and n e g a t i v e , be s t u d i e d �jhk. & associates 20 i n d e t a i l . I t i s recommended t h a t the D. C. Department of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n e n t e r the e n v i r o n m e n t a l r e v i e w p r o c e s s f o r an a l t e r n a t i v e which would c o n t a i n the f o l l o w i n g elements: T i e e x i s t i n g ramps a t the e a s t end of W h i t e h u r s t Freeway to t e r m i n i on L S t r e e t . Convert 26th S t r e e t between L and M S t r e e t s to two-way o p e r a t i o n , removing p a r k i n g i n t h i s s e c t i o n of 26th S t r e e t , and making the c e n t e r l a n e r e v e r s i b l e . Remove p a r k i n g on L S t r e e t between the W h i t e h u r s t Freeway ramps and 26th S t r e e t , r e d e s i g n i n g the i n t e r s e c t i o n of 26th and L S t r e e t s to accommodate double l e f t t u r n s . Make L S t r e e t one-way eastbound between 26th S t r e e t and P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue. I n a d d i t i o n , as p a r t of the d e s i g n f o r the r e c o n s t r u c t i o n of the W h i t e h u r s t Freeway, i t i s recommended t h a t both the eastbound and westbound ramps a t the west end of W h i t e h u r s t Freeway be r e d e s i g n e d i n order to improve t r a f f i c f l o w . This e n t i r e p r o p o s a l , however, should o n l y be c o n s i d e r e d w i t h i n the c o n t e x t of an o v e r a l l management p l a n which does not p e r m i t i n c r e a s e d t r a f f i c volumes t o e n t e r downtown Wahington. (2) E x t e n d lower K S t r e e t to i n t e r s e c t w i t h Canal Road o p p o s i t e the Southern E n t r a n c e to Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y . The p r i m a r y purpose of t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e would be to p r o v i d e improved a c c e s s to the r a p i d l y growing area of Georgetown south of M S t r e e t , thereby d i v e r t i n g much of the t r a f f i c o r i e n t e d to t h i s a r e a from M S t r e e t and the c e n t e r of Georgetown. The e x t e n s i o n of K S t r e e t to Canal Road could a l s o s e r v e as an a l t e r n a t e r o u t e to M S t r e e t and the W h i t e h u r s t Freeway f o r through t r a f f i c . �associates 21 However, t h e r e a r e a number of s e r i o u s problems w i t h t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e which make i t s f e a s i b i l i t y u n l i k e l y . The most s e r i o u s impacts would be upon the C&O Canal which would have t o be c r o s s e d i f lower K S t r e e t i s t o be connected t o Canal Road (see F i g u r e 3). The C&O Canal i s a n a t i o n a l h i s t o r i c landmark a d m i n i s t e r e d by the N a t i o n a l Park S e r v i c e . E x c e p t f o r a s m a l l p i e c e of l a n d j u s t t o the west of Key B r i d g e , t h e e n t i r e a r e a between Canal Road and the Potomac R i v e r t o the west of Key B r i d g e i s N a t i o n a l Park S e r v i c e l a n d . The e l e v a t i o n of K S t r e e t as i t passes under Key Bridge i s a p p r o x i m a t e l y 20 f e e t above sea l e v e l . At the p o i n t where K S t r e e t extended would i n t e r s e c t w i t h C a n a l Road t h e e l e v a t i o n i s 50 f e e t above sea l e v e l , t h u s the c o n s t r u c t i o n of a roadway which would enable v e h i c l e s t o overcome t h i s grade d i f f e r e n t i a l would r e q u i r e a b a r r i e r between the C&O Canal and the Potomac R i v e r . T h i s b a r r i e r would be much more o b t r u s i v e than the e x i s t i n g C h e s s i e System r a i l r o a d t r a c k s . P i e r s would have t o be c o n s t r u c t e d f o r a b r i d g e a c r o s s the C&O Canal which would protude i n t o the c a n a l ' s r i g h t of way along the w a l l s e p a r a t i n g the c a n a l from Canal Road. The t r a f f i c impacts of e x t e n d i n g K S t r e e t t o i n t e r s e c t w i t h Canal Road would be mixed. The a r e a south of M S t r e e t i n Georgetown i s undergoing r a p i d redevelopment w i t h s i g n i f i c a n t i n c r e a s e s i n t r a f f i c g e n e r a t i o n being e x p e r i e n c e d . T r a f f i c generated by t h i s new development which i s o r i e n t e d t o the west must p r e s e n t l y use the narrow n o r t h - s o u t h s t r e e t s c o n n e c t i n g K S t r e e t t o M S t r e e t . Much o f t h i s t r a f f i c would b e n e f i t from the opening of a connection t o Canal Road, and the p r e s e n t overburdening o f M S t r e e t would be r e l i e v e d t o a c e r t a i n e x t e n t . However, t h i s t r a f f i c would be dumped onto Canal Road a t a p o i n t where i t c o u l d not handle the a d d i t i o n a l t r a f f i c l o a d s . I n a d d i t i o n , l o w e r K S t r e e t would become a t h i r d major e a s t - w e s t r o u t e through the s o u t h e r n p a r t of Georgetown. The a d d i t i o n a l c a p a c i t y p r o v i d e d by such a roadway would be c o n t r a r y t o t h i s s t u d y ' s o b j e c t i v e of r e d u c i n g ��through t r a f f i c i n Georgetown as w e l l as D.C. DOT's l a r g e r object i v e of r e d u c i n g automobile t r a f f i c t o downtown Wahington. Because of the l a r g e riumber of problems a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e , i t i s recommended t h a t i t be dropped from f u r t h e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n t h i s study. (3) Repave lower K S t r e e t , moving the r a i l r o a d t r a c k s to e i t h e r the n o r t h or south s i d e of K S t r e e t . On the n o r t h s i d e of lower K S t r e e t many new b u i l i d i n g s have r e c e n t l y been c o n s t r u c t e d , a r e b e i n g b u i l t , or a r e planned. On the south s i d e of lower K S t r e e t the W a t e r f r o n t P a r k and the proposed Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t development i s planned. With the m a s s i v e redevelopment of the a r e a of Georgetown south of M S t r e e t t r a v e l demand on K S t r e e t i s s t e a d i l y i n c r e a s i n g . However, lower K S t r e e t a t the p r e s e n t time has r a i l r o a d t r a c k s down i t s c e n t e r and v e r y poor pavement c o n d i t i o n s . I t i s n e c e s s a r y t h a t the r a i l r o a d t r a c k s remain along lower K S t r e e t because t h e G e n e r a l S e r v i c e s A d m i n i s t r a t i o n power p l a n t a t the e a s t end of lower K S t r e e t r e c e i v e s c o a l shipments along the C h e s s i e System l i n e t h a t runs down the c e n t e r of lower K S t r e e t . However, i f the t r a c k s c o u l d be moved t o e i t h e r the n o r t h or south s i d e of the s t r e e t and the s t r e e t repaved, i t s t r a f f i c h a n d l i n g c a p a b i l i t i e s would be improved considerably. With a new pavement i t would be p o s s i b l e t o run buses along K S t r e e t w i t h o u t f e a r of damage r e s u l t i n g from the poor pavement c o n d i t i o n s . P u t t i n g the t r a c k s along the south s i d e would r e q u i r e t h a t the t r a c k s c r o s s lower K S t r e e t a t i t s e a s t end i n order t o a c c e s s the GSA power p l a n t . However, p l a c i n g them on the n o r t h s i d e would r e q u i r e r a i l r o a d c r o s s i n g s a t every i n t e r s e c t i o n and the t r a c k s would i n t e r f e r e w i t h u n l o a d i n g operat i o n s a t the b u i l d i n g s along the n o r t h s i d e of the s t r e e t . �The D.C. Department of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n i s p r e s e n t l y p l a n n i n g to i n c o r p o r a t e the r e p a v i n g of lower K S t r e e t i n t o i t s p r o j e c t to r e h a b i l i t a t e the W h i t e h u r s t Freeway. I t i s important t h a t t h i s be done, and i f the W h i t e h u r s t Freeway p r o j e c t i s delayed f o r any r e a s o n , s e r i o u s c o n s i d e r a t i o n should be g i v e n t o r e p a v i n g lower K S t r e e t sooner. I t i s now i m p o s s i b l e f o r buses t o operate over t h i s s t r e e t because of i t s poor c o n d i t i o n . I f new bus r o u t e s cannot begin o p e r a t i n g i n t h i s a r e a as new developments open, an important o p p o r t u n i t y t o develop a t r a n s i t h a b i t among the r e s i d e n t s and employees of t h e s e new developments may be l o s t . The c o s t of r e p a v i n g lower K S t r e e t and moving t h e r a i l r o a d t r a c k s to the south s i d e of the s t r e e t f o r i t s e n t i r e l e n g t h i s e s t i m a t e d to be on the order o f $300,000 t o $400,000 i n 1979 d o l l a r s . T h i s i s an e x p e n d i t u r e t h a t w i l l be w e l l worth t h e c o s t because i t w i l l a l l o w K S t r e e t t o p r o v i d e some r e l i e f t o M S t r e e t f o r t r a f f i c i n South Georgetown and w i l l permit the i n s t i t u t i o n o f bus s e r v i c e to the r a p i d l y and d e n s e l y d e v e l o p i n g a r e a south of M S t r e e t . (4) Depress K S t r e e t between Washington C i r c l e and W h i t e h u r s t Freeway. At the p r e s e n t time K S t r e e t passes through a t u n n e l under Washington C i r c l e , r e t u r n s t o the l e v e l of the s u r f a c e s t r e e t s a t 25th S t r e e t , and a g a i n becomes depressed where i t s p l i t s from the W h i t e h u r s t Freeway. At 25th S t r e e t v e h i c u l a r t r a f f i c cannot c r o s s K S t r e e t ; however, t h e r e i s a p e d e s t r i a n s i g n a l and c r o s s w a l k which i s used by a l a r g e number of p e d e s t r i a n s throughout the day (see F i g u r e 4 ) . The p e d e s t r i a n s i g n a l i s the f i r s t s i g n a l encountered by t r a f f i c coming o f f the W h i t e h u r s t Freeway. There a r e a s i g n i f i c a n t number of p e d e s t r i a n a c c i d e n t s a t t h i s l o c a t i o n each y e a r , which has l e d t o the s u g g e s t i o n by r e s i d e n t s of the West End t h a t K S t r e e t be depressed through t h i s s e c t i o n . Because such a p r o j e c t would o b v i o u s l y i n v o l v e s i g n i f i c a n t e n g i n e e r i n g �PROPOSED D E P R E S S E D K S T R E E T �a n a l y s i s and c o n s i d e r a b l e c o s t , JHK r e q u e s t e d D. C. Department of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n e n g i n e e r s to develop a c o s t e s t i m a t e f o r t h i s project. I f K S t r e e t were depressed through t h i s e n t i r e s e c t i o n and a v e h i c u l a r / p e d e s t r i a n b r i d g e were b u i l t a c r o s s K S t r e e t a t 25th S t r e e t , D.C. DOT e n g i n e e r s e s t i m a t e the e n t i r e p r o j e c t would c o s t $6,600,000. I f the b r i d g e were designed to c a r r y t r o l l e y l o a d i n g s (25th S t r e e t i s one of the s t r e e t s b e i n g c o n s i d e r e d f o r a t r o l l e y r o u t i n g ) , another $600,000 would have to be added to the c o s t of the p r o j e c t . A p r o j e c t of t h i s order of magnitude would have to be i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o l o n g e r term c a p i t a l p r o j e c t s p l a n n i n g and would have t o be weighed a g a i n s t o t h e r l a r g e s c a l e c a p i t a l p r o j e c t s throughout t h e c i t y . A p o s s i b l e a l t e r n a t i v e t o d e a l i n g w i t h the p e d e s t r i a n c r o s s i n g problem would be t o b u i l d a p e d e s t r i a n b r i d g e a c r o s s K S t r e e t . Depending upon the t y p e of s t r u c t u r e b u i l t such a b r i d g e would c o s t between $100,000 and $200,000. Although t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e would not s o l v e the problem of t r a f f i c n o i s e f o r r e s i d e n t s l i v i n g along K S t r e e t , i t would o f f e r a s a f e c r o s s i n g of K S t r e e t f o r p e d e s t r i a n s a t a c o n s i d e r a b l y lower c o s t . I t i s recommended t h a t a p e d e s t r i a n b r i d q e at 25th S t r e e t be p r i o r i t i z e d i n r e l a t i o n to o t h e r l o c a t i o n s where p e d e s t r i a n b r i d g e s a r e p r e s e n t l y being c o n s i d e r e d throughout the c i t y and i f i t determined to be among the most needing l o c a t i o n s , t h a t such a b r i d g e be b u i l t . (7) P r o v i d e p e d e s t r i a n a c c e s s along K S t r e e t between Georgetown and the West End. With the r a p i d redevelopment of the a r e a of Georgetown south of M S t r e e t , i t i s important t h a t good a c c e s s t o M e t r o r a i l be p r o v i d e d i n o r d e r t h a t as h i g h a percentage of t r i p s w i l l use M e t r o r a i l as p o s s i b l e . The s t r a i g h t l i n e d i s t a n c e between most of t h i s development and t h e Foggy Bottom M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n i s between 1/2 and 3/4 m i l e , which i s w i t h i n t h e range of d i s t a n c e s commuters are observed t o walk to Metror a i l s t a t i o n s . However, a t p r e s e n t t h e r e i s no d i r e c t p e d e s t r i a n �c o n n e c t i o n between lower K S t r e e t i n Georgetown and the Foggy Bottom s t a t i o n . P e d e s t r i a n s d e s i r i n g t o make t h i s movement must walk n o r t h t o M S t r e e t and P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue before proceeding e a s t t o t h e West End. I t i s important t h a t t r a n s i t usage t o the new developments south o f M S t r e e t be as h i g h as p o s s i b l e i f t r a n s p o r t a t i o n l e v e l s of s e r v i c e are t o be m a i n t a i n e d a t an a c c e p t a b l e l e v e l i n South Georgetown. Because a d i r e c t p e d e s t r i a n c o n n e c t i o n between Georgetown and the West End along K S t r e e t would s i g n i f i c a n t l y improve a c c e s s t o t h e Foggy Bottom M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n from South Georgetown, i t i s recommended t h a t attempts be made t o i n c o r p o r a t e a s i d e w a l k along K S t r e e t a c r o s s Rock Creek Park d u r i n g t h e d e s i g n and r e c o n s t r u c t i o n of W h i t e h u r s t Freeway. �CHAPTER 3. CANDIDATE TRAFFIC OPERATION IMPROVEMENT ACTIONS Because t h e r e a r e u n l i k e l y t o be many major p h y s i c a l changes to t h e s t r e e t system i n Georgetown i n t h e f o r e s e e a b l e f u t u r e , improvements i n a c c e s s i n t h e study a r e a w i l l have t o come t o a l a r g e degree from management o f t h e e x i s t i n g s t r e e t system. Although a g r e a t d e a l o f e f f o r t has been spent i n t h e p a s t t r y i n g t o t a i l o r t r a f f i c o p e r a t i o n s t o demand i n order t o maximize t r a f f i c throughput, the r a p i d redevelopment o f t h e a r e a south o f M S t r e e t i s going t o i n t r o d u c e a whole new s e t o f t r a f f i c p a t t e r n s and t r a f f i c opera t i o n i s s u e s which must be d e a l t w i t h i n Georgetown. T r a f f i c o p e r a t i o n s a l t e r n a t i v e s cover a wide range o f means f o r improving t r a f f i c f l o w . They a l s o can be used t o t r y t o a c h i e v e o b j e c t i v e s o t h e r than s t r i c t l y maximizing v e h i c l e throughput, however. For example c e r t a i n l a n e s on roadways c o u l d be s e t a s i d e f o r use by high occupancy v e h i c l e s o n l y , or c e r t a i n t u r n i n g movements could be c o n t r o l l e d e i t h e r through s i g n a l t i m i n g o r t u r n r e s t r i c t i o n s t o reduce through t r a f f i c volumes. However, i n i n v e s t i g a t i n g a l t e r n a t i v e t r a f f i c o p e r a t i o n o p t i o n s , one must be c a r e f u l not t o propose a c t i o n s which may s o l v e one problem and c r e a t e a more s e r i o u s one e l s e w h e r e . A t o t a l o f t w e l v e c a n d i d a t e t r a f f i c o p e r a t i o n a c t i o n s were generated f o r i n c l u s i o n i n t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e s a n a l y s i s . These a c t i o n s a r e as f o l l o w s : (1) One-way s t r e e t s (a) South o f M S t r e e t ( 2 9 t h , 30th, 3 1 s t , Thomas J e f f e r s o n S t r e e t s ) (b) (2) North-south s t r e e t s n o r t h o f M S t r e e t ( 2 8 t h , 2 9 t h , 30th, 3 1 s t S t r e e t s ) (c) E a s t - w e s t s t r e e t s n o r t h o f M S t r e e t (N, P, Q S t r e e t s ) Upgrade t h e t r a f f i c s i g n a l system. (3) R e v e r s i b l e l a n e s on Key B r i d g e . (4) Remove r e v e r s i b l e l a n e s on M S t r e e t . �(5) - Extend bus l a n e s on M S t r e e t from W i s c o n s i n Avenue t o Key B r i d g e • (6) Make r i g h t l a n e of Key Bridge northbound t u r n only a t W h i t e h u r s t Freeway ramp. right (7) High occupancy v e h i c l e l a n e s on Key (8) High occupancy v e h i c l e l a n e s on W h i t e h u r s t (9) High occupancy v e h i c l e l a n e s on Canal Road and W h i t e h u r s t Freeway from Chain B r i d g e t o Washington Circle. Bridge. Freeway. (10) High occupancy v e h i c l e l a n e s on P and Q S t r e e t s . (11) Reduce the number of l a n e s on Key B r i d g e t o f o u r . (12) Reduce the number of l a n e s on Chain B r i d g e t o two. (1) One-way s t r e e t s . One way s t r e e t s a r e n o r m a l l y implemented i n d e n s e l y developed a r e a s where inadequate c a p a c i t y e x i s t s on e x i s t i n g two-way s t r e e t s . One-way s t r e e t s can i n c r e a s e the t r a f f i c c a r r y i n g c a p a c i t y of the s t r e e t system because they e l i m i n a t e t u r n ing c o n f l i c t s w i t h on-coming t r a f f i c and n o r m a l l y reduce d e l a y s r e s u l t i n g from stopping or p a r k i n g v e h i c l e s by a l l o w i n g f o r an e x t r a l a n e ( s ) i n which to get by stopping or p a r k i n g v e h i c l e s . P e d e s t r i a n s a f e t y i s n o r m a l l y improved w i t h one-way s t r e e t s because p e d e s t r i a n s o n l y need to be concerned w i t h v e h i c l e s approaching from one d i r e c t i o n . However, w i t h the improvements which r e s u l t i n t r a f f i c f l o w , v e h i c u l a r speeds n o r m a l l y i n c r e a s e as do t r a f f i c volumes c a r r i e d . The d i s c u s s i o n of p o t e n t i a l one-way s t r e e t p a t t e r n s i n Georgetown w i l l be d i v i d e d i n t o t h r e e s e c t i o n s : one-way s t r e e t s south of M S t r e e t , n o r t h - s o u t h one-way s t r e e t s n o r t h of M S t r e e t , a n d e a s t - w e s t one-way s t r e e t s n o r t h of M S t r e e t . A one-way s t r e e t p a t t e r n a l r e a d y e x i s t s west of W i s c o n s i n Avenue i n Georgetown. A map showing both e x i s t i n g and p o t e n t i a l one-way s t r e e t s i n the Georgetown a r e a i s shown i n F i g u r e 5. �PROPOSED GEORGETOWN ONE WAY ST SYSTEM �(a) South of M S t r e e t . The a r e a of Georgetown south of M S t r e e t i s r a p i d l y r e d e v e l o p i n g w i t h many new b u i l d i n g s being c o n s t r u c t e d . T h i s redevelopment i s r e s u l t i n g i n s i g n i f i c a n t l y more t r a f f i c being added t o the n o r t h - s o u t h s t r e e t s which run between K and M S t r e e t s . E x c e p t f o r W i s c o n s i n Avenue t h e s e s t r e e t s are q u i t e narrow. With p a r k i n g a l l o w e d on both s i d e s , a t i t i s now, i t i s i m p o s s i b l e f o r two v e h i c l e s t r a v e l l i n g i n o p p o s i t e d i r e c t i o n s to pass w i t h o u t one p u l l i n g over t o the s i d e w h i l e the o t h e r p a s s e s . To e x a c e r b a t e the s i t u a t i o n d r i v e r s of d e l i v e r y t r u c k s o f t e n cannot f i n d space along the curb when making d e l i v e r i e s , so they stop t h e i r t r u c k s i n t h e middle of the s t r e e t , unload or l o a d t h e i r cargo, and b l o c k t r a f f i c , o f t e n f o r p e r i o d s as long as 5 minutes or more. I n o r d e r t o stop t h e s e t r u c k s from b l o c k i n g the s t r e e t , more l o a d i n g and unloading zones a r e needed along t h e s e s t r e e t s (see d i s c u s s i o n i n the c h a p t e r on p a r k i n g a l t e r n a t i v e s ) . I n order to f a c i l i t a t e t r a f f i c f l o w along t h e s e s t r e e t s , i t i s proposed t h a t one-way s t r e e t o p e r a t i o n s be i n s t i t u t e d on 2 9 t h , 3 0 t h , Thomas J e f f e r s o n , a n d 31st S t r e e t s between K and M S t r e e t s as shown i n F i g u r e 5. Because of s e r i o u s s i g h t d i s t a n c e problems encountered by southbound t r a f f i c on 29th S t r e e t a t K S t r e e t , i t i s recommended t h a t i f a one-way s t r e e t p a t t e r n i s adopted t h a t 29th S t r e e t be one-way northbound. The d i r e c t i o n of each of t h e o t h e r s t r e e t s would depend t o a c e r t a i n e x t e n t upon what i s done i n terms of one-way o p e r a t i o n s n o r t h of M S t r e e t . R e c e n t l y 30th S t r e e t between M and K S t r e e t s was c o n v e r t e d t o one-way southbound o p e r a t i o n a t the r e q u e s t o f r e s i d e n t s l i v i n g i n the a r e a . The new d i r e c t i o n a l p a t t e r n was w e l l r e c e i v e d by most r e s i d e n t s and businessmen, e x c e p t one h o t e l o p e r a t o r who must now have g u e s t s ' c a r s d r i v e n around the b l o c k a f t e r they a r e r e t r i e v e d from t h e h o t e l ' s garage. One-way s t r e e t s w i l l r e s u l t i n some a d d i t i o n a l v e h i c l e m i l e s o f t r a v e l because most t r i p s t o p o i n t s along the one-way s t r e e t s w i l l have t o c i r c l e a b l o c k , e i t h e r i n coming t o o r l e a v i n g t h e i r d e s t i n a t i o n . However, t r a v e l time d e l a y s should be reduced c o n s i d e r a b l y on the one-way �streets. The c a p a c i t i e s o f t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n s of t h e s e s t r e e t s w i t h M S t r e e t w i l l be i n c r e a s e d because of t h e r e d u c t i o n i n t h e number o f t u r n i n g movements a l l o w e d . Because of the l a r g e i n c r e a s e s i n t r i p g e n e r a t i o n and i t s r e s u l t a n t impacts on t r a f f i c f l o w i n t h i s a r e a , i t i s recommended t h a t 29th and Thomas J e f f e r s o n S t r e e t s be made one-way northbound, 3 1 s t S t r e e t be made one-way southbound, and 30th S t r e e t be r e t a i n e d as a one-way southbound street. (b) North-south s t r e e t s n o r t h of M S t r e e t . As shown i n F i g u r e 5, 2 8 t h , 2 9 t h , 3 0 t h , and 3 1 s t S t r e e t s have a l l been proposed f o r one-way o p e r a t i o n between M and R S t r e e t s . Whereas the n o r t h - s o u t h s t r e e t s south o f M S t r e e t s u f f e r from inadequate c a p a c i t y and poor t r a f f i c f l o w t o the e n t r a n c e s of the many new and l a r g e o f f i c e and commercial b u i l d i n g s going up i n the a r e a , the a r e a n o r t h of M S t r e e t i s p r i m a r i l y r e s i d e n t i a l i n n a t u r e , and the s t r e e t s i n t h e a r e a p r o v i d e adequate a c c e s s t o t h e r e s i d e n c e s . The t r a f f i c problems along t h e s e s t r e e t s a r e somewhat the opposite of the s t r e e t s south of M S t r e e t i n t h a t through t r a f f i c from t h e congested a r t e r i a l s t r e e t s s p i l l s over onto t h e s e s t r e e t s which are intended f o r l o c a l a c c e s s o n l y . The r e s i d e n t s i n t h i s a r e a have s u c c e s s f u l l y l o b b i e d t o get four-way stops i n s t a l l e d a t most i n t e r s e c t i o n s throughout t h i s a r e a i n an e f f o r t t o slow down t r a f f i c and d i s c o u r a g e through t r a f f i c from u s i n g these s t r e e t s . I t i s d o u b t f u l t h a t t h e s e r e s i d e n t s would be amenable t o a proposal which would f a c i l i t a t e t r a f f i c f l o w and i n c r e a s e t h e number o f through v e h i c l e s u s i n g t h e i r s t r e e t s . On t h e o t h e r hand one-way s t r e e t s do make p a r k i n g e a s i e r and improve p e d e s t r i a n s a f e t y . Because t h e p r i m a r y impact o f c o n v e r t i n g t h e s e s t r e e t s t o one-way o p e r a t i o n would be upon t h e l o c a l r e s i d e n t s and because c o n v e r t i n g t h e s e s t r e e t s t o one-way o p e r a t i o n would l i k e l y i n c r e a s e through t r a f f i c on them, t h i s proposed a c t i o n should o n l y be c o n s i d e r e d i f supported by those persons l i v i n g i n t h e a r e a . �(c) E a s t - w e s t s t r e e t s n o r t h of M S t r e e t . P r o p o s a l s have been made t o c r e a t e two one-way p a i r s out of N, Dumbarton, P, and Q. S t r e e t s between Wisconsin Avenue and the e a s t e r n bounda r y of Georgetown (see F i g u r e 5 ) . Dumbarton S t r e e t p r e s e n t l y i s one-way eastbound. N S t r e e t would be made one-way westbound to b a l a n c e the one-way f l o w on Dumbarton S t r e e t . Q S t r e e t would be made one-way eastbound and P S t r e e t one-way westbound. T h i s i s the r e v e r s e of a normal one-way p a i r i n g and i s proposed t h i s way because Q S t r e e t e a s t of Rock Creek Park i s one-way eastbound. P and Q S t r e e t s a t the p r e s e n t time c a r r y r e l a t i v e l y l a r g e t r a f f i c l o a d s p r i m a r i l y because they a r e the o n l y Georgetown s t r e e t s n o r t h of M S t r e e t which c r o s s Rock Creek P a r k . A m a j o r i t y of the peak p e r i o d t r a f f i c on t h e s e s t r e e t s i s through t r a f f i c and any a c t i o n s which would f a c i l i t a t e t r a f f i c f l o w on t h e s e s t r e e t s would l i k e l y i n c r e a s e the amount of through t r a f f i c on t h e s e s t r e e t s , p a r t i c u l a r l y d u r i n g peak p e r i o d s . I n a d d i t i o n t h e r e are two problems , one a t each end of the proposed two-way p a i r which make the d e s i r a b i l i t y of implementing t h i s one-way p a i r q u e s t i o n a b l e . The v a s t m a j o r i t y of eastbound t r a f f i c on P and Q S t r e e t s makes a l e f t t u r n from W i s c o n s i n Avenue i n o r d e r to get on one or the o t h e r of t h e s e s t r e e t s . At the p r e s e n t time t h e s e l e f t t u r n i n q v e h i c l e s are s p l i t between the two i n t e r s e c t i o n s , and although they c o n t r i b u t e to c o n g e s t i o n a t both i n t e r s e c t i o n s t h e i r impact i s l e s s e n e d by the f a c t t h a t they are s p l i t between the i n t e r s e c t i o n s . I f a one-way p a i r were implemented and a l l eastbound v e h i c l e s had t o t u r n a t Q S t r e e t , the c o n g e s t i o n would become more s e r i o u s merely because a l l t h e s e l e f t t u r n i n g v e h i c l e s would be c o n c e n t r a t e d a t one i n t e r s e c t i o n . Although no green time would have t o be g i v e n to westbound Q S t r e e t v e h i c l e s , t h e s e v e h i c l e s would s t i l l be coming through the i n t e r s e c t i o n from P S t r e e t . Another problem w i t h the P/Q S t r e e t one-way p a i r o c c u r s a t the e a s t end of Georgetown where i t c r o s s e s Rock Creek P a r k . P S t r e e t p r e s e n t l y i n t e r s e c t s w i t h Rock Creek Parkway i n both d i r e c t i o n s . The Rock Creek Parkway/ P S t r e e t ramps c a r r y s u b s t a n t i a l t r a f f i c volumes o r i e n t e d both �toward downtown Washington and toward Georgetown. I f P S t r e e t i s made one-way westbound, t r a f f i c coming from Rock Creek Parkway and d e s i r i n g t o go eastbound would f i r s t have t o t r a v e l westbound to 27th S t r e e t and then n o r t h t o Q S t r e e t b e f o r e proceeding eastbound (see F i g u r e 6 ) . T r a f f i c w i s h i n g t o a c c e s s Rock Creek Parkway from Georgetown would have to c r o s s Rock Creek P a r k on Q S t r e e t and proceed southbound on 2 3rd S t r e e t and westbound on P S t r e e t b e f o r e being a b l e t o get on Rock Creek Parkway from P S t r e e t . The n e t e f f e c t of t h e one-way p a i r would be t o f a c i l i t a t e through t r a f f i c w h i l e making c o n d i t i o n s more d i f f i c u l t f o r t r a f f i c coming from Georgetown and w i s h i n g t o get on Rock Creek Parkway. T h e r e f o r e t h i s one-way p a i r i s not recommended. Although i t does not appear t h a t c o n v e r t i n g N S t r e e t t o one-way westbound o p e r a t i o n would have s e r i o u s n e g a t i v e i m p a c t s , i t a l s o does not appear t h a t t h e r e i s much t o be gained by the a c t i o n , except perhaps i n c r e a s e d ease of p a r k i n g and i n c r e a s e d p e d e s t r i a n s a f e t y . T h e r e f o r e t h i s a c t i o n i s recommended o n l y i f t h e r e i s s t r o n g c i t i z e n support f o r i t . (2) Upgrade t h e t r a f f i c s i g n a l system. The t r a f f i c s i g n a l system i n Georgetown has r e c e i v e d a g r e a t d e a l of a t t e n t i o n d u r i n g tne past, twenty y e a r s . Timing p l a n s have been c a r e f u l l y c o n c e i v e d which a r e based upon measured t r a f f i c volume t u r n i n g c o u n t s . S e v e r a l y e a r s ago M S t r e e t through Georgetown was connected i n t o the D.C. Department of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n ' s computerized t r a f f i c s i g n a l system. However, t i m i n g p a t t e r n s were not p r o p e r l y updated to account f o r t h e i n c r e a s e d t r a f f i c volumes which t h e system was capable of h a n d l i n g and t r a f f i c backed up from Key B r i d g e , r e s u l t i n g i n s e r i o u s c o n g e s t i o n through Georgetown. E x c e p t f o r i s o l a t e d c a s e s where i n t e r s e c t i o n s do not have adequate c a p a c i t y t o handle the t r a f f i c volumes p a s s i n g through them, t h e o v e r a l l t r a f f i c s i g n a l system i n Georgetown does a f a i r l y good job of moving t r a f f i c when p r o p e r l y m a i n t a i n e d . The c r i t i c a l element t h a t determines how w e l l t h e s i g n a l system moves t r a f f i c i s proper maintenance and c o n s t a n t u p d a t i n g of p h a s i n g and t i m i n g p l a n s as t r a f f i c p a t t e r n s change. ��The need f o r new t r a f f i c s i g n a l s i n Georgetown w i l l depend to a c e r t a i n e x t e n t upon what o t h e r c a n d i d a t e a c t i o n s are implemented. I f the Southern E n t r a n c e to Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y i s upgraded so a l l t u r n i n g movements are a l l o w e d , a t r a f f i c s i g n a l w i l l have to be i n s t a l l e d a t t h a t l o c a t i o n . T h i s s i g n a l w i l l have to i n t e r c o n n e c t w i t h the s i g n a l s a t the i n t e r s e c t i o n of Canal and F o x h a l l Roads and w i t h the s i g n a l s a t the i n t e r s e c t i o n of Canal Road and tne W h i t e h u r s t Freeway. I f buses and emergency v e h i c l e s o n l y are p e r m i t t e d to make c e r t a i n movements d u r i n g c e r t a i n time p e r i o d s , a ous p r i o r i t y s i g n a l w i l l have t o be i n s t a l l e d . I f one-way s t r e e t s are implemented south of M S t r e e t , a new s i g n a l w i l l be n e c e s s a r y a t the i n t e r s e c t i o n of Thomas J e f f e r s o n S t r e e t and M S t r e e t . I n a d d i t i o n phasing and t i m i n g p l a n s along M S t r e e t would have t o be updated t o respond to the r e s u l t a n t changes i n t r a f f i c patterns. R e g a r d l e s s of whether or not one-way s t r e e t o p e r a t i o n s are implemented i n South Georgetown, a s i g n a l w i l l be w a r r a n t e d i n the v e r y near f u t u r e a t the i n t e r s e c t i o n of W i s c o n s i n Avenue and K S t r e e t . I f changes i n t r a f f i c o p e r a t i o n s on Key B r i d g e a r e implemented, t h e i r impact on t r a f f i c p a t t e r n s w i l l have to be t a k e n i n t o account i n s i g n a l t i m i n g . To as g r e a t an e x t e n t as i s p r a c t i c a l , s i g n a l t i m i n g a t the west end of W h i t e h u r s t Freeway should be designed t o f a v o r W h i t e h u r s t Freeway t r a f f i c , t h e r e b y making W h i t e h u r s t Freeway a p r e f e r a b l e r o u t e t o M S t r e e t f o r through t r a f f i c . Changes i n t r a f f i c p a t t e r n s w i l l o c c u r , even over and above those changes d i r e c t l y r e s u l t i n g from t h e implementation of c e r t a i n t r a f f i c o p e r a t i o n a c t i o n s , because of the r a p i d development occurr i n g south of M S t r e e t . T h e r e f o r e , i t i s e s s e n t i a l t h a t t r a f f i c volumes and t u r n i n g movements along M S t r e e t and K S t r e e t be c a r e f u l l y monitored over the course of the n e x t s e v e r a l y e a r s to determine i f changes i n s i g n a l phasing or t i m i n g a r e w a r r a n t e d or i f new s i g n a l s a r e n e c e s s a r y a t i n t e r s e c t i o n s not p r e s e n t l y h a v i n a them. �(3) R e v e r s i b l e l a n e s on Key B r i d g e . T h i s i s the f i r s t of s e v e r a l c a n d i d a t e t r a f f i c o p e r a t i o n s a c t i o n s f o r Key B r i d g e . It should be noted t h a t a s e p a r a t e management study i s p r e s e n t l y bei n g conducted f o r I n t e r s t a t e 66 and the R o o s e v e l t B r i d g e . It is important t h a t any management a c t i o n s t a k e n f o r Key B r i d g e be f u l l y c o o r d i n a t e d w i t h the a c t i o n s which w i l l be t a k e n to manage I n t e r s t a t e 66. Key B r i d g e i s p r e s e n t l y the second b u s i e s t r i v e r c r o s s i n g between V i r g i n i a and the D i s t r i c t of Columbia, the I n t e r s t a t e 395 b r i d g e s being the o n l y b u s i e r c r o s s i n g . J a n u a r y 1979 t r a f f i c counts showed a weekday average of 61,200 v e h i c l e s c r o s s i n g Key B r i d g e , w i t h the AM and PM peak hours r e p r e s e n t i n g 7.6 and 7.5 p e r c e n t of t o t a l d a i l y t r a f f i c . Both peak hours have h i g h l y unbalanced f l o w s w i t h the AM s p l i t being 66/34 and the PM s p l i t 37/63, inbound v e r s u s outbound; so c o n s i d e r i n g the b r i d g e by i t s e l f , the t r a f f i c f l o w s a r e unbalanced enough to permit r e v e r s i b l e l a n e s . I n a d d i t i o n , i f the Southern E n t r a n c e to Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y becomes the main e n t r a n c e to the campus, l e f t t u r n s o f f Key B r i d g e w i l l i n c r e a s e to the p o i n t t h a t two l e f t t u r n l a n e s o f f Key B r i d g e onto M S t r e e t during the AM peak p e r i o d would improve t r a f f i c o p e r a t i o n s a t the Georgetown end of the b r i d g e d u r i n g t h a t time p e r i o d . There a r e , however, some s e r i o u s problems w i t h the r e v e r s i b l e l a n e concept on Key B r i d g e . A primary o b j e c t i v e of t h i s study i s t o reduce through t r a f f i c i n Georgetown, but the net e f f e c t of i n c r e a s i n g c a p a c i t y on Key B r i d g e would be to i n c r e a s e through t r a f f i c volumes. During the PM peak p e r i o d the c o n s t r a i n i n a f a c t o r on Key B r i d g e t r a f f i c c a p a c i t y i s not the b r i d g e i t s e l f , but the c a p a c i t y of R o s s l y n C i r c l e , and l i t t l e would be gained by a t t e m p t i n g t o merge f o u r l a n e s of t r a f f i c i n t o a t r a f f i c c i r c l e which i s a l r e a d y a t c a p a c i t y w i t h t h r e e l a n e s of t r a f f i c e n t e r i n g from the b r i d g e . R e v e r s i b l e l a n e s on the b r i d g e would r e q u i r e some r a t h e r complex s i g n i n g i n c l u d i n g overhead s i g n s . The bridge �KEY BRIDGE REVERSIBLE LANES �s t r u c t u r e a t t h e p r e s e n t time i s not capable o f s u p p o r t i n g overhead signs. I n a d d i t i o n , such s i g n s would d e t r a c t from t h e appearance of t h i s a r c h i t e c t u r a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t s t r u c t u r e . Because o f t h e problems c i t e d above i t i s f e l t t h a t r e v e r s i b l e l a n e s d u r i n g t h e PM peak should be dropped from f u r t h e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n . Although t h e r e a r e s e r i o u s problems w i t h t h e concept o f r e v e r s i b l e l a n e s on Key B r i d g e d u r i n g t h e AM peak p e r i o d , t h i s concept should a t l e a s t be c o n s i d e r e d i n t h e Key B r i d g e management s t u d y , but o n l y i f t h e two l e f t l a n e s a r e u t i l i z e d f o r l e f t t u r n s onto Canal Road, and o n l y w i t h i n t h e c o n t e x t o f a t o t a l management p l a n which does not permit i n c r e a s e d through t r a f f i c t o e n t e r Georgetown proper. (4) Remove r e v e r s i b l e l a n e s on M S t r e e t . S i n c e t h e Metror a i l B l u e L i n e opened between R o s s l y n and downtown Washington i n J u l y 1977 and t h e v a s t m a j o r i t y o f V i r g i n i a bus r o u t e s which used to o p e r a t e along M S t r e e t i n Georgetown were c u t back a t t h e R o s s l y n s t a t i o n i n September 1977, t r a f f i c c o n g e s t i o n along M S t r e e t has subsided c o n s i d e r a b l y d u r i n g peak p e r i o d s . The n e t r e s u l t has been t h a t M S t r e e t has become a more a t t r a c t i v e a l t e r n a t i v e r o u t e f o r through t r a f f i c e n t e r i n g Georgetown. A suggested means o f r e d u c i n g M S t r e e t through t r a f f i c i s t h e removal o f t h e r e v e r s i b l e l a n e s along M S t r e e t . Although such a measure may e f f e c t i v e l y reduce M S t r e e t through t r a f f i c volumes, t h i s measure by i t s e l f would be c o u n t e r p r o d u c t i v e to c e r t a i n o t h e r t r a n s p o r t a t i o n o b j e c t i v e s i n Georgetown. U n l e s s c a p a c i t y i s a l s o reduced a t t h e major e n t r y p o i n t s t o M S t r e e t , i . e . , Key B r i d g e , Canal Road, and M S t r e e t and P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue over Rock Creek P a r k , t h e n e t e f f e c t o f removing t h e r e v e r s i b l e l a n e s would be a s p i l l o v e r o f through t r a f f i c onto p a r a l l e l r e s i d e n t i a l s t r e e t s w i t h i n Georgetown, a s a r e s u l t o f t h e slower t r a v e l t i m e s along M S t r e e t . I n a d d i t i o n the i n c r e a s e d congestion would r e s u l t i n i n c r e a s e d a i r p o l l u t i o n e m i s s i o n s and g a s o l i n e consumption. T h e r e f o r e , removal o f t h e r e v e r s i b l e l a n e s w i t h o u t t y i n g t h i s a c t i o n t o c e r t a i n o t h e r measures i s not recommended at t h i s t i m e . �However, i f the ramps a t the e a s t end of W h i t e h u r s t Freeway are l i n k e d t o M S t r e e t and P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue, and the Key Bridge t r a f f i c management scheme i s a b l e to e f f e c t i v e l y l i m i t the amount of t r a f f i c which can e n t e r M S t r e e t , t r a f f i c f l o w s along M S t r e e t could be reduced from p r e s e n t l e v e l s and p e r m i t removal of the r e v e r s i b l e l a n e s w i t h o u t the r e s u l t a n t s p i l l o v e r and c o n g e s t i o n e f f e c t s c i t e d above. I f t r o l l e y s e r v i c e i s r e i n s t i t u t e d on M S t r e e t and operated on e x c l u s i v e r i g h t - o f - w a y i n t h e c e n t e r l a n e s of M S t r e e t , r e v e r s ible l a n e s would have to be removed from M S t r e e t through Georgetown. I n t h i s c a s e i t would be important t h a t a l t e r n a t e c a p a c i t y be prov i d e d t o p r e v e n t t r a f f i c which p r e s e n t l y uses the c e n t e r l a n e s of M S t r e e t from s p i l l i n g over onto l o c a l r e s i d e n t i a l s t r e e t s . The proposed W h i t e h u r s t Freeway ramps would be one means t o p r o v i d e t h i s alternate capacity. T r a f f i c p r o j e c t i o n s f o r 1985 show the percentage o f through t r a f f i c d e c r e a s i n g from p r e s e n t l e v e l s as new developments south of M S t r e e t open up. T h i s l o c a l a c c e s s t r a f f i c i s l i k e l y t o have much l e s s of a d i r e c t i o n a l b i a s t h a n e x i s t i n g peak hour t r a f f i c , which has a 64/36 d i r e c t i o n a l s p l i t d u r i n g t h e PM peak hour on M S t r e e t j u s t e a s t of W i s c o n s i n Avenue. Therefore, t r a f f i c volumes along M S t r e e t should be c a r e f u l l y monitored over the course of the n e x t f i v e t o s i x y e a r s , and i f the d i r e c t i o n a l d i s t r i b u t i o n becomes l e s s pronounced, s e r i o u s c o n s i d e r a t i o n should be g i v e n to removing the r e v e r s i b l e l a n e s along M S t r e e t . (5) E x t e n d bus l a n e s on M S t r e e t from W i s c o n s i n Avenue to Key B r i d g e . Bus l a n e s p r e s e n t l y e x i s t on M S t r e e t between 28th S t r e e t and W i s c o n s i n Avenue d u r i n g the AM and PM peak p e r i o d s i n the peak d i r e c t i o n . A t o t a l o f 28 buses were counted d u r i n g both the AM and PM peak hours i n the peak d i r e c t i o n i n t h i s s e c t i o n . Even w i t h t h i s number of b u s e s , an average of one e v e r y two m i n u t e s , the bus l a n e c a r r i e s a h i g h number of a u t o s , some of which a r e l e g i t i m a t e l y u s i n g t h e l a n e t o make r i g h t t u r n s . I n t h e s e c t i o n of M S t r e e t between W i s c o n s i n Avenue and Key B r i d g e o n l y 12 buses pass �by i n t h e peak d i r e c t i o n d u r i n g t h e peak hour, o r one e v e r y f i v e minutes. With bus Volumes t h i s low, t h e r e would be a high number of bus l a n e v i o l a t i o n s . S i g n i f i c a n t s a v i n g s i n bus t r a v e l times c o u l d not be r e a l i s t i c a l l y expected. I t i s unwise p o l i c y t o i n s t a l l bus l a n e s where they a r e not w a r r a n t e d because they tend to be f r e q u e n t l y v i o l a t e d and tend t o breed g e n e r a l d i s r e s p e c t f o r bus l a n e s elsewhere i n t h e c i t y . T h e r e f o r e e x t e n d i n g t h e bus l a n e s on M S t r e e t from W i s c o n s i n Avenue t o Key B r i d g e i s not recommended. (6) Make r i g h t l a n e o f Key B r i d g e northbound r i g h t t u r n o n l y a t W h i t e h u r s t Freeway ramp. One o f t h e key o b j e c t i v e s of t h i s study i s t o attempt t o f i n d means f o r r e d u c i n g t h e amount of through t r a f f i c u s i n g Georgetown's l o c a l s t r e e t s . One means f o r doing t h i s i s t o t r y t o d i v e r t some of t h i s through t r a f f i c to t h e W h i t e h u r s t Freeway and thereby e f f e c t i v e l y bypass Georgetown's s t r e e t system. One proposed means designed t o d i v e r t a h i g h e r p e r centage o f Key B r i d g e t r a f f i c t o t h e W h i t e h u r s t Freeway i s t o make the northbound r i g h t l a n e a r i g h t t u r n o n l y l a n e a t t h e W h i t e h u r s t Freeway ramp (see F i g u r e 8 ) . I n t h i s way r i g h t t u r n i n g t r a f f i c would not have t o compete w i t h through t r a f f i c f o r use o f t h e r i g h t l a n e . C a p a c i t y f o r through t r a f f i c would be reduced, thereby making the Key B r i d g e - M S t r e e t r o u t e a l e s s a t t r a c t i v e a l t e r n a t i v e f o r through t r a f f i c . Making t h e r i g h t l a n e , r i g h t t u r n o n l y becomes an even more a t t r a c t i v e a l t e r n a t i v e i f d u r i n g t h e r e h a b i l i t a t i o n of W h i t e h u r s t Freeway t h e ramp from Key B r i d g e c o u l d be r e c o n s t r u c t e d so i t has more c u r v a t u r e . Then c a r s would not have t o come almost t o a complete stop b e f o r e t u r n i n g onto t h e ramp from t h e b r i d g e . T h i s a l t e r n a t i v e a l s o becomes more a t t r a c t i v e i f t h e eastbound ramp a t the e a s t end o f W h i t e h u r s t Freeway i s b u i l t t o t i e i n t o L S t r e e t because t h e W h i t e h u r s t Freeway would become a more a t t r a c t i v e a l t e r n a t i v e route f o r t r a f f i c d e s t i n e d t o p o i n t s i n t h e West End and e a s t e r n Georgetown, a s w e l l a s f o r t r a f f i c p a s s i n g through Georgetown. �PROPOSED REQUIRED RIGHT TURN ON K E Y BRIDGE �A f i n a l recommendation on making the r i g h t l a n e of Key B r i d g e northbound r i g h t t u r n only a t the W h i t e h u r s t Freeway ramp should w a i t u n t i l t h e completion of the ongoing I n t e r s t a t e 66 management study. However, a t t h i s time i t appears t o be an a l t e r n a t i v e which has m e r i t , p a r t i c u l a r l y i f l i n k e d w i t h the ramps a t the e a s t end of W h i t e h u r s t Freeway. I f t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e i s implemented some p h y s i c a l means should be employed t o prevent through v e h i c l e s from c o n t i n u i n g to use the r i g h t l a n e . R a i s e d pavement i n the a r e a j u s t n o r t h of the ramp would discourage through t r a f f i c from u s i n g t h i s l a n e , but would s t i l l a l l o w f o r through v e h i c l e s t o bypass a d i s a b l e d v e h i c l e i n the c e n t e r l a n e when such an i n c i d e n t o c c u r s . (7) High occupancy v e h i c l e l a n e s on Key B r i d g e . Under e x i s t i n g c o n d i t i o n s , the c o n v e r s i o n of a peak p e r i o d , peak d i r e c t i o n l a n e t o high occupancy v e h i c l e usage would not be warranted because the time s a v i n g s a f f o r d e d HOV's would be so minimal t h a t l i t t l e modal d i v e r s i o n would occur and enforcement of the HOV l a n e would be almost i m p o s s i b l e . However, once I n t e r s a t e 66 opens i n 1983 or 1984, the percentage of v e h i c l e s u s i n g Key Bridge d u r i n g peak p e r i o d s which w i l l be h i g h occupancy v e h i c l e s w i l l i n c r e a s e s i g n i f i c a n t l y , due t o the occupancy r e s t r i c t i o n s which w i l l be i n e f f e c t on I n t e r s t a t e 66. High occupancy v e h i c l e s w i l l be a s s u r e d a high l e v e l of s e r v i c e f o r t h e i r t r i p between the C a p i t a l Beltway and R o s s l y n along I n t e r s t a t e 66. I t would a l s o be d e s i r a b l e i f they could be a s s u r e d a high l e v e l of s e r v i c e i n t o the D i s t r i c t of Columbia, i n order t o ensure the a t t r a c t i v e n e s s of the high occupancy modes when persons a r e choosing among modes f o r t h e i r t r i p s i n t o downtown Washington. U n f o r t u n a t e l y t h e r e a r e s e v e r a l s e r i o u s o p e r a t i o n a l problems which make high occupancy v e h i c l e l a n e s on Key Bridge imp r a c t i c a l . An HOV l a n e on Key B r i d g e would have to be designed t o c a r r y both buses and c a r p o o l s t o ensure t h a t n e i t h e r high occupancy v e h i c l e mode s u f f e r s i n c r e a s e d time d e l a y s imposed �upon mixed t r a f f i c . The r i g h t l a n e s o f Key B r i d g e a r e not supposed to be used by buses because t h e b r i d g e cannot s t r u c t u r a l l y support bus l o a d i n g s i n t h e s e l a n e s . I n a d d i t i o n , f r e e a c c e s s t o and from W h i t e h u r s t Freeway should be g i v e n t o a u t o s i n o r d e r t o encourage through t r a f f i c t o use W h i t e h u r s t Freeway i n s t e a d o f s t r e e t s i n Georgetown proper. I f t h e c e n t e r l a n e s a r e used i t w i l l not be p o s s i b l e f o r t r a f f i c t o move i n t o p o s i t i o n t o make t u r n s a t e i t h e r end o f Key B r i d g e . I f t h e northbound l e f t l a n e i s used f o r HOV's i t w i l l i n t e r f e r e w i t h t r a f f i c t u r n i n g l e f t from Key B r i d g e onto Canal Road. Going southbound i t w i l l be d i f f i c u l t f o r buses t o move from the r i g h t l a n e a t t h e i r l a s t stop on M S t r e e t i n t o t h e l e f t l a n e i n a s h o r t enough time p e r i o d t o b e n e f i t from a l e f t h a n d HOV l a n e on Key B r i d g e . C a r p o o l s d e s t i n e d f o r I n t e r s t a t e 66 w i l l e x i t from t h e r i g h t l a n e i n R o s s l y n C i r c l e and t h e r e f o r e would not want t o use t h e l e f t l a n e o f Key B r i d g e . I n a d d i t i o n t o t h e o p e r a t i o n a l problems c i t e d above, e n f o r cement o f an HOV l a n e f o r both buses and c a r p o o l s which i s not p h y s i c a l l y s e p a r a t e d from mixed t r a f f i c i s e x t r e m e l y d i f f i c u l t , so t h e r e would l i k e l y be l i t t l e i f any time s a v i n g s a f f o r d e d HOV's by e x c l u s i v e l a n e s on t h e b r i d g e . F o r a l l t h e r e a s o n s g i v e n above i t i s recommended t h a t t h e Key B r i d g e h i g h occupancy v e h i c l e l a n e a l t e r n a t i v e be dropped from f u r t h e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n t h i s study. (8) High occupancy v e h i c l e l a n e s on W h i t e h u r s t Freeway. HOV l a n e s on W h i t e h u r s t Freeway a r e a concept t h a t has been proposed f o r a number o f y e a r s but which has n e v e r been implemented. HOV l a n e s would be designed t o a f f o r d a bypass o f c o n g e s t i o n a t t h e west end of W h i t e h u r s t Freeway d u r i n g peak p e r i o d s . However, t h e r e a r e a number o f c o n v i n c i n g arguments a g a i n s t t h e implementation o f h i g h occupancy v e h i c l e l a n e s on t h e W h i t e h u r s t Freeway. The f i r s t and most i m p o r t a n t i s t h a t implementation o f t h e s e l a n e s would be c o u n t e r p r o d u c t i v e t o meeting t h e o b j e c t i v e o f r e d u c i n g t h e impact of v e h i c u l a r through t r a f f i c i n Georgetown. Reducing t h e c a p a c i t y �of W h i t e h u r s t Freeway f o r low occupancy v e h i c l e s t o one lane would d i v e r t s i g n i f i c a n t numbers of t h e s e v e h i c l e s t o a l t e r n a t i v e r o u t e s which use l o c a l Georgetown s t r e e t s . Time s a v i n g s a f f o r d e d high occupancy v e h i c l e s would be so s m a l l t h a t t h e r e would be almost no modal d i v e r s i o n t o HOV's. O v e r a l l d e l a y , a i r p o l l u t i o n e m i s s i o n s , and energy consumption would i n c r e a s e , p a r t i c u l a r l y on Georgetown's l o c a l s t r e e t s . An HOV l a n e on W h i t e h u r s t Freeway would c a r r y only a s m a l l number of buses (14 were counted d u r i n g the AM peak hour i n t h e peak d i r e c t i o n ) and a c o r r e s p o n d i n g l y s m a l l number of c a r p o o l s (only 164 three-or-more person c a r p o o l s were counted d u r i n a the AM peak hour i n the peak d i r e c t i o n ) . Even i f t h e number o f t h r e e or-more person c a r p o o l s i n c r e a s e s by 50 p e r c e n t , an o p t i m i s t i c e s t i m a t e a t b e s t , o n l y 246 c a r p o o l s and 14 buses would use t h i s l a n e , w h i l e an e s t i m a t e d 1,000 t o 1,300 low occupancy v e h i c l e s would be d i v e r t e d t o l o c a l Georgetown s t r e e t s . Based upon the above a r guments i t i s recommended t h a t t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e be dropped from further consideration. (9) High occupancy v e h i c l e l a n e on Canal Road and W h i t e h u r s t Freeway from Chain B r i d g e t o Washington C i r c l e . During t h e gasol i n e shortage o f the summer of 1979, the U.S. Department o f I n t e r i o r and t h e D.C. Department o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n asked JHK and A s s o c i a t e s t o a n a l y z e the f e a s i b i l i t y o f implementing a h i g h occupancy v e h i c l e l a n e along Canal Road and t h e W h i t e h u r s t Freeway as a p o t e n t i a l energy s a v i n g a c t i o n which c o u l d be q u i c k l y implemented. JHK and A s s o c i a t e s p r e p a r e d a memorandum f o r D.C. DOT.—^ The HOV l a n e was not implemented, p r i m a r i l y because i t was not f e a s i b l e t o put i n p l a c e i n a r a p i d enough manner t h a t i t c o u l d respond t o t h e summer of 1979 s h o r t a g e . The HOV l a n e was t o have o p e r a t e d between 7 and 9 AM i n the r i g h t l a n e of eastbound George Washington Parkway, Canal Road, and W h i t e h u r s t Freeway, from a p o i n t two m i l e s n o r t h o f Chain Bridge 1/ JHK and A s s o c i a t e s , "Canal Road Bus/Carpool Lane," p r e p a r e d f o r D.C. Department o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n , May 1979. �to the e a s t e r n terminus of the W h i t e h u r s t Freeway. I t was e s t i mated t h a t buses and c a r p o o l s could a c h i e v e a 7 t o 12 minute time s a v i n g s over low occupant v e h i c l e s t r a v e r s i n g the e n t i r e l e n g t h of the f a c i l i t y . The memorandum addressed a number implementation i s s u e s i n c l u d i n g s i g n i n g , marking, enforcement, and p u b l i c r e l a t i o n i s s u e s . I t a l s o i d e n t i f i e d some s e r i o u s problems. S i g n i f i c a n t d i v e r s i o n of low occupancy v e h i c l e s t o MacArthur B o u l e v a r d could be expected. Some of t h i s i n c r e a s e d t r a f f i c w i l l undoubtedly f i n d i t s way onto R e s e r v o i r Road, P S t r e e t , Q S t r e e t , and o t h e r r e s i d e n t i a l s t r e e t s i n Georgetown. U n l e s s a t h i r d eastbound l a n e i s added t o Canal Road between Chain B r i d g e and A r i z o n a Avenue, t h i s a r e a w i l l become a major b o t t l e n e c k . U n l e s s c a r e f u l l y planned, s i g n i f i c a n t d e l a y s c o u l d r e s u l t not o n l y t o low occupant v e h i c l e s but a l s o t o buses and c a r p o o l s . As i d e n t i f i e d i n the a n a l y s i s of W h i t e h u r s t Freeway HOV l a n e s , a r e d u c t i o n i n c a p a c i t y f o r low occupancy v e h i c l e s , not o n l y on the W h i t e h u r s t Freeway but a l s o on Canal Road between F o x h a l l Road and the W h i t e h u r s t Freeway i s l i k e l y t o r e s u l t i n s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r t r a f f i c volumes making t h e i r way onto Georgetown s t r e e t s and would be c o u n t e r p r o d u c t i v e to the goal of r e d u c i n g through t r a f f i c impacts w i t h i n Georgetown. The j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r an HOV l a n e on t h e s e s e c t i o n s becomes e s p e c i a l l y q u e s t i o n a b l e when one c o n s i d e r s the v e r y s m a l l time s a v i n g s which c o u l d be a f f o r d e d high occupancy v e h i c l e s over p r e s e n t t r a v e l times between the i n t e r s e c t i o n of F o x h a l l and Canal Roads and the e a s t e r n t e r m i n u s of W h i t e h u r s t Freeway. The p r i n c i p a l time s a v i n g s a Canal Road HOV l a n e could a f f o r d t h e s e v e h i c l e s a r e on Canal Road a t the e x i s t i n g b o t t l e necks a t Chain B r i d g e , A r i z o n a Avenue, and F o x h a l l Road, and i t i s i n t h e s e s e c t i o n s t h a t an HOV l a n e a f f o r d s the most p o t e n t i a l f o r c a u s i n g modal d i v e r s i o n and energy s a v i n g s . T h e r e f o r e , i t i s recommended t h a t f u r t h e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n be g i v e n t o an HOV l a n e �o n l y i n the s e c t i o n of the George Washington Parkway and Canal Road between the Maryland S t a t e L i n e and F o x h a l l Road, (see F i g u r e 9 ) . Even i n t h i s s e c t i o n implementation of an HOV l a n e could be expected t o be a s e n s i t i v e i s s u e . Implementation would have t o occur a t an a p p r o p r i a t e t i m e , and should occur o n l y a f t e r c a r e f u l p l a n n i n g and p r e p a r a t i o n . However, an HOV l a n e on Canal Road does o f f e r an o p p o r t u n i t y f o r s i g n i f i c a n t d i v e r s i o n t o high occupancy v e h i c l e s i n a c o r r i d o r which p r e s e n t l y e x p e r i e n c e s some of the l o w e s t v e h i c l e occupancies e n t e r i n g downtown Washington. I t i s a p r o j e c t which d e s e r v e s c a r e f u l study and should have imp l e m e n t a t i o n p l a n s f u l l y developed, so when an a p p r o p r i a t e time f o r implementation becomes a v a i l a b l e , such as the n e x t g a s o l i n e s h o r t a g e , i t c o u l d be r a p i d l y put i n p l a c e . An a d d i t i o n a l a t t r a c t i v e f e a t u r e of t h i s p r o j e c t i s the f a c t t h a t i t i s e a s i l y retractable. I f a f t e r implementaion t h e expected modal d i v e r s i o n does not occur and c o n g e s t i o n becomes even more s e v e r e i n the c o r r i d o r , t h e p r o j e c t c o u l d e a s i l y be dropped. I t i s a l s o important t o note t h a t HOV l a n e s on Canal Road have s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r p o t e n t i a l i f a p a r k - a n d - r i d e l o t a t the Glen Echo Amusement Park i s implemented. P a s t e f f o r t s t o e s t a b l i s h a park and r i d e l o t a t t h i s s i t e have f a i l e d and f u t u r e p r o s p e c t s f o r t h i s s i t e a r e not good. However, i t i s important t h a t the s e a r c h f o r p o t e n t i a l s i t e s f o r park and r i d e l o t s on both s i d e s of t h e Potomac R i v e r continue. (10) High occupancy v e h i c l e l a n e s on P and Q S t r e e t s . A s d i s c u s s e d e a r l i e r i n the a n a l y s i s of p o t e n t i a l one-way t r a f f i c o p e r a t i o n s on P and Q S t r e e t s , t h e s e s t r e e t s p r e s e n t l y c a r r y r e l a t i v e l y h i g h t r a f f i c volumes, p a r t i c u l a r l y f o r s t r e e t s which a r e p r i m a r i l y r e s i d e n t i a l i n n a t u r e . P and Q S t r e e t s a r e the o n l y s t r e e t s i n the n o r t h e r n h a l f o f Georgetown which c r o s s Rock Creek P a r k , and as a r e s u l t they c a r r y a r e l a t i v e l y h i g h p r o p o r t i o n of through t r a f f i c (4 8 and 60 p e r c e n t , r e s p e c t i v e l y i n the PM peak p e r i o d e n t e r i n g Georgetown). Implementation of HOV l a n e s on ��t h e s e s t r e e t s has been proposed as a means t o reduce the c a p a c i t y f o r low occupant autos (through low occupant autos i n p a r t i c u l a r ) , w h i l e improving t r a v e l times f o r buses and c a r p o o l s and thereby i n d u c i n g modal d i v e r s i o n t o these h i g h e r occupancy modes. Probably the only way HOV l a n e s on t h e s e s t r e e t s could be a t a l l e n f o r c e a b l e , and hence e f f e c t i v e , would be i f they were operated as c o n t r a - f l o w l a n e s . However, c o n t r a - f l o w l a n e s on P and Q S t r e e t s between Wisconsin Avenue and 23rd S t r e e t s p r e s e n t s e v e r a l s e r i o u s problems. T r a f f i c o p e r a t i o n s f o r low occupancy autos would i n e f f e c t be t h e same as those of the proposed one-way s t r e e t d i s c u s s e d e a r l i e r i n t h i s c h a p t e r and would have somewhat s i m i l a r problems. I n p a r t i c u l a r t r a f f i c a c c e s s i n g Rock Creek Parkway from Georgetown or e g r e s s i n g from Rock Creek Parkway t o go i n t o downtown Washington w i l l have t o t a k e a long c i r c u i t o u s r o u t e . I n a d d i t i o n i n those p o r t i o n s of P and Q S t r e e t where t h e r e i s p r e s e n t l y p a r k i n g on both s i d e s of the s t r e e t , v e h i c l e s d e s i r i n g t o f i n d a p a r k i n g space would have t o be a l l o w e d t o use the c o n t r a f l o w HOV l a n e t o s e a r c h f o r a p a r k i n g space. T h i s would i n c r e a s e t h e d i f f i c u l t i e s of e n f o r c i n g the HOV l a n e s . The reduced c a p a c i t y f o r low occupancy v e h i c l e s on P and Q S t r e e t s w i l l induce some of t h e s e v e h i c l e s t o d i v e r t t o o t h e r r e s i d e n t i a l s t r e e t s which a r e not intended t o be used f o r t r i p s o t h e r than l o c a l a c c e s s . Because of the above c i t e d reasons i t i s recommended t h a t high occupancy v e h i c l e l a n e s on P and Q S t r e e t s no l o n g e r be c o n s i d e r e d . With-flow HOV l a n e s would be almost i m p o s s i b l e t o e n f o r c e and t h e r e f o r e i n e f f e c t i v e . C o n t r a - f l o w l a n e s not o n l y would have the problems a s s o c i a t e d w i t h one-way s t r e e t o p e r a t i o n s , but would a l s o p r e s e n t problems f o r p a r k e r s along P and Q S t r e e t s . (11) Reduce t h e number of l a n e s on Key B r i d g e t o f o u r . T h i s r a t h e r d r a s t i c measure has been proposed as a means t o reduce t h e amount o f V i r g i n i a t r a f f i c p a s s i n g through Georgetown from Key Bridge. The c a p a c i t y of t h i s main a r t e r y i n t o Georgetown from V i r g i n i a would be c u t by a t h i r d . Because o f the �r e s u l t a n t d i f f i c u l t y f o r v e h i c l e s t o make t h e i r way through Georgetown, persons i n through v e h i c l e s would i n t h e o r y e i t h e r change t h e i r t r a v e l paths t o o t h e r Potomac R i v e r b r i d g e s or would divert to t r a n s i t . There a r e , however, s e v e r a l s e r i o u s problems w i t h t h e proposed a c t i o n which i n t o t a l make i t an u n d e s i r a b l e a l t e r n a t i v e . The D i s t r i c t o f Columbia's p r e s e n t p o l i c i e s a r e t o attempt t o d i v e r t as many t r i p s t o high occupancy modes a s p o s s i b l e and thus reduce v e h i c u l a r t r a v e l demand, p a r t i c u l a r l y on s t r e e t s i n downtown and i n r e s i d e n t i a l a r e a s . However, a t t h e same t i m e , i t i s r e a l i z e d t h a t a w e l l f u n c t i o n i n g a r t e r i a l s t r e e t system i s n e c e s s a r y i f t h e D i s t r i c t ' s attempts t o a t t r a c t a l a r g e r b u s i n e s s base a r e t o be s u c c e s s f u l . T h e r e f o r e , measures w i l l not be adopted which attempt t o d i v e r t persons t o t r a n s i t by making t h e a r t e r i a l system become so congested t h a t t r a v e l by low occupancy auto becomes e x t r e m e l y difficult. The long term i m p l i c a t i o n s o f such a c t i o n s would he t o d r i v e new development from t h e c e n t e r c i t y t o suburban l o c a t i o n s where even more t r a v e l w i l l be generated. Reducing Key B r i d g e t o f o u r l a n e s would be such an a c t i o n . T h i s a c t i o n would cause u n t o l d congestion both i n Georgetown and R o s s l y n , not o n l y f o r through t r i p s , but a l s o f o r t r i p s t o and from p o i n t s w i t h i n Georgetown. T r i p s d i v e r t e d t o o t h e r b r i d g e s would have longer t r a v e l p a t h s , r e s u l t i n g i n i n c r e a s e d v e h i c l e m i l e s o f t r a v e l , a i r p o l l u t i o n e m i s s i o n s , and energy consumption. The n e g a t i v e e f f e c t s o f t h e r e s u l t a n t c o n g e s t i o n would impact not o n l y low occupant a u t o s , but a l s o t h e buses and c a r p o o l s t o which t h e D i s t r i c t i s a t t e m p t i n g t o g e t people t o s w i t c h . The c o n g e s t i o n caused by backups from Key B r i d g e i n t o Georgetown would r e s u l t not o n l y i n decreased a c c e s s i b i l i t y w i t h i n Georgetown, but i n more a i r p o l l u t i o n e m i s s i o n s and energy consumption by i d l i n g c a r s s t a n d i n g i n the congestion. I n c r e a s e d d i f f i c u l t y o f g e t t i n g t o Georgetown would d r i v e away some r e t a i l t r i p s p r e s e n t l y being made t o Georgetown. I t i s unl i k e l y Georgetown r e s i d e n t s o r b u s i n e s s e s d e s i r e t o s i g n i f i c a n t l y �decrease t h e i r own a c c e s s i b i l i t y i n order t o make i t more d i f f i c u l t f o r through t r i p s to use Georgetown s t r e e t s f o r t h e i r t r a v e l paths. There are more e f f e c t i v e means t o decrease the impacts of through t r a f f i c on Georgetown than by completely t a k i n g away two l a n e s from Key B r i d g e . For a l l t h e s e r e a s o n s , i t i s recommended t h a t t h i s c a n d i d a t e a c t i o n be dropped from f u r t h e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n a t t h i s time. (12) Reduce the number of l a n e s on Chain B r i d g e t o two. As noted i n T e c h n i c a l Memorandum No. 3 a s i g n i f i c a n t p o r t i o n of the V i r g i n i a t r a f f i c c r o s s i n g Chain B r i d g e e v e n t u a l l y moves i t s way onto Georgetown S t r e e t s , e i t h e r v i a Canal Road or R e s e r v o i r Road. The m a j o r i t y of t h i s t r a f f i c i s v e h i c l e s p a s s i n g through Georgetown, and thereby c o n t r i b u t i n g t o Georgetown's through t r a f f i c problem. I t has been suggested t h a t i f the number of l a n e s on Chain B r i d g e were reduced t o one i n each d i r e c t i o n a t a l l times of day, t r a f f i c would be d i s c o u r a g e d from u s i n g t h i s b r i d g e and would be l e s s apt to make i t s way i n t o and through Georgetown. Although i n concept t h e r e i s some m e r i t t o the s u g g e s t i o n , t h e r e a r e a l s o some s i g n i f i c a n t problems. Although a s i g n i f i c a n t p o r t i o n of the t r a f f i c c r o s s i n g Chain B r i d g e i s o r i e n t e d toward downtown Washington, a l a r g e p o r t i o n i s a l s o o r i e n t e d t o p o i n t s o t h e r than the CBD. For t h e v a s t m a j o r i t y of non-CBD o r i e n t e d t r i p s i n t h i s c o r r i d o r t h e r e i s v e r y poor t r a n s i t s e r v i c e , so the r e a l a l t e r n a t i v e s t o Chain B r i d g e a r e route a l t e r n a t i v e s , r a t h e r than mode a l t e r n a t i v e s . For a number of t h e s e t r i p s the most a t t r a c t i v e a l t e r n a t i v e r o u t e i s t o c r o s s the Cabin John B r i d g e and make the e n t i r e t r i p i n the c o r r i d o r on t h e Maryland s i d e of the r i v e r . For t h e s e t r i p s t h e impact on Georgetown does not change. However, t o t a l VMT, a i r p o l l u t i o n e m i s s i o n s , and energy consumption would i n c r e a s e . The o t h e r p r i n c i p a l r o u t e a l t e r n a t i v e would be t o use the George Washington Parkway on the V i r g i n i a s i d e o f the r i v e r through Spout Run and then t o use one of the c e n t r a l a r e a Potomac R i v e r B r i d g e s , thus a g g r a v a t i n g the a l r e a d y s e v e r e l y congested �c o n d i t i o n s a t Spout Run and on t h e o t h e r Potomac R i v e r B r i d q e s . For many of the t r i p s p r e s e n t l y c r o s s i n g Chain B r i d g e , however, n e i t h e r of t h e s e r o u t e a l t e r n a t i v e s i s a r e a l i s t i c o p t i o n and t h e s e t r i p s would c o n t i n u e t o use Chain B r i d g e , even i f long backups had t o be endured. Removal of a l a n e on the b r i d g e would r e s u l t i n s i g n i f i c a n t i n c r e a s e s i n d e l a y w i t h o u t o f f s e t t i n g benefits. An a l t e r n a t i v e t o the a b s o l u t e removal of a l a n e from the b r i d g e would be t h e c o n v e r s i o n o f one of the peak p e r i o d , peak d i r e c t i o n l a n e s t o an HOV l a n e . Such an a c t i o n could be t i e d t o t h e implementation of an HOV l a n e along Canal Road d u r i n g peak p e r i o d s . The problem w i t h t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e i s t h a t the approaches on the V i r g i n i a s i d e of Chain B r i d g e have o n l y two l a n e s so t h e r e would be no e f f e c t i v e means f o r high occupancy v e h i c l e s t o bypass the backup and d e l a y s caused by t h e r e d u c t i o n i n c a p a c i t y on the b r i d g e . Although t h i s o p t i o n should be c o n s i d e r e d d u r i n g the development of d e t a i l e d implementation p l a n s f o r the Canal Road HOV l a n e , i t appears t o be an i n a d v i s a b l e a l t e r n a t i v e a t t h i s t i m e , as does the a b s o l u t e removal of an e n t i r e l a n e from the b r i d g e at a l l times. �CHAPTER 4. CANDIDATE PARKING MANAGEMENT ACTIONS One of the most c r i t i c a l a c c e s s problems i n the Georgetown a r e a a t the p r e s e n t time i s p a r k i n g , and t h i s problem i s bound t o be e x a c e r b a t e d as new development t a k e s p l a c e i n the a r e a . Competition between Georgetown's r e s i d e n t s and p a t r o n s of i t s commercial e s t a b l i s h m e n t s f o r the l i m i t e d supply of f r e e o n - s t r e e t p a r k i n g spaces i s keen. T h i s problem i s p a r t i c u l a r l y acute d u r i n g evenings and on weekends i n the a r e a s w i t h i n t h r e e to f o u r b l o c k s of M S t r e e t and W i s c o n s i n Avenue. The implementation of the r e s i d e n t i a l p a r k i n g p e r m i t program i n Georgetown has.eased s h o r t term p a r k i n g supply problems d u r i n g midday on weekdays, but has had l i t t l e e f f e c t on evening and weekend p a r k i n g problems. Other problems r e l a t e d to p a r k i n g i n Georgetown i n c l u d e the l a c k of e f f e c t i v e marketing of o f f - s t r e e t spaces, a s e v e r e shortage of o f f - s t r e e t p a r k i n g spaces i n the Wisconsin Avenue commercial a r e a n o r t h of M S t r e e t , d e l i v e r y v e h i c l e s double and t r i p l e p a r k i n g throughout the midday p e r i o d , and the l a c k of adequate park and r i d e f a c i l i t i e s i n the t r a f f i c c o r r i d o r s which converge upon Georgetown. A number of c a n d i d a t e p a r k i n g management measures f o r the Georgetown a r e a designed to h e l p s o l v e some of the a b o v e - c i t e d problems a r e a n a l y z e d i n t h i s c h a p t e r . These c a n d i d a t e a c t i o n s a r e as f o l l o w s : (1) (2) (3) (4) Extend r e s i d e n t i a l p a r k i n g p e r m i t program t o evenings and weekends. Extend peak hour o n - s t r e e t p a r k i n g r e s t r i c t i o n s along M S t r e e t and W i s c o n s i n Avenue t o midday, e v e n i n g s , and weekends. Convert a percentage of p a r k i n g spaces along M S t r e e t and W i s c o n s i n Avenue to l o a d i n g zones. B u i l d a p a r k i n g garage i n the W i s c o n s i n Avenue commercial a r e a n o r t h of M S t r e e t . �(5) Park-and-ride l o t s . (a) Glen Echo Amusement P a r k (b) McLean, V i r g i n i a a r e a (c) Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y (6) Remove peak hour o n - s t r e e t p a r k i n g spaces south of M S t r e e t Convert a percentage o f o n - s t r e e t p a r k i n g spaces south of M S t r e e t t o l o a d i n g zones. M a r k e t i n g of p r i v a t e garage s p a c e s , p a r t i c u l a r l y on weekends and evenings (a) expand p a r k i n g v a l i d a t i o n programs (7) (8) (b) (c) (9) (10) post p a r k i n g i n f o r m a t i o n signing f o r parking I n c r e a s e p a r k i n g meter r a t e s and extend hours. I n c r e a s e the number of o n - s t r e e t p a r k i n g spaces which a r e metered. (1) Extend r e s i d e n t i a l p a r k i n g p e r m i t program t o evenings and weekends. The i n s t i t u t i o n o f a r e s i d e n t i a l p a r k i n g p e r m i t program between 7:00 AM and 6:00 PM on weekdays has been q u i t e e f f e c t i v e i n i n c r e a s i n g the a v a i l a b i l i t y of o n - s t r e e t p a r k i n g i n Georgetown f o r r e s i d e n t s and s h o r t - t e r m p a r k e r s . As r e p o r t e d i n T e c h n i c a l Memorandum No. 3 t h e average occupancy r a t e of ons t r e e t spaces on weekdays has dropped from 115 p e r c e n t t o 86 p e r cent making i t much e a s i e r f o r both r e s i d e n t s and shoppers t o f i n d o n - s t r e e t p a r k i n g . The persons who have been most impacted by t h e program a r e Georgetown employees who d r i v e t o work and o t h e r commuters who f o r m e r l y drove t o Georgetown t o park t h e i r c a r s and who then took t r a n s i t or walked t o t h e i r f i n a l d e s t i n a t i o n . Because t h e weekday r e s i d e n t i a l p a r k i n g p e r m i t program has been q u i t e s u c c e s s f u l , a p r o p o s a l t o extend t h e hours of Georgetown's p a r k i n g p e r m i t program t o evenings and weekends i s being s t u d i e d by t h e D.C. Department o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n . The p r i m a r y j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r such an e x t e n s i o n i s the d i f f i c u l t y r e s i d e n t s have i n �f i n d i n g o n - s t r e e t spaces near t h e i r homes d u r i n g these time p e r i o d s because t o u r i s t s , shoppers, and p a t r o n s of r e s t a u r a n t s and e n t e r t a i n m e n t spots u t i l i z e t h e spaces. The r e s u l t s of the weekend and evening o n - s t r e e t p a r k i n g i n v e n t o r y show t h i s to be a p a r t i c u l a r l y acute problem w i t h i n 3 t o 4 b l o c k s of M S t r e e t and W i s c o n s i n Avenue. However, t h e r e a r e a number o f s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e n a t u r e of o n - s t r e e t p a r k i n g d u r i n g evenings and weekends from o n - s t r e e t p a r k i n g d u r i n g t h e day on weekdays which need t o be weighed i n making a d e c i s i o n on e x t e n d i n g t h e hours of the r e s i d e n t i a l p a r k i n g p e r m i t program. The average l e n g t h of s t a y of evening and weekend v i s i t o r s t o Georgetown tends t o be longer than f o r midday weekday v i s i t o r s , so w h i l e t h e weekday permit program a c t s t o make p a r k i n g more c o n v e n i e n t f o r v i s i t o r s (both to r e s i d e n c e s and b u s i n e s s e s ) an evening or weekend program would make p a r k i n g c o n s i d e r a b l y l e s s c o n v e n i e n t . T h i s c o u l d have a s e r i o u s n e g a t i v e impact, p a r t i c u l a r l y on b u s i n e s s e s such as r e s t a u r a n t s and e n t e r t a i n m e n t s p o t s which c a t e r t o customers who tend t o s t a y longer than two hours i n Georgetown. I t would a l s o prove an i n c o n v e n i e n c e f o r r e s i d e n t s who e n t e r t a i n g u e s t s f o r longer than two hours. The weekday program i s designed p r i m a r i l y to d i s c o u r a g e commuters from p a r k i n g a l l day on Georgetown s t r e e t s . During evenings and weekends t h e r e a r e few commuters p a r k i n g o n - s t r e e t i n Georgetown. An a d d i t i o n a l requirement f o r a r e s i d e n t i a l p a r k i n g p e r m i t t o be s u c c e s s f u l i s the e x i s t e n c e of good t r a n s i t a l t e r n a t i v e s or a good supply o f o f f - s t r e e t p a r k i n g . During evenings and on weekends t r a n s i t l e v e l s o f s e r v i c e drop o f f c o n s i d e r a b l y , p a r t i c u l a r l y a t t h e home end of many t r i p s a t t r a c t e d t o Georgetown, and t h e r e f o r e t r a n s i t i n many c a s e s i s not a r e a l i s t i c a l t e r n a t i v e . Many o f t h e o f f - s t r e e t p a r k i n g f a c i l i t i e s c l o s e on evenings and weekends, making o f f - s t r e e t parki n g , a t l e a s t f o r t h e p r e s e n t , i n c o n v e n i e n t f o r many evening and weekend t r a v e l e r s t o Georgetown. �56. I t has been suggested t h a t perhaps a 3 or 4 hour permit program c o u l d be implemented d u r i n g evening and weekend hours to overcome some of the problems c i t e d above. However, i t i s d o u b t f u l whether such a program would have any impact on p a r k i n g space a v a i l a b i l i t y s i n c e such a program would not a f f e c t e x i s t i n g u s e r s of the s c a r c e spaces. A recommendation r e g a r d i n g the e x t e n s i o n of the hours of the r e s i d e n t i a l p a r k i n g p e r m i t program w i l l not be made s i n c e t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e i s being f u r t h e r s t u d i e d by D.C. DOT. However, some of the problems c i t e d above need t o be s e r i o u s l y c o n s i d e r e d i n any d e c i s i o n which i s made r e g a r d i n g the e x t e n s i o n of the hours of the p a r k i n g p e r m i t program. (2) Extend peak hour p a r k i n g r e s t r i c t i o n s along M S t r e e t and W i s c o n s i n Avenue t o midday, e v e n i n g s , and weekends. Often the most s e r i o u s c o n g e s t i o n problems along M S t r e e t and Wisconsin Avenue occur d u r i n g non-peak p e r i o d s when the c a p a c i t y of both roadways i s reduced because p a r k i n g i s a l l o w e d along both s i d e s . T h e r e f o r e , i t has been suggested t h a t removal of o n - s t r e e t spaces along both s t r e e t s c o u l d reduce o f f - p e a k c o n g e s t i o n l e v e l s on these s t r e e t s . Although t h i s may be t r u e , a more e f f e c t i v e way of d e a l i n g w i t h o f f - p e a k c o n g e s t i o n would be to reduce the amount of double p a r k i n g , p a r t i c u l a r l y by d e l i v e r y t r u c k s , o c c u r r i n g on both s t r e e t s by c o n v e r t i n g a percentage of o n - s t r e e t spaces on both s t r e e t s to l o a d i n g zones. This a l t e r n a t i v e i s discussed below. I n a d d i t i o n , i n c r e a s i n g the c a p a c i t y of M S t r e e t and Wisconsin Avenue d u r i n g o f f - p e a k p e r i o d s would tend t o encourage through t r a f f i c , which i s p r e s e n t l y d i s c o u r a g e d from u s i n g these s t r e e t s , to r e t u r n t o Georgetown's s t r e e t s . The number of spaces i n v o l v e d would be 101 along W i s c o n s i n Avenue and 9 7 along M S t r e e t . These r e p r e s e n t a s i g n i f i c a n t p r o p o r t i o n of the o n - s t r e e t spaces w i t h i n t h r e e b l o c k s of the Georgetown commercial a r e a . These spaces a r e a l r e a d y i n s h o r t s u p p l y , p a r t i c u l a r l y d u r i n g evenings �57 and weekends and t h e i r removal would l i k e l y r e s u l t i n more c r u i s i n g by autos s e a r c h i n g f o r o n - s t r e e t p a r k i n g spaces. Of course i f t r o l l e y s e r v i c e i s r e i n s t i t u t e d i n Georgetown along M S t r e e t and Wisconsin Avenue and the t r o l l e y o p e r a t e s on d e d i c a t e d r i g h t - o f - w a y , i t i s l i k e l y t h a t p a r k i n g w i l l have to be removed along these s t r e e t s a t a l l t i m e s . However, u n l e s s t r o l l e y s e r v i c e i s implemented, i t i s recommended t h a t o n - s t r e e t p a r k i n g along M S t r e e t and Wisconsin Avenue remain d u r i n g o f f - p e a k p e r i o d s and t h a t e f f o r t s along these s t r e e t s c o n c e n t r a t e on r e ducing double p a r k i n g , p a r t i c u l a r l y by pickup and d e l i v e r y v e h i c l e s . (3) Convert a percentage of p a r k i n g spaces along M S t r e e t and W i s c o n s i n Avenue to l o a d i n g zones. A c c e s s f o r p i c k u p s and d e l i v e r i e s to most of the b u s i n e s s e s along M S t r e e t and W i s c o n s i n Avenue i s from the s t r e e t i n f r o n t o f the b u s i n e s s . Because p a r k i n g i s p e r m i t t e d along most of the l e n g t h of both s t r e e t s i n f r o n t of the b u s i n e s s e s and t h e s e p a r k i n g spaces a r e w e l l u t i l i z e d , t r u c k s o f t e n f i n d i t n e c e s s a r y t o double park i n f r o n t of a b u s i n e s s when making a p i c k u p or d e l i v e r y . The presence of double parked t r u c k s s u b s t a n t i a l l y reduces the c a p a c i t y of t h e s e s t r e e t s and cont r i b u t e s s i g n i f i c a n t l y t o midday c o n g e s t i o n . I n order to a l l e v i a t e t h i s problem i t has been suggested t h a t a number of the o n - s t r e e t p a r k i n g spaces along both s t r e e t s be r e s e r v e d as t r u c k l o a d i n g and unloading zones. I n order t o be e f f e c t i v e t h r e e p a r k i n g spaces would have to be removed from midblock along each b l o c k f a c e i f one l a r g e or two medium s i z e d t r u c k s a r e t o be expected t o be a b l e to use the l o a d i n g zone. S t r i c t enforcement of the l o a d i n g zones would a l s o be n e c e s s a r y i n order t o keep automobiles from u s i n g the l o a d i n g zones as p a r k i n g s p a c e s . T h i s enforcement could be performed by the same persons who p r e s e n t l y check p a r k i n g meters along t h e s e s t r e e t s . T h i r t e e n b l o c k f a c e s along W i s c o n s i n Avenue n o r t h o f M S t r e e t and t w e l v e b l o c k f a c e s along M S t r e e t i n s i d e the Georgetown c o r r i d o r p r e s e n t l y have p a r k i n g spaces which could be c o n v e r t e d t o l o a d i n g zones. I f t h r e e spaces were c o n v e r t e d �58 to l o a d i n g zones along each of these b l o c k f a c e s , a p p r o x i m a t e l y o n e - t h i r d of the o n - s t r e e t p a r k i n g spaces along these s t r e e t s would be removed d u r i n g the midday p e r i o d . T h i s would r e s u l t i n s u b s t a n t i a l l y l e s s impact on p a r k i n g supply than the complete removal of o n - s t r e e t p a r k i n g spaces along these two s t r e e t s , y e t c o u l d r e s u l t i n s i g n i f i c a n t a l l e v i a t i o n of e x i s t i n g midday cong e s t i o n problems along M S t r e e t and Wisconsin Avenue. (4) B u i l d a p a r k i n g garage i n the Wisconsin Avenue commercial a r e a n o r t h of M S t r e e t . L i t t l e o f f - s t r e e t p a r k i n g p r e s e n t l y e x i s t s i n the W i s c o n s i n Avenue c o r r i d o r n o r t h of M S t r e e t , and as a r e s u l t p a r k i n g supply i n t h i s a r e a i s t i g h t , p a r t i c u l a r l y d u r i n g evenings and on weekends when t h i s a r e a a t t r a c t s a l a r g e number of v i s i t o r s . With the i n s t i t u t i o n of the r e s i d e n t i a l p a r k i n g permit program, p a r k i n g i s v e r y d i f f i c u l t f o r n o n - t r a n s i t commuting employees who work i n t h i s a r e a . An i n v e s t i g a t i o n of e x i s t i n g l a n d uses i n t h i s a r e a does not r e v e a l any l o c a t i o n s which c o u l d be e a s i l y c o n v e r t e d to a p a r k i n g f a c i l i t y e i t h e r by p r i v a t e i n t e r e s t s or by the D i s t r i c t of Columbia government. T h e r e f o r e , i t i s recommended t h a t the D.C. Department of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n support a long term g o a l of i n c r e a s i n g o f f - s t r e e t p a r k i n g i n the Wisconsin Avenue commercial a r e a n o r t h of M S t r e e t . T h i s can be done by e n s u r i n g t h a t a t l e a s t adequate and i f p o s s i b l e e x t r a o f f - s t r e e t p a r k i n g i s prov i d e d w i t h any new development which i s proposed i n t h i s a r e a . I n the meantime i t i s i m p e r a t i v e t h a t a high l e v e l of t r a n s i t s e r v i c e be m a i n t a i n e d and improved upon i n t h i s c o r r i d o r i n order t h a t employees have an a t t r a c t i v e a l t e r n a t i v e t o commuting by auto. (5) P a r k - a n d - r i d e l o t s . The Potomac R i v e r c o r r i d o r t o the northwest of Georgetown i s g e n e r a l l y a low d e n s i t y , h i g h income area,much of which i s not w e l l s e r v e d by t r a n s i t . Because of the low d e n s i t y of development i n the c o r r i d o r , g e n e r a l i n c r e a s e s i n t r a n s i t s e r v i c e w i l l not prove t o be c o s t - e f f e c t i v e . �59 However, i f p a r k - a n d - r i d e l o t s c o u l d be e s t a b l i s h e d i n the c o r r i d o r which c o u l d be s e r v e d by a h i g h l e v e l of t r a n s i t s e r v i c e t o the c e n t r a l employment a r e a , p a r t i c u l a r l y d u r i n g peak commuting p e r i o d s , s i g n i f i c a n t modal d i v e r s i o n c o u l d be expected. An e x a m i n a t i o n of the Potomac R i v e r c o r r i d o r r e v e a l s s e v e r a l p o t e n t i a l l o c a t i o n s f o r p a r k - a n d - r i d e s e r v i c e . The f i r s t i s the e x i s t i n g p a r k i n g l o t a t the Glen Echo Amusement Park i n the Glen Echo a r e a of Montgomery County. The p a r k i n g l o t i s f o r the most p a r t unused d u r i n g weekdays a t the p r e s e n t time. I t i s l o c a t e d along MacArthur B o u l e v a r d j u s t t o the n o r t h of a c o n v e n i e n t a c c e s s road between MacArthur B o u l e v a r d and C a n a l Road. I t s l o c a t i o n i s such t h a t a l a r g e number of auto commuters t o downtown Washington who p r e s e n t l y commute along the C a n a l Road - MacArthur B o u l e v a r d C o r r i d o r c o u l d be expected t o be i n t e r c e p t e d . There a r e , h o w e v e r , s e v e r a l i s s u e s which should be c o n s i d e r e d i n making the d e c i s i o n as t o whether the Glen Echo Amusement Park lot c o u l d be used as a p a r k - a n d - r i d e l o t . The f i r s t i s the o p p o s i t i o n of l o c a l r e s i d e n t s t o a p a r k - a n d - r i d e f a c i l i t y a t the Glen Echo Amusement P a r k . The r e s i d e n t s of the community of Glen Echo have e f f e c t i v e l y blocked a l l p a s t attempts t o implement a p a r k - a n d - r i d e l o t a t t h i s l o c a t i o n because they d i d not want the a d d i t i o n a l auto and bus t r a f f i c i n t h e i r neighborhood. A d d i t i o n a l o p p o s i t i o n i n the p a s t has come from the N a t i o n a l Park S e r v i c e . The o t h e r problem which has impeded p a s t e f f o r t s i s the f a c t t h a t MacArthur B o u l e v a r d i s posted w i t h a s i x ton weight l i m i t a t i o n i n the a r e a near the Glen Echo Amusement Park and an e x c e p t i o n t o t h i s weight l i m i t a t i o n would have t o be granted buses i n the s h o r t s e c t i o n of MacArthur B o u l e v a r d between the amusement park and the c u t o f f to C a n a l Road. However, t h e r e appear t o be no s t r u c t u r a l d e f i c i e n c i e s which r e q u i r e the p r o h i b i t i o n of buses i n t h i s s e c t i o n of MacArthur B o u l e v a r d . �60 D i s c u s s i o n s w i t h o f f i c i a l s of the Montgomery County Department of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n i n d i c a t e t h a t i t i s u n l i k e l y t h a t t h e o p p o s i t i o n of the r e s i d e n t s of Glen Echo t o a park-andr i d e l o t a t the amusement park c o u l d be overcome. Because Glen Echo i s i n c o r p o r a t e d t h e town can deny a c c e s s t o the p a r k i n g l o t , t h u s e f f e c t i v e l y b l o c k i n g the implementation of the park-and-ride f a c i l i t y . The d a t a c o l l e c t i o n phase of t h i s study i n d i c a t e d t h a t a s u b s t a n t i a l number of V i r g i n i a c a r s c r o s s Chain B r i d g e and u l t i mately make t h e i r way i n t o Georgetown v i a C a n a l Road and R e s e v o i r Road. P a r k - a n d - r i d e l o t s i n the McLean a r e a of V i r g i n i a , t o the west of Chain B r i d g e c o u l d be expected t o i n t e r c e p t some of t h i s t r a f f i c which p r e s e n t l y p a s s e s through Georgetown. The V i r g i n i a Department of Highways and T r a n s p o r t a t i o n (VDH&T) i s p r e s e n t l y i n v e s t i g a t i n g p o t e n t i a l l o c a t i o n s f o r such p a r k - a n d - r i d e l o t s . The D.C. Department o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n should support VDH&T's e f f o r t s to e s t a b l i s h park-and-ride l o t s i n t h i s area. The t h i r d p o t e n t i a l l o c a t i o n f o r a park and r i d e l o t i s a t Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y . The u n i v e r s i t y has l i m i t e d the number of p a r k i n g spaces i t makes a v a i l a b l e f o r commuters to the u n i v e r s i t y , and as a r e s u l t i t s u f f e r s a s e v e r e p a r k i n g s h o r t a g e d u r i n g c e r t a i n s p e c i a l e v e n t s such as b a s k e t b a l l games and commencement e x e r c i s e s . P r o v i d e d i n s u r a n c e d e t a i l s c o u l d be worked o u t , the u n i v e r s i t y has e x p r e s s e d i n t e r e s t i n e x p l o r i n g the p o s s i b i l i t y of c o n s t r u c t i n g e x t r a p a r k i n g spaces which would be r e s e r v e d f o r s h o r t term p a r k a n d - r i d e r s a t most t i m e s but c o u l d be used by the u n i v e r s i t y f o r s p e c i a l e v e n t s p a r k i n g . These spaces would be c o n v e n i e n t t o the proposed t r a n s p o r t a t i o n t e r m i n a l a t the Southern E n t r a n c e to the u n i v e r s i t y and c o u l d be used by shoppers and o t h e r s h o r t term p a r k e r s d e s t i n e d t o p o i n t s w i t h i n Georgetown or downtown Washington. I f the u n i v e r s i t y e x p r e s s e s i n t e r e s t i n s u p p l y i n g such spaces and a guarantee c o u l d be s u p p l i e d t h a t the spaces would be f o r s h o r t term use o n l y , i t i s recommended t h a t the D.C. Department of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n a c t f a v o r a b l y on such as p r o p o s a l . �61 (6) Remove peak hour o n - s t r e e t p a r k i n g spaces south of M S t r e e t . The a r e a o f Georgetown south o f M S t r e e t i s undergoing r a p i d and i n t e n s e redevelopment. E x i s t i n g p l a n s c a l l f o r a doubling o f both t r i p g e n e r a t i o n and t h e number o f p a r k i n g spaces i n t h i s a r e a i n t h e n e x t s i x y e a r s . T r a f f i c i n and out of t h i s a r e a i s s e r v e d p r i m a r i l y by a s e r i e s o f narrow n o r t h - s o u t h s t r e e t s between K and M S t r e e t s and by lower K S t r e e t a s i t runs under t h e W h i t e h u r s t Freeway. A t t h e p r e s e n t time p a r k i n g i s a l l o w e d on both s i d e s o f a l l these s t r e e t s , e x c e p t 30th S t r e e t where i t i s a l l o w e d on one s i d e . I t i s d i f f i c u l t f o r c a r s t o pass each o t h e r going i n t h e o p p o s i t e d i r e c t i o n and e x i s t i n g c a p a c i t y i s l i m i t e d . As new development c o n t i n u e s t o be b u i l t i n t h i s area t r a f f i c operations w i l l d e t e r i o r a t e , p a r t i c u l a r l y during peak p e r i o d s . As d i s c u s s e d i n t h e t r a f f i c o p e r a t i o n s improvements c h a p t e r , i t i s recommended t h a t these s t r e e t s be converted t o oneway o p e r a t i o n . I n a d d i t i o n i t w i l l become n e c e s s a r y t o remove some o r a l l p a r k i n g from these s t r e e t s d u r i n g c e r t a i n p e r i o d s i f the t r a f f i c volumes being generated by a l l t h e new development i s to be s e r v e d . However, because t o t a l p a r k i n g supply i n t h i s a r e a i s e x t r e m e l y t i g h t , p a r t i c u l a r y f o r r e s i d e n t s , i t i s recommended t h a t o n - s t r e e t r e s t r i c t i o n s be a p p l i e d o n l y when o f f - s t r e e t spaces become a v a i l a b l e t o r e p l a c e t h e o n - s t r e e t spaces being removed, and o n l y when removal o f t h e s e spaces becomes n e c e s s a r y t o maint a i n adequate t r a f f i c o p e r a t i o n s . Removal o f spaces should occur i n a g r a d u a l manner. W i t h i n t h e n e x t y e a r o r two i t w i l l probably become n e c e s s a r y t o r e s t r i c t p a r k i n g on one or both s i d e s o f these s t r e e t s d u r i n g peak p e r i o d s . Then a s f u l l development o c c u r s i t may become n e c e s s a r y t o a l s o r e s t r i c t p a r k i n g d u r i n g t h e middle of the day on one or both s i d e s of t h e s t r e e t . I t should not be n e c e s s a r y however t o implement a l l r e s t r i c t i o n s on a l l s t r e e t s a t one time. The r e s t r i c t i o n s should be implemented i n s t e a d as t r a f f i c o p e r a t i o n s w a r r a n t t h e i r being put i n p l a c e , and p r i o r i t y should be g i v e n t o r e s e r v i n g spaces which remain f o r r e s i d e n t s of t h i s a r e a . �(7) Convert a percentage of o n - s t r e e t p a r k i n g spaces south of M S t r e e t t o l o a d i n g zones. The s t r e e t s south of M S t r e e t a r e q u i t e narrow w i t h p a r k i n g on both s i d e s of the s t r e e t i n most s e c t i o n s and v i r t u a l l y no room t o pass oncoming or stopped t r a f f i c . Because i n the p a s t t h e s e s t r e e t s c a r r i e d l i t t l e t r a f f i c and p a r k i n g spaces f o r the most p a r t were f i l l e d , t r u c k s making pickups or d e l i v e r i e s to b u i l d i n g s along t h e s e s t r e e t s would double park i n the middle of the s t r e e t and e f f e c t i v e l y b l o c k a l l t r a f f i c , o f t e n f o r as much as f i v e minutes or more. With the i n t e n s e development which i s o c c u r r i n g i n t h i s a r e a and the r e s u l t a n t i n c r e a s e i n t r a f f i c , t h i s p r a c t i c e of double p a r k i n g and b l o c k i n g t h e s e s t r e e t s must be stopped. However, as development goes i n , t h e r e w i l l be even h i g h e r demand f o r making p i c k u p s and d e l i v e r i e s along these streets. A t the p r e s e n t time t h e r e a r e a l i m i t e d number of o n - s t r e e t l o a d i n g zones on the n o r t h - s o u t h s t r e e t s south of M S t r e e t . However, t h e r e i s not n e a r l y enough space d e d i c a t e d t o l o a d i n g zones, nor a r e the e x i s t i n g l o a d i n g zones adequately e n f o r c e d . T h e r e f o r e , i t i s recommended t h a t two or t h r e e p a r k i n g spaces along each b l o c k f a c e i n which t h e r e i s s i g n i f i c a n t o f f i c e or r e t a i l l a n d use be d e d i c a t e d to use as a l o a d i n g zone o n l y d u r i n g the hours of 7 AM t o 7 PM. I f p a r k i n g i s t o be r e s t r i c t e d d u r i n g peak p e r i o d s along a b l o c k f a c e then the hours of the l o a d i n g zones should be shortened t o midday hours o n l y . Furthermore, i t i s recommended t h a t D.C. Department of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n p a r k i n g enforcement p e r s o n n e l r i g o r o u s l y e n f o r c e l o a d i n g zone r e s t r i c t i o n s and no longer t o l e r a t e double p a r k i n g by t r u c k s on these s t r e e t s . I n a d d i t i o n , i t i s recommended t h a t the adequacy of curb space d e d i c a t e d t o l o a d i n g zones be r e v i e w e d , p a r t i c u l a r l y as new developments a r e completed. I n c o n v e r t i n g p a r k i n g spaces t o l o a d i n g zones, c a r e should be taken not t o reduce the number of o n - s t r e e t spaces a v a i l a b l e f o r use by r e s i d e n t s l i v i n g along these streets. �(8) Marketing of p r i v a t e garage s p a c e s , p a r t i c u l a r l y on weekends and e v e n i n g s . At the p r e s e n t time t h e r e i s a p e r c e p t i o n by most persons t r a v e l l i n g to Georgetown t h a t p a r k i n g spaces a r e d i f f i c u l t to f i n d and once a space i s found i t i s o f t e n s e v e r a l b l o c k s from the t r i p ' s f i n a l d e s t i n a t i o n . Because of t h i s p e r c e p t i o n some persons w i l l t r a v e l t o a l t e r n a t i v e d e s t i n a t i o n s o t h e r than Georgetown where p a r k i n g i s not p e r c e i v e d to be as g r e a t a problem. The r e a s o n f o r t h i s p e r c e p t i o n i s t h a t persons t r a v e l l i n g to Georaetown t h i n k i n terms of the a v a i l a b i l i t v of o n - s t r e e t p a r k i n g spaces i n Georgetown, which a r e d i f f i c u l t t o f i n d , p a r t i c u l a r l y d u r i n g evenings and weekends. However, a t the p r e s e n t time o f f - s t r e e t p a r k i n g spaces a r e not f u l l y u t i l i z e d , p a r t i a l l y because d r i v e r s t o Georgetown would r a t h e r spend the e x t r a e f f o r t r e q u i r e d t o f i n d an o n - s t r e e t space. I n o t h e r c a s e s t r a v e l l e r s t o Georgetown a r e not aware t h a t o f f s t r e e t parking i s a v a i l a b l e . I n a d d i t i o n , a number of the o f f s t r e e t p a r k i n g garages a r e c l o s e d d u r i n g evenings and on weekends. I f o f f - s t r e e t p a r k i n g was more e f f e c t i v e l y marketed d u r i n g these p e r i o d s perhaps more garages would s t a y open d u r i n g these p e r i o d s of p a r k i n g space s h o r t a g e . Three s p e c i f i c measures have been proposed as a means t o more e f f e c t i v e l y market o f f - s t r e e t spaces : the expansion of p a r k i n g v a l i d a t i o n programs, the p o s t i n g of p a r k i n g i n f o r m a t i o n i n Georgetown b u s i n e s s e s t a b l i s h m e n t s , and b e t t e r s i g n i n g of where o f f - s t r e e t p a r k i n g i s a v a i l a b l e . P a r k i n g v a l i d a t i o n programs a r e an e f f e c t i v e means f o r commercial e s t a b l i s h m e n t s i n d e n s e l y developed a r e a s t o a t t r a c t customers who might o t h e r w i s e b a l k a t coming t o t h e i r e s t a b l i s h ment because they have t o pay f o r p a r k i n g . U s u a l l y a commercial e s t a b l i s h m e n t makes an arrangement w i t h a p a r k i n g garage owner so t h a t i f a customer p r e s e n t s a p a r k i n g t i c k e t t h a t has been v a l i d a t e d (stamped) by the commercial e s t a b l i s h m e n t , the customer e i t h e r does not pay or r e c e i v e s a d i s c o u n t on h i s p a r k i n g f e e . The owner of the commercial e s t a b l i s h m e n t then reimburses the garage owner f o r those p a r k i n g t i c k e t s he has v a l i d a t e d . �P a r k i n g v a l i d a t i o n programs i n Georgetown a r e not as p r e v a l e n t as i n many commercial c e n t e r s throughout the U n i t e d S t a t e s . Even where they do e x i s t i n Georgetown they tend t o not be p r o m i n e n t l y posted or a d v e r t i s e d . P a r k i n g v a l i d a t i o n programs could s i g n i f i c a n t l y ease the p e r c e p t i o n of p a r k i n g d i f f i c u l t i e s i n Georgetown by p o t e n t i a l p a t r o n s of Georgetown's commercial e s t a b l i s h m e n t s . They a r e an e f f e c t i v e means of a t t r a c t i n g customers who o t h e r w i s e might not t r a v e l to Georgetown. I t i s recommended t h a t the Georgetown Businessmen's A s s o c i a t i o n a c t i v e l y work w i t h p a r k i n g garage owners to expand p a r k i n g v a l i d a t i o n programs i n Georgetown and s i m u l t a n e o u s l y extend the hours which p a r k i n g garages remain open d u r i n g the evenings and on weekends. I t i s a l s o recommended t h a t p a r k i n g v a l i d a t i o n programs, once i n p l a c e , be e f f e c t i v e l y marketed through a d v e r t i s e m e n t s and prominently d i s p l a y e d s i g n s . As d i s c u s s e d e a r l i e r , one of the c r i t i c a l problems r e l a t e d t o p a r k i n g i n Georgetown i s g e n e r a l l a c k of knowledge r e g a r d i n g where p a r k i n g i s a v a i l a b l e , p a r t i c u l a r l y o f f - s t r e e t p a r k i n g south of M S t r e e t . One means of a d d r e s s i n g t h i s problem would be f o r the owners of s t o r e s , r e s t a u r a n t s , e n t e r t a i n m e n t s p o t s , and prof e s s i o n a l o f f i c e s to p o s t p a r k i n g i n f o r m a t i o n . F i g u r e 10 shows a page of an a d v e r t i s i n g supplement t o the T h a n k s g i v i n g 1979 e d i t i o n of the Washington P o s t c a l l e d "Christmas i n Georgetown". I n t h i s s i n g l e g r a p h i c , i n f o r m a t i o n r e g a r d i n g the l o c a t i o n of o f f - s t r e e t p a r k i n g i n Georgetown i s e f f e c t i v e l y d i s p l a y e d . A s i m i l a r g r a p h i c c o u l d be developed i n p o s t e r form t o be d i s p l a y e d i n commercial e s t a b l i s h m e n t s throughout Georgetown. I n a d d i t i o n a f l y e r c o u l d be developed c o n t a i n i n g s i m i l a r i n f o r m a t i o n which p a t r o n s of Georgetown commercial e s t a b l i s h m e n t s c o u l d t a k e home f o r f u t u r e r e f e r e n c e . The Georgetown Businessmen's A s s o c i a t i o n would appear t o be the most a p p r o p r i a t e o r g a n i z a t i o n t o t a k e on the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r d e v e l o p i n g and producing both the p o s t e r and f l y e r . �65 PARKING WHILE SHOPPING IN GEORGETOWN *29th & C&O CANAL •3030 M ST. *1229 WISC. AVE. •3053 M ST. *1055 THOMAS JEFFERSON •3268 M ST. *1058 31st ST. •3285 M ST. *1070 30th ST. •3220 PROSPECT ST. SOURCE: ADVERTISING SUPPLEMENT TO NOVEMBER 22, 1979 WASHINGTON POST GEORGETOWN PARKING INFORMATION �Another method f o r i n c r e a s i n g p u b l i c awareness of the l o c a t i o n of o f f - s t r e e t p a r k i n g i s to post s i g n s along M S t r e e t and K S t r e e t i n d i c a t i n g p a r k i n g i s a v a i l a b l e along a c e r t a i n s t r e e t . These s i g n s need not be l a r g e or o b t r u s i v e . They could merely say "PARKING" and have an arrow p o i n t i n g i n the a p p r o p r i a t e d i r e c t i o n . R e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r p u t t i n g up such s i g n s r e s t s w i t h the D.C. Department of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n , Bureau of P a r k i n g . (9) I n c r e a s e p a r k i n g meter r a t e s and extend hours. I n c r e a s i n g the c o s t of p a r k i n g has t r a d i t i o n a l l y been viewed as a p o s s i b l e means t o d i v e r t some t r a v e l l e r s t o t r a n s i t or higher occupancy a u t o s . However, t h i s s t r a t e g y i s more e f f e c t i v e f o r work t r i p s where t h e r e i s l e s s c h o i c e of t r i p d e s t i n a t i o n than f o r shopping and s o c i a l - r e c r e a t i o n t r i p s where an i n c r e a s e i n p a r k i n g c o s t s w i l l be more l i k e l y to d i v e r t t r i p s t o an a l t e r n a t i v e d e s t i n a t i o n . The primary purpose of p a r k i n g meters i n the commercial a r e a s of Georgetown i s t o ensure t u r n o v e r i n the most c o n v e n i e n t l y l o c a t e d p a r k i n g spaces and thus guarantee t h e i r a v a i l a b i l i t y t o s h o r t - t e r m p a r k e r s . There i s l i t t l e to be gained by r a i s i n g p a r k i n g meter r a t e s o t h e r than to i n c r e a s e revenues t o the c i t y government. However, p o t e n t i a l l o s s e s to Georgetown r e t a i l e s t a b l i s h m e n t s c o u l d f a r o u t s t r i p g a i n s from r a i s i n g meter r a t e s , p a r t i c u l a r l y i f meter r a t e s are not r a i s e d u n i f o r m l y around the city. T h e r e f o r e , u n l e s s meter r a t e s i n c r e a s e throughout the c i t y , r a i s i n g t h e i r r a t e s i n Georgetown i s not recommended. For the most p a r t , money must be put i n p a r k i n g meters i n Georgetown on weekdays between the hours a t 7:00 AM and 6:30 PM. P a r k i n g i n metered spaces i s r e s t r i c t e d t o e i t h e r 30 minutes, 1 hour, or 2 hours. During evenings and on weekends t h e r e are no time r e s t r i c t i o n s or f e e s f o r u s i n g t h e s e spaces. Extending the hours t h a t p a r k e r s a r e r e q u i r e d t o pay f o r the use of metered spaces has been suggested as a means t o i n c r e a s e t u r n o v e r of these spa'ces d u r i n g evenings and on weekends when the p a r k i n g supply i s l i m i t e d . However, doing so would decrease the supply of �spaces a v a i l a b l e t o r e s i d e n t s d u r i n g these p e r i o d s of t i g h t p a r k i n g supply. I n a d d i t i o n , the n a t u r e of s h o r t - t e r m p a r k i n g d u r i n g t h e evenings and on weekends i s q u i t e d i f f e r e n t than during midday on weekdays. During evenings and on weekends v i s i t o r s to both b u s i n e s s e s and r e s i d e n c e s tend to s t a y f o r p e r i o d s longer than the midday time l i m i t s f o r the metered spaces. A much s m a l l e r p r o p o r t i o n of the s h o r t - t e r m p a r k e r s r e q u i r e the use of a p a r k i n g space f o r the maximum time a l l o w e d on a meter. T h e r e f o r e , e x t e n d i n g the hours d u r i n g which meter f e e s must be p a i d i s not recommended a t t h i s time. (10) I n c r e a s e the number of o n - s t r e e t p a r k i n g spaces which a r e metered. The D.C. Department of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n ' s p r e s e n t p o l i c y r e g a r d i n g the placement of p a r k i n g meters i s t h a t they a r e t o be p l a c e d i n commercial a r e a s where the o n - s t r e e t p a r k i n g supply i s l i m i t e d and t h e r e i s a need t o ensure the t u r n o v e r of v e h i c l e s u t i l i z i n g o n - s t r e e t spaces. As a matter of p o l i c y , p a r k i n g meters u s u a l l y do not extend more than one b l o c k i n t o the r e s i d e n t i a l a r e a s a d j o i n i n g the commercial a r e a s i n which p a r k i n g meters a r e w a r r a n t e d . T h i s i s to ensure t h a t r e s i d e n t s have f r e e p a r k i n g spaces a v a i l a b l e a d j a c e n t to t h e i r homes. Using the c r i t e r i a o u t l i n e d above v i r t u a l l y e v e r y o n - s t r e e t space i n Georgetown which w a r r a n t s a meter p r e s e n t l y has one. Extending meters f u r t h e r i n t o the r e s i d e n t i a l a r e a s would d e p r i v e Georgetown r e s i d e n t s of even more p a r k i n g spaces than they p r e s e n t l y have available. However, a p o s s i b l e s o l u t i o n e x i s t s which c o u l d ensure a h i g h e r t u r n o v e r of v e h i c l e s i n p a r k i n g spaces i n r e s i d e n t i a l a r e a s a d j a c e n t t o M S t r e e t and W i s c o n s i n Avenue w h i l e a t the same time a l l o w i n g r e s i d e n t s to use spaces i n f r o n t of t h e i r homes. Under the proposed scheme meters would be extended s e v e r a l b l o c k s on e i t h e r s i d e of M S t r e e t and Wisconsin Avenue. I n those spaces which do not p r e s e n t l y have meters,, c a r s d i s p l a y i n g l o c a l r e s i d e n t i a l p a r k i n g p e r m i t s would be a l l o w e d t o park i n d e f i n i t e l y �w i t h o u t paying the meter f e e . V i s i t o r s to shops, r e s t a u r a n t s , e n t e r t a i n m e n t s p o t s , or o f f i c e s i n Georgetown would have to pay meter f e e s . V i s i t o r s of Georgetown r e s i d e n t s could o b t a i n v i s i t o r p a s s e s s i m i l a r t o those which a r e p r e s e n t l y used to exempt v i s i t o r s from the two hour time l i m i t imposed by the r e s i d e n t i a l p a r k i n g permit program. There a r e s e v e r a l a t t r a c t i v e f e a t u r e s to t h i s proposal. I t i s a means of making spaces i n the r e s i d e n t i a l a r e a s c l o s e t o M S t r e e t and Wisconsin Avenue more a c c e s s i b l e t o the r e s i d e n t s who l i v e i n the a r e a . Enforcement would become much e a s i e r than under the p r e s e n t r e s i d e n t i a l p a r k i n g p e r m i t program where c a r s must be rechecked two hours l a t e r to determine i f they have v i o l a t e d p a r k i n g r e g u l a t i o n s . The hours d u r i n g which meter f e e s a r e r e q u i r e d could be extended w i t h o u t n e g a t i v e l y impacting residents. I n f a c t under t h i s scheme such a p r o p o s a l becomes an a t t r a c t i v e way t o overcome the problem of r e s i d e n t s not being a b l e t o f i n d p a r k i n g spaces d u r i n g evenings and on weekends. The r e a c t i o n of r e s i d e n t s i s l i k e l y t o be mixed. On the one hand they may not l i k e the i d e a of p a r k i n g meters i n f r o n t of t h e i r homes and they may f i n d the meters an i m p o s i t i o n upon t h e i r visitors. However, i f implementation of the p r o p o s a l r e s u l t s i n g r e a t e r ease of p a r k i n g d u r i n g evenings and weekends i n much the same manner the weekday r e s i d e n t i a l p a r k i n g permit program made p a r k i n g much e a s i e r d u r i n g those t i m e s , t h e r e would l i k e l y be s t r o n g support f o r such a measure. The s t r o n g e s t o p p o s i t i o n c o u l d be expected from businessmen who would see the measure making p a r k i n g more d i f f i c u l t f o r t h e i r p a t r o n s . The proposed measure d e s e r v e s s e r i o u s study by the D.C. Department of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n ' s Bureau of P a r k i n g , p a r t i c u l a r l y w i t h r e g a r d t o i t s l e g a l i t y . I f i t i s found to have a good l e g a l b a s i s , or c o u l d w i t h the proper e n a b l i n g l e g i s l a t i o n , a p i l o t program c o u l d be t e s t e d t o see i f the intended r e s u l t s occur, to' *see what p u b l i c r e a c t i o n would be and to determine what type of problems would occur. I n i t i a l r e a c t i o n by r e s i d e n t s appears t o be n e g a t i v e and an e d u c a t i o n a l program about the b e n e f i t s o f such a program may prove n e c e s s a r y . �CHAPTER 5. CANDIDATE TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT ACTIONS T r a n s i t i s a c r i t i c a l element of Georgetown's t r a n s p o r t a t i o n system and p r o v i d e s an important o p p o r t u n i t y f o r h e l p i n g t o improve a c c e s s t o and w i t h i n Georgetown. Durinq t h e course o f t h i s study i t became apparent t h a t t h e r e a r e a number o f problems w i t h t r a n s i t s e r v i c e w i t h i n Georgetown, both a c t u a l and p e r c e i v e d . These problems have been i d e n t i f i e d through d i s c u s s i o n s w i t h Georgetown c i t i z e n s and businessmen, through d i s c u s s i o n s w i t h WMATA and D. C. Department of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n s t a f f members, by r i d i n g on buses through Georgetown, by s t a n d i n g on s t r e e t c o r n e r s i n Georgetown and o b s e r v i n g bus o p e r a t i o n s , by s t u d y i n g schedules and r o u t e maps, and through t h e survey of Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y s t u d e n t s , f a c u l t y , and s t a f f . A number of t h e s e problems a r e d i s c u s s e d i n T e c h n i c a l Memoranda 3 and 4 and a r e b r i e f l y summarized h e r e : Georgetown i s n o t d i r e c t l y s e r v e d by M e t r o r a i l , and t h e r e f o r e t r a n s i t t r i p s t o and from much o f t h e Washington m e t r o p o l i t a n a r e a r e q u i r e a t r a n s f e r between M e t r o r a i l and Metrobus. Although t h e r e a r e t h r e e M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n s o n l y one m i l e from t h e c e n t e r o f Georgetown, a high p r o p o r t i o n o f p o t e n t i a l t r a n s i t t r i p s i n Georgetown a r e n o t d i r e c t l y l i n k e d by bus t o t h e most conveni e n t M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n f o r the i n d i v i d u a l t r i p . I n p a r t i c u l a r , much o f North Georgetown does not have c o n v e n i e n t bus a c c e s s t o e i t h e r R o s s l y n or Foggy Bottom, and much o f South Georgetown does not have c o n v e n i e n t a c c e s s t o Dupont C i r c l e so bus t r a n s f e r s or long w a l k s a r e n e c e s s a r y f o r r e l a t i v e l y short M e t r o r a i l access t r i p s . I t is d e s i r a b l e t h a t d i r e c t bus a c c e s s be p r o v i d e d t o both t h e M e t r o r a i l Red L i n e and M e t r o r a i l B l u e / Orange L i n e t o minimize t r a n s f e r s both on buses and M e t r o r a i l . The r a p i d l y developing a r e a o f Georgetown along lower K S t r e e t i s n o t p r e s e n t l y s e r v e d by Metrobus. P r o v i d i n g s e r v i c e along t h i s s t r e e t would o f f e r an important o p p o r t u n i t y t o develop a t r a n s i t h a b i t among both r e s i d e n t s and employees o f t h e a r e a and thus reduce v e h i c u l a r demand on t h e narrow, congested s t r e e t s south o f M S t r e e t . �The bus r o u t e s which p r e s e n t l y s e r v e Georgetown run on long r o u t e s a c r o s s t h e c i t y . O f t e n , by the time they have reached Georgetown, they a r e crowded making i t n e c e s s a r y f o r Georgetown passengers t o s t a n d . I n a d d i t i o n they a r e o f t e n o f f schedule and have s t a r t e d running i n platoons of t h r e e t o f o u r buses, thus i n c r e a s i n g e f f e c t i v e headways and d e c r e a s i n g t h e p e r c e i v e d l e v e l of service. F a r e s on Metrobus a r e p e r c e i v e d t o be q u i t e h i g h , p a r t i c u l a r l y f o r short t r i p s to Metrorail stations or t h e K S t r e e t b u s i n e s s d i s t r i c t of downtown Washington. F a r e s a r e e s p e c i a l l y d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y h i g h f o r t r i p s between Georgetown and t h e R o s s l y n M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n because o f t h e s t a t e l i n e c r o s s i n g charge. Bus t r a v e l times i n Georgetown a r e slow because buses g e t caught i n t h e c o n g e s t i o n on Georgetown's a r t e r i a l s t r e e t s , and because buses have d i f f i c u l t y i n maneuvering on Georgetown's narrow s t r e e t s . T h i s m a n e u v e r a b i l i t y problem i s e x a c e r b a t e d by i l l e g a l l y parked v e h i c l e s which b l o c k bus p a t h s , the w o r s t c u l p r i t s being double-parked d e l i v e r y trucks. There i s n o t good t r a n s i t s e r v i c e between Georgetown and t h e a r e a o f Northwest Washington west o f Wisconsin Avenue. T h i s problem i s p a r t i c u l a r l y acute f o r commuters t o Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y from t h i s a r e a because i n most c a s e s a t l e a s t two t r a n s f e r s a r e required. I n g e n e r a l t r a n s i t s e r v i c e i n t h e Potomac R i v e r c o r r i d o r northwest of Georgetown i s s p a r s e , w i t h no park and r i d e s e r v i c e provided i n t h i s heavy auto commuting c o r r i d o r . T r a n s i t s e r v i c e i n Georgetown i s n o t e f f e c t i v e l y marketed. Although l e v e l s o f s e r v i c e a r e q u i t e h i g h compared t o most o f t h e r e s t o f t h e m e t r o p o l i t a n a r e a , many Georgetown r e s i d e n t s , employees, and shoppers a r e n o t aware o f what s e r v i c e s a r e a v a i l a b l e and as a r e s u l t p e r c e i v e poor l e v e l s of s e r v i c e . Although t r a n s i t s e r v i c e i n Georgetown i s plagued by many problems, t h e r e a r e a number o f o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r improving both s e r v i c e l e v e l s and t h e p e r c e p t i o n of t r a n s i t s e r v i c e i n t h e Georgetown a r e a . A number o f t h e a b o v e - c i t e d problems could �be overcome through some j u d i c i o u s m o d i f i c a t i o n of t r a n s i t r o u t e s , through t h e a d d i t i o n of s e v e r a l new r o u t e s , and through a g g r e s i v e marketing o f t r a n s i t i n t h e Georgetown a r e a . I n response t o t h e a b o v e - c i t e d problems, as w e l l as t h e o b j e c t i v e s f o r improving t r a n s p o r t a t i o n a c c e s s i n t h e Georgetown a r e a o u t l i n e d i n Chapter 1 , t h e f o l l o w i n g c a n d i d a t e t r a n s i t improvement a c t i o n s have been proposed and a r e a n a l y z e d i n t h i s c h a p t e r . (1) (2) (3) New or m o d i f i e d l a r g e bus r o u t e s . (a) Glen Echo park and r i d e e x p r e s s s e r v i c e (b) Chevy Chase C i r c l e - T e n l e y C i r c l e - American U n i v e r s i t y - Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y - F a r r a g u t Square R e i n s t i t u t i o n o f Georgetown t r o l l e y s e r v i c e . S m a l l bus r o u t e s . (a) K S t r e e t - P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue loop (b) K S t r e e t - Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y loop (c) K S t r e e t - Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y Medical Center (d) Foggy Bottom - Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y loop (e) R o s s l y n - Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y Medical Center ( f ) R o s s l y n - Wisconsin/Massachusetts Avenues (g) (h) (i) (j) (4) R o s s l y n - Dupont C i r c l e R o s s l y n - Foggy Bottom Foggy Bottom - Dupont C i r c l e v i a Wisconsin Avenue E x t e n s i o n o f above r o u t e s t o Kennedy Center and o t h e r p o i n t s i n Foggy Bottom, or t o F a r r a g u t Square T r a n s i t marketing. (a) T r a n s i t i n f o r m a t i o n c e n t e r s (b) T r a n s i t i n f o r m a t i o n package f o r Georgetown employees (c) Employer s u b s i d y o f t r a n s i t f a r e s (d) T r a n s i t f a r e v a l i d a t i o n scheme (e) T r a n s i t i n f o r m a t i o n brochure f o r p a t r o n s of Georgetown shops, r e s t a u r a n t s , and e n t e r t a i m e n t spots. �(1) New or m o d i f i e d l a r g e bus r o u t e s . Metrobus r o u t e s p r e s e n t l y operate on v i r t u a l l y e v e r y major a r t e r i a l s t r e e t i n Georgetown. A number of problems w i t h t h e s e r o u t e s were i d e n t i f i e d e a r l i e r , most of which a r e r e l a t e d t o the f a c t t h a t the Georgetown s e c t i o n of t h e s e r o u t e s i s o n l y a s m a l l p o r t i o n of a much longer r o u t e s t r u c t u r e . Most of the d e f i c i e n c i e s i d e n t i f i e d e a r l i e r can be more e f f e c t i v e l y d e a l t w i t h by implementing l o c a l , s m a l l bus r o u t e s w i t h i n Georgetown than by implementing more or r e v i s e d Metrobus l i n e - h a u l r o u t e s . However, two problems which could p o t e n t i a l l y be addressed through the implementation of new bus r o u t e s a r e t h e l a c k of s e r v i c e between Georgetown and the a r e a o f Northwest Washington t o the northwest of Georgetown and the g e n e r a l s p a r s i t y of s e r v i c e between the Potomac R i v e r c o r r i d o r west of Georgetown and downtown Washington. Two new Metrobus r o u t e s have been proposed t o d e a l w i t h t h e s e d e f i c i e n c i e s . These r o u t e s a r e shown i n F i g u r e s 11 and 12. The f i r s t r o u t e would p r o v i d e e x p r e s s bus s e r v i c e between the proposed Glen Echo p a r k - a n d - r i d e l o t and F a r r a g u t Square v i a C a n a l Road, M S t r e e t , P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue, and K S t r e e t . I f s u f f i c i e n t p a r k i n g i s provided a t Glen Echo and the r o u t e i s operated a t a high l e v e l of s e r v i c e (15 minute headways or b e t t e r d u r i n g the p e a k ) , i t i s r e a s o n a b l e t o expect t h a t a s i g n i f i c a n t number of commuters would be d i v e r t e d from t h e i r autos t o the e x p r e s s s e r v i c e . T h i s s e r v i c e c o u l d f i l l an e x i s t i n g v o i d i n t r a n s i t s e r v i c e i n t h i s c o r r i d o r where the d e n s i t y of development i s too low t o j u s t i f y broad t r a n s i t r o u t e coverage. T h i s s e r v i c e would be e s p e c i a l l y e f f e c t i v e i f combined w i t h HOV l a n e s on Canal Road and c o u l d be expected t o p r o v i d e some r e l i e f t o Georgetown t r a f f i c c o n g e s t i o n caused by through autos between the Potomac R i v e r C o r r i d o r t r a f f i c shed and- downtown Washington. As d i s c u s s e d i n Chapter 4, however, i t i s u n l i k e l y t h a t a p a r k - a n d - r i d e l o t can be implemented a t t h e Glen Echo Amusement P a r k . U n l e s s an a l t e r n a t i v e l o c a t i o n �73 ��could be found f o r a park and r i d e l o t , t h i s r o u t e w i l l n o t prove f e a s i b l e . The second proposed Metrobus r o u t e would s t a r t a t Chevy Chase C i r c l e , and t r a v e l south on C o n n e c t i c u t Avenue, southwest on Nebraska Avenue p a s t t h e proposed T e n l e y C i r c l e M e t r o r a i l S t a t i o n and American U n i v e r s i t y , s o u t h e a s t on New Mexico Avenue and TunlawRoad, south on 37th S t r e e t t o t h e Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y M e d i c a l C e n t e r , e a s t on R e s e r v o i r Road, south on 35th S t r e e t p a s s i n g two b l o c k s from t h e main e n t r a n c e t o Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y , e a s t on P r o s p e c t S t r e e t , south on W i s c o n s i n Avenue, and e a s t on M S t r e e t , P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue, and K S t r e e t t o F a r r a g u t Square. T h i s r o u t e would d i r e c t l y connect downtown Washington and Georgetown w i t h a number o f l o c a t i o n s i n Northwest Washington which a r e not d i r e c t l y l i n k e d by t r a n s i t a t t h e p r e s e n t time. Routes s i m i l a r to t h i s one have been proposed i n t h e p a s t but have n o t been implemented because t r a n s i t p r i o r i t i e s were p l a c e d elsewhere i n the c i t y . However, i t i s a r o u t e t h a t should r e c e i v e s e r i o u s c o n s i d e r a t i o n f o r implementation by WMATA. V e h i c l e o p e r a t i n g requirements and c o s t s were e s t i m a t e d f o r each o f t h e two c a n d i d a t e Metrobus r o u t e s a n a l y z e d . I t was assumed t h a t both r o u t e s would operate on 15 minute headways d u r i n g peak p e r i o d s , t h e Glen E c h o - F a r r a g u t Square e x p r e s s s e r v i c e would operate on 60 minute headways d u r i n g weekday o f f peak p e r i o d s , and t h e Chevy C h a s e - F a r r a g u t Square r o u t e would operate on 30 minute headways d u r i n g midday w i t h l e s s f r e q u e n t s e r v i c e d u r i n g evenings and on weekends. Under t h e s e assumed c o n d i t i o n s , o p e r a t i n g r e q u i r e m e n t s and c o s t s would be as f o l l o w s : G l e n Echo F a r r a g u t Square Peak P e r i o d Headway B a s e P e r i o d Headway V e h i c l e Requirements A n n u a l VHT A n n u a l VMT Annual Operating C o s t s (1979 d o l l a r s ) 15 60 4 6,300 101,000 $250,000 Chevy C h a s e C i r c l e F a r r a g u t Square 15 30 5 14,500 139,000 $260,000 �(2) R e i n s t i t u t i o n o f Georgetown t r o l l e y s e r v i c e . During an e a r l i e r phase o f t h e Georgetown Area A c c e s s A l t e r n a t i v e s Study a s e p a r a t e a n a l y s i s of t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e was performed, t h e r e s u l t s of which a r e p r e s e n t e d i n " T e c h n i c a l Memorandum No. 2: The R e i n s t i t u t i o n o f Georgetown T r o l l e y S e r v i c e : an Overview." I n t h i s memorandum a number o f a l t e r n a t i v e a l i g n m e n t s , o p e r a t i o n a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s , and system impacts o f t r o l l e y s e r v i c e i n Georgetown were a n a l y z e d i n terms of d e t e r m i n i n g i f t h e r e i n s t i t u t i o n o f t r o l l e y s e r v i c e i n Georgetown i s a v i a b l e a l t e r n a t i v e which should be pursued i n more depth through t h e conduct of a d e t a i l e d Georgetown T r o l l e y Study. During t h e c o u r s e o f t h e a n a l y s i s a number o f i s s u e s were i d e n t i f i e d w h i c h i t was f e l t must be addressed i n d e t a i l b e f o r e a d e c i s i o n regarding the r e i n s t i t u t i o n of t r o l l e y s e r v i c e i s made. These i s s u e s i n c l u d e d t h e f o l l o w i n g : Function I s t h e p r i m a r y f u n c t i o n o f t h e system t o be h i s t o r i c preservation, transportation service, or a combination of t h e two? System L o c a t i o n I s t h e system t o be a l o c a l Georgetown system, or i s i t t o extend beyond Georgetown and p r o v i d e a major l i n e - h a u l f u n c t i o n ? What i s t o be t h e alignment o f t h e system? P h y s i c a l System To what degree can e x i s t i n g e l e c t r i c a l c o n d u i t and t r a c k be used f o r t r o l l e y o p e r a t i o n s ? Should t h e t r a c k be l o c a t e d i n t h e c e n t e r l a n e ( s ) or curb l a n e ( s ) ? Should t h e system have s i n g l e o r double t r a c k operations? Should t h e system be l o c a t e d i n r e s e r v e d r i g h t of way or w i l l i t o p e r a t e i n mixed t r a f f i c ? What type o f v e h i c l e should be used? What type o f power source should be used? �What s h o u l d be t h e s t a t i o n s p a c i n g ? Where w i l l t h e maintenance f a c i l i t y be l o c a t e d ? System O p e r a t i o n s What would be t h e h o u r s o f o p e r a t i o n ? What would be t h e s y s t e m headways? How many v e h i c l e s would be r e q u i r e d ? What f a r e s would be charged? What would be t h e r o l e s f o r o t h e r systems i n t h e Georgetown a r e a ? transit System Impacts How would t h e t r o l l e y a f f e c t b u s i n e s s e s i n Georgetown? How would t h e t r o l l e y a f f e c t t o and w i t h i n Georgetown? accessibility How would t h e t r o l l e y a f f e c t t r a f f i c o p e r a t i o n s and p a r k i n g ? How would i t a f f e c t t r a f f i c volumes on Georgetown s t r e e t s ? What s a f e t y problems does a t r o l l e y s y s t e m i n t r o d u c e ? To what degree a r e t h e s e s o l v a b l e ? What a r e t h e neighborhood i m p a c t s ? What would the community a c c e p t a n c e of t h e s e i m p a c t s be? How much n o i s e would t h e system c r e a t e ? How would t h e t r o l l e y a f f e c t a i r quality? What a r e t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n innoacts? I s t h e s y s t e m t o be f u l l y a c c e s s i b l e t o the e l d e r l y and handicapped? I f so, how does t h i s a f f e c t d e s i g n and o p e r a t i o n s ? Institutional Who would o p e r a t e t h e system? Who would fund t h e system? Where a r e moneys available? How would f u n d i n g f o r a t r o l l e y a f f e c t funding f o r other t r a n s i t i n the region? �Patronage and Revenue What r i d e r s h i p would be a t t r a c t e d t o t h e system? How would t h i s demand be d i s t r i b u t e d over time of day, day o f week,and season o f y e a r ? How does demand a f f e c t system r e q u i r e m e n t s ? What p o r t i o n s of t h e demand would be former t r a n s i t r i d e r s , former auto u s e r s , or induced trips? How much revenue would be c o l l e c t e d from t h e system? Costs How much would a l t e r n a t i v e systems c o s t t o b u i l d ? What would i t c o s t t o o p e r a t e t h e s e systems a t various l e v e l s of service? What would system d e f i c i t s (or o p e r a t i n g surpluses) be? I f t h e r e were a d e f i c i t , who would pay t h e subsidy? An o v e r v i e w a n a l y s i s o f each of t h e s e i s s u e s i s p r o v i d e d i n T e c h n i c a l Memorandum No. 2. Rather than r e p e a t i n g t h e d i s c u s s i o n of t h a t a n a l y s i s , t h e r e a d e r i s r e f e r r e d t o t h a t document. I n t h a t r e p o r t , JHK concludes t h a t based upon t h e i n f o r m a t i o n a v a i l a b l e a t t h i s time, none of t h e i s s u e s i d e n t i f i e d above f o r e c l o s e s t r o l l e y s e r v i c e as a p o s s i b l e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n o p t i o n i n Georgetown. JHK f u r t h e r recommended i n t h a t r e p o r t t h a t an i n depth Georgetown T r o l l e y Study be performed. S i n c e t h e i s s u a n c e o f t h a t t e c h n i c a l memorandum, p r e l i m i n a r y t r a v e l demand e s t i m a t e s have been made f o r a base t r o l l e y a l t e r n a t i v e which o p e r a t e s between t h e Foggy Bottom M e t r o r a i l S t a t i o n and t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n of M S t r e e t and W i s c o n s i n Avenue. These e s t i m a t e s a r e p r e s e n t e d i n Chapter 8. I n terms o f t h e t r o l l e y ' s impacts on o t h e r proposed a c c e s s improvement measures i n Georgetown, i t i s f e l t t h a t t h e p r i m a r y impact o f t h e t r o l l e y w i l l be on t r a f f i c o p e r a t i o n s . I t i s l i k e l y t h a t t h e t r o l l e y would have t o operate on e x c l u s i v e r i g h t - o f - w a y i n t h e c e n t e r o f M S t r e e t and P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue and t h a t two t r a f f i c l a n e s w i l l i n e f f e c t be removed from t h e s e �major t r a f f i c c a r r y i n g s t r e e t s . I f t h e t r o l l e y i s implemented, t h e r e w i l l be even more j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r t y i n g the ramps a t the e a s t end o f the W h i t e h u r s t Freeway i n t o L S t r e e t , s o t r a f f i c can e f f e c t i v e l y bypass t h a t p o r t i o n o f M S t r e e t on which the t r o l l e y w i l l be o p e r a t i n g . The t r o l l e y o f f e r s an o p p o r t u n i t y t o improve l o c a l t r a n s i t s e r v i c e between the c e n t e r o f Georgetown and the Foggy Bottom M e t r o r a i l S t a t i o n . However, the t r o l l e y should supplement bus s e r v i c e through Georgetown, r a t h e r than r e p l a c e i t because the bus r o u t e s which p r e s e n t l y run along M S t r e e t and P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue i n Georgetown a r e l i n e - h a u l r o u t e s which p r i m a r i l y c a r r y longer t r a n s i t t r i p s t h a t pass through Georgetown o r o r i g i n a t e from p o i n t s o u t s i d e t h e proposed s e r v i c e a r e a o f t h e t r o l l e y . Institut i o n o f t r o l l e y s e r v i c e a l s o w i l l not decrease the need t o p r o v i d e t r a n s i t s e r v i c e t o lower K S t r e e t and between R o s s l y n and Dupont C i r c l e a s recommended i n the n e x t s e c t i o n and t h e r e f o r e does not a f f e c t the c o n c l u s i o n s reached i n t h a t s e c t i o n . (3) S m a l l bus r o u t e s . The D. C. Department o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n i s p r e s e n t l y conducting a study t o i n v e s t i g a t e the f e a s i b i l i t y of implementing a number o f neighborhood bus r o u t e s which would operate u s i n g buses s m a l l e r than those used by WMATA. The system i n p r i n c i p l e would be s i m i l a r t o Montgomery County's Ride-On system i n which s m a l l buses a r e r o u t e d through r e s i d e n t i a l a r e a s where passengers d e s t i n e d t o o r coming from nearby a c t i v i t y c e n t e r s , M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n s , o r l i n e - h a u l bus r o u t e s a r e p i c k e d up and dropped o f f . Georgetown i s one o f the a r e a s w i t h i n the D i s t r i c t o f Columbia being c o n s i d e r e d f o r such r o u t e s . I t i s a l o g i c a l a r e a f o r such s e r v i c e because l a r g e r WMATA buses running on l i n e h a u l r o u t e s do not adequately s e r v e the t r a n s i t needs o f Georgetown a t the p r e s e n t t i m e . I n order t o b e t t e r p e n e t r a t e the p o t e n t i a l t r a n s i t market i n Georgetown, l o c a l r o u t e s which p r o v i d e s e r v i c e between Georgetown and i t s nearby M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n s a r e needed. Metrobuses cannot e f f e c t i v e l y maneuver on many o f Georgetown's �narrow and congested s t r e e t s , whereas m i d s i z e buses such as the Greyhound C i t y c r u i s e r s p r e s e n t l y used by Montgomery County could much more s u c c e s s f u l l y maneuver on t h e s e s t r e e t s . S h o r t l o c a l i z e d r o u t e s o f t e n prove to be v e r y p r o d u c t i v e r o u t e s because t h e r e are a . r e l a t i v e l y l a r g e number of passengers boarding per v e h i c l e m i l e t r a v e l e d . With a s e p a r a t e system where buses operate on s h o r t , prod u c t i v e r o u t e s , i t becomes f e a s i b l e to c o n s i d e r lower f a r e s f o r s h o r t l o c a l t r i p s , p a r t i c u l a r l y those which do not t r a n s f e r to a longer l i n e - h a u l bus r o u t e . Such a system could p r o v i d e conv e n i e n t , low-cost t r a n s i t a c c e s s to M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n s and induce a s i g n i f i c a n t number of t r a v e l e r s to d i v e r t to t r a n s i t . During the course of c o n s i d e r i n g the p o s s i b i l i t i e s f o r l o c a l s m a l l bus r o u t e s i n Georgetown, a number of p o t e n t i a l r o u t e s were i d e n t i f i e d , n i n e of which were chosen f o r a n a l y s i s . These n i n e r o u t e s are shown i n F i g u r e s 13 through 2 1 . The K S t r e e t - P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue Loop r o u t e ( F i g u r e 13) i s designed to p r o v i d e t r a n s i t s e r v i c e to the r a p i d l y d e v e l o p i n g a r e a between K and M S t r e e t s and l i n k t h i s a r e a d i r e c t l y to the Foggy Bottom M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n . I t would be operated as a loop r o u t e w i t h buses t r a v e l i n g i n both d i r e c t i o n s to ensure t h a t the most d i r e c t r o u t e to the Foggy Bottom s t a t i o n i s t r a v e r s e d . Although t h i s r o u t e would meet i t s o b j e c t i v e , r o u t e s which extend f u r t h e r i n t o Georgetown and t r a v e r s e K S t r e e t would p r o v i d e s e r v i c e t o a l a r g e r p o r t i o n of Georgetown and t h e r e f o r e a r e rated higher. The K S t r e e t - Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y Loop route ( F i g u r e 14) would p r o v i d e d i r e c t s e r v i c e between the Foggy Bottom M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n and lower K S t r e e t and would a l s o extend s e r v i c e t o the a r e a of Georgetown west of W i s c o n s i n Avenue, i n c l u d i n g Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y . Although i t would be d e s i r a b l e to l i n k t h i s a r e a to the Foggy Bottom s t a t i o n , the Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s u r v e y showed s i g n i f i c a n t l y l e s s demand f o r t r a n s i t s e r v i c e t o the Foggy Bottom s t a t i o n than e i t h e r the Dupont C i r c l e or R o s s l y n s t a t i o n s . T r a n s i t s e r v i c e between t h i s a r e a and Foggy Bottom would �K ST. - PENNSYLVANIA AVE. LOOP �K ST. - GU LOOP �K ST. - GU HOSPITAL �FOGGY BOTTOM - GU LOOP FIGURE No. 16 �ROSSLYN - GU HOSPITAL ��ROSSLYN - DUPONT CIRCLE �R O S S L Y N - F O G G Y BOTTOM �F O G G Y BOTTOM - DUPONT CIRCLE �be p r o v i d e d by the proposed Metrobus r o u t e between Chevy Chase and F a r r a g u t Square which p a s s e s through Georgetown. T h e r e f o r e f o r the sake of a v o i d i n g d u p l i c a t i o n of s e r v i c e i n an a r e a i n which demand i s u n l i k e l y t o w a r r a n t i t , t h i s r o u t e i s not recommended. The t h i r d r o u t e a n a l y z e d would begin a t the Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y Medical Center and would t r a v e r s e R e s e r v o i r Road, W i s c o n s i n Avenue, and K S t r e e t , f i n a l l y ending up a t the Foggy Bottom M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n (see F i g u r e 1 5 ) . T h i s r o u t e would be s i m i l a r t o t h e p r e v i o u s l y a n a l y z e d one, but would l i n k B u r l e i t h and the GU Medical Center w i t h the Foggy Bottom s t a t i o n . Is is not recommended f o r e s s e n t i a l l y the same reasons t h e p r i o r a l t e r n a t i v e was not. The f o u r t h a l t e r n a t i v e ( F i g u r e 16) would p r o v i d e d i r e c t t r a n s i t s e r v i c e between neighborhoods both e a s t and west of W i s c o n s i n Avenue and the Foggy Bottom s t a t i o n . Persons l i v i n g i n t h e s e neighborhoods who p r e s e n t l y w i s h t o a c c e s s the Foggy Bottom s t a t i o n must walk to e i t h e r W i s c o n s i n Avenue or M S t r e e t . T h i s a l t e r n a t i v e a l s o would d i r e c t l y l i n k Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y w i t h the Foggy Bottom s t a t i o n . Although t h i s p a r t i c u l a r r o u t e would p r o v i d e improved s e r v i c e t o the r e s i d e n t i a l a r e a s i t would d i r e c t l y s e r v e , i t c o u l d not be expected t o be as p r o d u c t i v e as s e v e r a l of the l a t e r a l t e r n a t i v e s t h a t a r e recommneded. Theref o r e , i t does not r e c e i v e as h i g h a r a n k i n g as those a l t e r n a t i v e s . The f i f t h a l t e r n a t i v e ( F i g u r e 17) would l i n k the R o s s l y n M e t r o r a i l S t a t i o n w i t h the Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y M e d i c a l Center v i a W i s c o n s i n Avenue. T h i s r o u t e would d i r e c t l y connect both t h e c e n t e r of Georgetown and North Georgetown w i t h the R o s s l y n S t a t i o n on buses which could charge s i g n i f i c a n t l y lower f a r e s than t h e e x i s t i n g Metrobuses which c r o s s Key B r i d g e . Such a r o u t e c o u l d s i g n i f i c a n t l y improve V i r g i n i a t r a n s i t p a s s e n g e r s ' p e r c e p t i o n s of t h e l e v e l of bus s e r v i c e p r o v i d e d between M e t r o r a i l and Georgetown. However, t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e does not r a t e as h i g h as one o f i t s v a r i a n t s ( A l t e r n a t i v e 6) which i n s t e a d of t u r n i n g west on R e s e r v o i r Road from W i s c o n s i n Avenue, c o n t i n u e s n o r t h on �W i s c o n s i n Avenue t o M a s s a c h u s e t t s Avenue (see F i g u r e 1 8 ) . T h i s i s because t h e Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y Medical Center i s e f f e c t i v e l y l i n k e d t o t h e R o s s l y n s t a t i o n v i a GUTS, but a t p r e s e n t t h e r e i s no d i r e c t connection between the W i s c o n s i n Avenue c o r r i d o r and R o s s l y n , d e s p i t e i n d i c a t i o n s t h a t demand f o r t h i s movement i s quite high. A l t e r n a t i v e 6 i s recommended f o r implementation as a Georgetown s m a l l bus r o u t e . The seventh s m a l l bus r o u t e a l t e r n a t i v e i s another v a r i a n t of t h e two p r i o r a l t e r n a t i v e s . I t would go between R o s s l y n and Dupont C i r c l e (see F i g u r e 1 9 ) . T h i s a l t e r n a t i v e a l s o does not r a t e q u i t e as h i g h l y as a r o u t e which extends up W i s c o n s i n Avenue because t h e M e t r o r a i l Blue L i n e i s d i r e c t l y connected t o Dupont C i r c l e by a number of r o u t e s which r u n between Dupont C i r c l e and F a r r a g u t Square. T r i p s from V i r g i n i a t o Dupont C i r c l e can t a k e M e t r o r a i l t o t h e F a r r a g u t West s t a t i o n and r i d e a Metrobus f o r f r e e w i t h no b a c k t r a c k i n g r e q u i r e d . On the other hand, t r i p s between V i r g i n i a and t h e W i s c o n s i n Avenue c o r r i d o r on e x i s t i n g r o u t e s e i t h e r i n v o l v e double t r a n s f e r s i f passengers a l i g h t from M e t r o r a i l a t R o s s l y n , or s i g n i f i c a n t b a c k t r a c k i n g i f they a l i g h t a t Foggy Bottom. Demand between R o s s l y n and t h e r e s i d e n t i a l a r e a s along P S t r e e t e a s t of W i s c o n s i n Avenue cannot be expected t o be as g r e a t as between R o s s l y n and the upper W i s c o n s i n Avenue c o r r i d o r . The e i g h t h s m a l l bus r o u t e a l t e r n a t i v e would be between R o s s l y n and Foggy Bottom v i a lower K S t r e e t (see F i g u r e 2 0 ) . T h i s r o u t e would d i r e c t l y l i n k t h e r a p i d l y developing lower K S t r e e t a r e a w i t h both t h e Foggy Bottom and R o s s l y n M e t r o r a i l stations. I n combination w i t h t h e r o u t e between R o s s l y n and W i s c o n s i n / M a s s a c h u s e t t s Avenue, i t would p r o v i d e an e s p e c i a l l y high l e v e l of s e r v i c e i n t h e a r e a between R o s s l y n and t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n of - S t r e e t and W i s c o n s i n Avenue. T h i s a l t e r n a t i v e i s more a t t r a c M t i v e t h a n t h e p r e v i o u s l y d i s c u s s e d a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r lower K S t r e e t . T r a v e l demand would be h i g h e r t h a n f o r t h e o t h e r a l t e r n a t i v e s �because t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e would d i r e c t l y connect t h e dense, new development along K S t r e e t w i t h t h e M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n commuters t o Georgetown from V i r g i n i a would be most l i k e l y t o u s e , t h e R o s s l y n s t a t i o n . T h e r e f o r e t h i s r o u t e i s recommended f o r implementation as a s m a l l bus r o u t e i n Georgetown. The f i n a l proposed s m a l l bus r o u t e would be between Foggy Bottom and Dupont C i r c l e v i a K S t r e e t , W i s c o n s i n Avenue, and P S t r e e t (see F i g u r e 2 1 ) . T h i s r o u t e would d i r e c t l y connect t h e c e n t e r of Georgetown and t h e lower K S t r e e t a r e a w i t h M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n s on both t h e Blue/Orange and Red l i n e s . T h i s s e r v i c e could be e f f e c t i v e l y marketed a s a shopping and r e s t a u r a n t s p e c i a l w i t h d i s c o u n t f a r e s g i v e n t o Georgetown shoppers or d i n e r s . When combined w i t h t h e proposed Rosslyn-Foggy Bottom r o u t e , a high l e v e l o f s e r v i c e would be ensured between lower K S t r e e t i n Georgetown and t h e Foggy Bottom s t a t i o n . T h i s r o u t e c o u l d be expected t o be w e l l used and t h e r e f o r e i s recommended f o r implementation as a s m a l l bus r o u t e . The D. C. Department o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n ' s s m a l l bus program i s now i n t h e i n i t i a l s t a g e s o f p l a n n i n g and i s s t i l l s e v e r a l y e a r s from becoming o p e r a t i o n a l . However, w i t h new developments a l r e a d y opening south of M S t r e e t , i t i s c r i t i c a l t h a t t r a n s i t s e r v i c e begin along lower K S t r e e t as soon as p o s s i b l e , so a t r a n s i t h a b i t can be developed among t r a v e l e r s t o and from t h i s a r e a . Because Georgetown has a need f o r s m a l l bus s e r v i c e now and because t h e recommended r o u t e s i n Georgetown have a h i g h p r o b a b i l i t y f o r s u c c e s s , i t i s recommended t h a t Georgetown be used a s a p i l o t a r e a f o r t h e s m a l l bus system. T h i s would enable the D. C. Department o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n t o work out many o f t h e problems w i t h t h e system b e f o r e a t t e m p t i n g t o implement i t on a l a r g e s c a l e throughout t h e c i t y . I t a l s o could e n a b l e Georgetown t o b e n e f i t from t h e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n of s m a l l bus r o u t e s much e a r l i e r t h a n might o t h e r w i s e be p o s s i b l e . The r o u t e s which a r e shown i n t h e a l t e r n a t i v e s t o t e r m i n a t e a t t h e Foggy Bottom M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n c o u l d be extended t o connect �w i t h the Kennedy Center and o t h e r p o i n t s i n the Foggy Bottom a r e a . T h i s would enable Foggy Bottom to b e n e f i t from s m a l l bus s e r v i c e and would d i r e c t l y connect Georgetown w i t h d e s t i n a t i o n s i n Foggy Bottom. An a n a l y s i s of s p e c i f i c r o u t i n g s i n Foggy Bottom i s o u t s i d e the scope of t h i s study. However, c o n n e c t i o n of Georgetown s m a l l bus r o u t e s i n t o Foggy Bottom i s a concept which has m e r i t and should r e c e i v e s e r i o u s c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n the ongoing s m a l l bus study being conducted f o r the D. C. Department of Transportation. E x t e n s i o n of a l t e r n a t i v e s m a l l bus r o u t e s to F a r r a g u t Square has a l s o been proposed. T h i s would d i r e c t l y connect Georgetown w i t h t h i s downtown b u s i n e s s d i s t r i c t . Although t h i s o p t i o n should a l s o r e c e i v e c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n the s m a l l bus s t u d y , i t may not have as much m e r i t as e x t e n d i n g t h e s e r o u t e s i n t o Foggy Bottom. Doing so would i n c r e a s e bus o p e r a t i n g requirements w i t h o u t s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n c r e a s i n g bus p a t r o n a g e . S m a l l bus r o u t i n g s i n the v i c i n i t y of the Foggy Bottom s t a t i o n would be v i a a loop i n which buses would t r a v e l e a s t bound on K S t r e e t t o Washington C i r c l e , t u r n r i g h t from the c i r c l e onto 2 3rd S t r e e t w i t h passengers being dropped o f f i n f r o n t of the Foggy Bottom M e t r o r a i l S t a t i o n . Buses would then c o n t i n u e south on 23rd S t r e e t , t u r n west on H S t r e e t and t u r n n o r t h on 24th S t r e e t , stopping o p p o s i t e the M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n t o p i c k up p a s s e n g e r s . Buses would t u r n west on the s e r v i c e road t o K S t r e e t , r e j o i n i n g K S t r e e t a t 25th S t r e e t . I t has been p o i n t e d out t h a t the merge from the westbound K S t r e e t s e r v i c e road t o K S t r e e t i s a dangerous maneuver which buses may have d i f f i c u l t y n e g o t i a t i n g . I f t h i s proves to be the c a s e , s e r i o u s c o n s i d e r a t i o n should be g i v e n to i n s t a l l i n g a bus p r i o r i t y s i g n a l a t 25th and K S t r e e t s . An a n a l y s i s of v e h i c l e o p e r a t i n g r e q u i r e m e n t s and c o s t s was performed f o r the t h r e e recommended s m a l l bus r o u t e s i n Georgetown. Each r o u t e i s s h o r t enough t h a t a round t r i p could �be completed i n 30 minutes. T h e r e f o r e , i f r o u t e s a r e operated on t e n minute headways, i t would be n e c e s s a r y t o have t h r e e buses i n s e r v i c e on each r o u t e a t any g i v e n time, or a t o t a l of n i n e buses f o r the t h r e e r o u t e s . I f t e n minute headways a r e maintained throughout the day and evening, annual v e h i c l e hours of t r a v e l per r o u t e would be 17,800 and annual v e h i c l e m i l e s of t r a v e l would be 142,000 f o r the Rosslyn-Foggy Bottom r o u t e , 171,000 f o r the Foggy Bottom-Dupont C i r c l e r o u t e , and 192,000 f o r the Rosslyn-Wisconsin/Massachusetts Avenues r o u t e . Annual o p e r a t i n g c o s t s i n 1979 d o l l a r s would be a p p r o x i m a t e l y $480,000 per r o u t e , or $1.44 m i l l i o n f o r the t h r e e r o u t e s combined. Operating t h e s e r o u t e s a t t e n minute headways would g i v e e f f e c t i v e f i v e minute headways along the p o r t i o n s of the r o u t e s which o v e r l a p . I f demand proved t o be h i g h enough t h a t a d d i t i o n a l buses would have t o be added, o p e r a t i n g c o s t s would i n c r e a s e p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y . The l a t e s t e s t i m a t e f o r c a p i t a l c o s t s f o r m i d - s i z e buses i s $95,000 per bus. To operate the s e r v i c e recommended, e l e v e n buses would be r e q u i r e d (nine i n s e r v i c e a t any one time, p l u s two s p a r e s ) , r e s u l t i n g i n a t o t a l c a p i t a l c o s t of $1.0 million. (4) T r a n s i t Marketing. As s t a t e d i n Chapter 1 , one of the o b j e c t i v e s f o r improving t r a n s p o r t a t i o n a c c e s s i n the Georgetown a r e a i s t o i n c r e a s e t r a n s i t ' s modal share of t r i p s t o , from, and through Georgetown. An e f f e c t i v e t r a n s i t marketing s t r a t e g y should be an i n t e g r a l p a r t of any t r a n s i t improvement package f o r the Georgetown a r e a . At the beginning of t h i s chapter a number of observed f i c i e n c i e s i n Georgetown a r e a t r a n s i t s e r v i c e were l i s t e d . deThe m a j o r i t y of t h e s e d e a l t w i t h shortcomings w i t h the a c t u a l s e r v i c e t h a t operates i n Georgetown. However, l a c k of awareness of t r a n s i t s e r v i c e t h a t i s a v a i l a b l e i n the Georgetown a r e a , by r e s i d e n t s , �employees, and v i s i t o r s i s one reason t r a n s i t ' s modal share i s not h i g h e r than i t i s today. I n a d d i t i o n many employers and commercial e s t a b l i s h m e n t s tend t o " s u b s i d i z e " t r a v e l t o and from Georgetown by auto w i t h o u t p r o v i d i n g s i m i l a r s u b s i d i e s f o r employees or c u s tomers who t r a v e l by t r a n s i t . For example the c o s t of p r o v i d i n g p a r k i n g f o r employees or customers i s o f t e n u n d e r w r i t t e n e i t h e r through the p r o v i s i o n of f r e e or low-cost spaces or through p a r k i n g v a l i d a t i o n programs w h i l e s i m i l a r schemes t o u n d e r w r i t e employers' and customers' t r a n s i t f a r e s g e n e r a l l y do not e x i s t . Finally, t r a n s i t ' s image i n t h e Georgetown a r e a needs t o be improved. Through a c o n c e r t e d m a r k e t i n g e f f o r t , t r a v e l l i n g t o and from Georgetown by t r a n s i t c o u l d be p e r c e i v e d as being " c h i c " or a t l e a s t no longer p e r c e i v e d as being " u n c h i c " by f e l l o w employees, shoppers, or r e s i d e n t s . I n order t h a t t r a n s i t can be more e f f e c t i v e t l y marketed i n Georgetown a f i v e element marketing s t r a t e g y i s o u t l i n e d below. (a) T r a n s i t i n f o r m a t i o n c e n t e r s . As noted above many p e r sons who l i v e , work, or v i s i t i n Georgetown a r e not f u l l y aware of what t r a n s i t s e r v i c e i s a v a i l a b l e f o r t h e i r t r a v e l t o and from Georgetown. One method f o r b e t t e r d i s s e m i n a t i n g i n f o r m a t i o n about t r a n s i t s e r v i c e i s t o s e t up t r a n s i t i n f o r m a t i o n c e n t e r s i n banks, s t o r e s , and r e s t a u r a n t s throughout Georgetown. The i n f o r m a t i o n c e n t e r s would not have t o be l a r g e , but should be a t t r a c t i v e , and p r o v i d e c l e a r i n f o r m a t i o n about what t r a n s i t s e r v i c e i s a v a i l a b l e . A map showing r o u t e s i n Georgetown c o u l d be d i s p l a y e d t o g e t h e r w i t h i n s t r u c t i o n s on how t o get between v a r i o u s p o i n t s i n Georgetown and key d e s t i n a t i o n s such as M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n s and downtown Washington. Each t r a n s i t i n f o r m a t i o n c e n t e r should a l s o c o n t a i n a supply of s c h e d u l e s f o r a l l bus r o u t e s s e r v i n g Georgetown. I n a d d i t i o n i n f o r m a t i o n about the advantages o f - t r a v e l l i n g t o Georgetown by t r a n s i t should be d i s p l a y e d . �(b) T r a n s i t i n f o r m a t i o n package f o r Georgetown employees. Much o f t h e i n f o r m a t i o n which would be d i s p l a y e d i n t h e proposed t r a n s i t i n f o r m a t i o n c e n t e r could be combined i n t o a package o f m a t e r i a l s about Georgetown t r a n s i t s e r v i c e f o r use by employees. A brochure o r s h o r t r e p o r t c o u l d be developed which c o n t a i n s a t r a n s i t r o u t e map o f t h e Georgetown a r e a , i n f o r m a t i o n on how t o use Metrobus and M e t r o r a i l t o g e t t o and from Georgetown, and i n f o r m a t i o n on t h e advantages o f t r a v e l by t r a n s i t , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n terms o f c o s t . The package o f m a t e r i a l s c o u l d a l s o i n c l u d e s c h e d u l e s f o r bus r o u t e s i n t h e Georgetown a r e a and i n f o r m a t i o n on t h e C o u n c i l o f Governments' computerized c a r p o o l matching program. S e t s o f packages c o u l d be made a v a i l a b l e t o Georgetown employers who c o u l d d i s t r i b u t e them t o c u r r e n t o r n e w l y - h i r e d employees. The package c o u l d a l s o be made a v a i l a b l e t o Georgetown r e s i d e n t s , perhaps through t h e C i t i z e n s A s s o c i a t i o n o f Georgetown. (c) Employers s u b s i d y o f t r a n s i t f a r e s . Employers have long s u b s i d i z e d t r a v e l t o work by auto f o r t h e i r employees through the p r o v i s i o n o f f r e e o r low-cost p a r k i n g spaces. I n the past few y e a r s t h e concept o f s u b s i d i z i n g employee t r a v e l t o work has been extended t o t r a n s i t t r a v e l through t h e i s s u a n c e o f t r a n s i t p a s s e s t o employees as a f r i n g e b e n e f i t . F i r m s i n Los Angeles, D a l l a s , Chicago, S e a t t l e , H a r t f o r d , Kansas C i t y , M i n n e a p o l i s , and now Washington a r e p r e s e n t l y paying p a r t o r a l l o f t h e i r employee's t r a n s i t f a r e s f o r t h e i r t r i p t o and from work. Congressional Q u a r t e r l y , i n J a n u a r y 1980, became t h e f i r s t Washington f i r m t o s u b s i d i z e t r a n s i t work t r i p s . Major employers who have subs i d i z e d t r a n s i t t r a v e l t o work have been a b l e t o c l a i m c r e d i t f o r doing t h e i r p a r t t o conserve energy, reduce t h e number o f c a r s on t h e r o a d s , ease c e n t e r c i t y c o n g e s t i o n , lower a i r pollution, and r e l i e v e p a r k i n g problems. F o r employers who p r o v i d e f r e e p a r k i n g t o t h e i r employees as a f r i n g e b e n e f i t , s h i f t s o f employees t o t r a n s i t o f t e n can mean s a v i n g s i n c o s t s f o r s u b s i d i z i n g t r a v e l t o work, o r can mean g r e a t e r a v a i l a b i l i t y o f p a r k i n g spaces f o r �customers. Employer s u b s i d i e s f o r t r a n s i t work t r i p s by employees should be s t r o n g l y encouraged i n t h e Georgetown a r e a . (d) T r a n s i t f a r e v a l i d a t i o n scheme. P a r k i n g v a l i d a t i o n schemes have long been used as an e f f e c t i v e marketing t o o l t o a t t r a c t p a t r o n s t o commercial e s t a b l i s h m e n t s by auto i n a r e a s w i t h high p a r k i n g c o s t s . The concept can be l o g i c a l l y extended t o t r a n s i t p a t r o n s as w e l l . Under a t r a n s i t f a r e v a l i d a t i o n program, commercial e s t a b l i s h m e n t s buy tokens from t h e t r a n s i t agency and g i v e tokens t o p a t r o n s who have made a minimum purchase and r e q u e s t a token. A number o f s t o r e s i n S i l v e r S p r i n g p r e s e n t l y p a r t i c i p a t e i n such a program where a token i s worth a f u l l f a r e on any Montgomery County Ride-On bus o r 25 c e n t s o f f a f a r e on any Metrobus anytime, anywhere t h e buses r u n . The program i n Montgomery County i s marketed under t h e name "Fare Share" and has proven t o be q u i t e s u c c e s s f u l . A s i m i l a r program i n Georgetown c o u l d be an e f f e c t i v e t o o l t o a t t r a c t t r a n s i t p a t r o n s t o Georgetown shops, r e s t a u r a n t s , and e n t e r t a i n m e n t s p o t s . (e) T r a n s i t i n f o r m a t i o n brochure f o r p a t r o n s o f Georgetown shops, r e s t a u r a n t s , and e n t e r t a i n m e n t s p o t s . T h i s element o f t h e proposed t r a n s i t m a r k e t i n g s t r a t e g y i s an e x t e n s i o n o f t h e t r a n s i t i n f o r m a t i o n c e n t e r and t r a n s i t i n f o r m a t i o n package element. Howe v e r , t h i s element would focus upon v i s i t o r s t o Georgetown's commercial e s t a b l i s h m e n t s . A brochure c o u l d be developed which would c o n t a i n i n f o r m a t i o n on t r a n s i t r o u t e s i n t h e Georgetown a r e a and how t o a c c e s s M e t r o r a i l v i a t h e s e r o u t e s . The brochure could a l s o c o n t a i n i n f o r m a t i o n about t h e t r a n s i t f a r e v a l i d a t i o n scheme i f such a scheme were implemented. T h i s brochure should be d i f f e r e n t from t h e brochure developed f o r employees because i t would be n e c e s s a r y t h a t a brochure aimed a t Georgetown v i s i t o r s be c o n c i s e and e y e c a t c h i n g i f i t i s t o be n o t i c e d and p i c k e d up a t c a s h i e r s t a n d s i n commercial e s t a b l i s h m e n t s . �CHAPTER 6. CANDIDATE GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY SOUTHERN ENTRANCE ACTIONS One o f t h e k e y i s s u e s t o be addressed i n t h e Georgetown Area A c c e s s A l t e r n a t i v e s Study i s t h e upgrading o f t h e Canal Road ent r a n c e t o Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y so t r a f f i c movements i n a l l d i r e c t i o n s i n t o and o u t o f t h e U n i v e r s i t y can be made a t t h i s l o c a t i o n . The adopted Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y Master P l a n c a l l s f o r t h e Canal Road e n t r a n c e t o become t h e p r i n c i p a l a c c e s s p o i n t t o t h e Main and E a s t Campus o f t h e U n i v e r s i t y , thereby removing much o f t h e e x i s t ing University-generated commuter and t r u c k t r a f f i c from l o c a l r e s i d e n t i a l s t r e e t s w i t h i n Georgetown. EXISTING TRANSPORTATION ACCESS TO GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY I n A p r i l 1979, a s u r v e y was taken o f Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y s t u d e n t s , f a c u l t y , and s t a f f t o determine t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f e x i s t i n g a c c e s s p a t t e r n s t o t h e u n i v e r s i t y . The f i n d i n g s o f t h i s s u r v e y a r e p r e s e n t e d i n " T e c h n i c a l Memorandum No. 4: Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Survey." Some o f t h e key f i n d i n g s o f the survey as they a f f e c t t h e a n a l y s i s o f upgrading t h e Southern E n t r a n c e t o the U n i v e r s i t y a r e a s f o l l o w s : Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y draws a p p r o x i m a t e l y 9,780 commuters t o i t s campus each weekday. Of t h e s e , 59% a r e d e s t i n e d t o t h e Main and E a s t Campus and 4 1 % t o t h e Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y Medical Center. F i f t y p e r c e n t o f t h e U n i v e r s i t y ' s commuters a r r i v e by auto w i t h t h a t percentage s p l i t as follows: 36% d r i v e and park i n U n i v e r s i t y l o t s or g a r a g e s , 9% d r i v e and park o n - s t r e e t , 5% r i d e as a passenger i n an automobile. A r r i v a l s a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y peak a t 9:00 AM w i t h 4 5% o f a l l a r r i v a l s o c c u r r i n g between 8:00 and 9:00 AM. D e p a r t u r e s a r e l e s s peaked w i t h t h e peak hour (5-6 PM) r e p r e s e n t i n g 28% o f t h e t o t a l day's d e p a r t u r e s . Auto a c c e s s t o t h e Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y M e d i c a l Center i s p r e s e n t l y v i a R e s e r v o i r Road w i t h a c c e s s p o i n t s a t f o u r l o c a t i o n s along R e s e r v o i r Road. The E a s t and Main Campus o f t h e U n i v e r s i t y �can be a c c e s s e d a t t h r e e major p o i n t s : Healy C i r c l e a t 37th and 0 S t r e e t s , the P r o s p e c t S t r e e t E n t r a n c e a t 37th and P r o s p e c t S t r e e t s , and the Southern E n t r a n c e o f f Canal Road. At the Southern E n t r a n c e l e f t t u r n s i n t o and out of the campus cannot be made, thus l i m i t i n g the amount of a c c e s s which i s made through t h i s p o i n t . V e h i c u l a r t r a f f i c counts made i n March and A p r i l of 1977 show t h a t d u r i n g the hours between 7 AM and 6 PM E a s t and Main Campus a r r i v a l s and d e p a r t u r e s a r e s p l i t among the 3 e n t r a n c e s as f o l l o w s : - ^ % Vehicular Arrivals % Vehicular Departures Healy C i r c l e Prospect S t r e e t Entrance Southern E n t r a n c e 44 44 38 43 18 13 100 100 The v a s t m a j o r i t y (over 80%) of v e h i c u l a r t r a f f i c a c c e s s i n g the E a s t and Main Campus does so by p a s s i n g through the r e s i d e n t i a l a r e a s e a s t of campus. I n c l u d e d i n t h i s t r a f f i c i s a s i g n i f i c a n t number of t r u c k s which s e r v e t h e U n i v e r s i t y as w e l l as a l l GUTS buses. Most of the t r a f f i c which comes from or i s d e s t i n e d t o V i r g i n i a must wind i t s way along M S t r e e t , 33rd or 34th S t r e e t , and P r o s p e c t S t r e e t t o r e a c h campus. T r a f f i c approaching from the Canal Road-MacArthur B o u l e v a r d C o r r i d o r t o the northwest must t r a v e l along R e s e r v o i r Road and 35th S t r e e t , t h e r e b y c o n t r i b u t i n g t o the a l r e a d y h i g h l e v e l s of c o n g e s t i o n along t h e s e s t r e e t s . Traffic which l e a v e s the U n i v e r s i t y v i a t h e Southern E n t r a n c e and w i s h e s t o c r o s s Key B r i d g e or t r a v e l eastbound toward downtown Washington must c i r c l e a l l the way around Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y b e f o r e c o n t i n u i n g on i t s way. IMPACTS OF GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY MASTER PLAN ON ACCESS S e v e r a l p o r t i o n s o f the Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y Master P l a n c a l l f o r changes w i t h i n the U n i v e r s i t y which w i l l s i g n i f i c a n t l y 1/ Data d e r i v e d from t r a f f i c counts provided by Stephen G. P e t e r s e n , P.E. �impact a c c e s s and e g r e s s p a t t e r n s t o and from the U n i v e r s i t y . E x i s t i n g p a r k i n g i s p r o v i d e d on the Main and E a s t Campus a t a t o t a l of 10 l o c a t i o n s as shown i n F i g u r e 22. u l t i m a t e p l a n s c a l l f o r v i r t u a l l y a l l s u r f a c e p a r k i n g on the Main and E a s t Campus t o be e l i m i n a t e d w i t h these spaces being r e p l a c e d by a new p a r k i n g garage which would be l o c a t e d j u s t t o the n o r t h of e x i s t i n g S u r f a c e L o t 3. T h i s garage would be i n a m u l t i p l e use s t r u c t u r e which would c o n t a i n f l u i d i z e d energy s t o r a g e beds below the p a r k i n g l e v e l s and r e c r e a t i o n f i e l d s on t h e r o o f of the s t r u c t u r e . With the e l i m i n a t i o n of the s u r f a c e l o t s which a r e p r e s e n t l y accessed v i a Healy C i r c l e , the Healy C i r c l e E n t r a n c e would become a ceremonial e n t r a n c e and would no longer s e r v e as a major v e h i c u l a r a c c e s s p o i n t t o the U n i v e r s i t y . With the s h i f t i n p a r k i n g t o the proposed p a r k i n g garage and the c l o s i n g of Healy C i r c l e as an a c c e s s p o i n t , the Master P l a n c a l l s f o r the Canal Road e n t r a n c e t o become the major e n t r a n c e to the U n i v e r s i t y . I n order t o be a b l e t o s e r v e such a f u n c t i o n , i t would be n e c e s s a r y t h a t a l l t u r n i n g movements i n t o and out of the U n i v e r s i t y a t t h i s p o i n t be a l l o w e d . JUSTIFICATION FOR PROVIDING FULL ACCESS AT THE CANAL ROAD ENTRANCE At the p r e s e n t t i m e , Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y i s the s i n g l e l a r g e s t t r a f f i c g e n e r a t o r i n t h e Georgetown a r e a and r e p r e s e n t s app r o x i m a t e l y o n e - t h i r d of t h e t o t a l Georgetown p o p u l a t i o n and employment. The 8,387 s t u d e n t s , 3,834 s t a f f members, and 828 f a c u l t y members r e p r e s e n t a t o t a l U n i v e r s i t y p o p u l a t i o n of 13,049. The t o t a l number of n o n - U n i v e r s i t y r e s i d e n t s i n Georgetown i s e s t i m a t e d t o be 12,700,and t o t a l n o n - U n i v e r s i t y Georgetown employment i s e s t i m a t e d t o be 13,800. A t r a f f i c g e n e r a t o r the s i z e of Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y should l o g i c a l l y have i t s major a c c e s s p o i n t s along a r t e r i a l s t r e e t s which a r e designed t o c a r r y l a r g e volumes of t r a f f i c . Yet, a t t h e p r e s e n t t i m e , 82 p e r c e n t of the t r a f f i c a c c e s s i n g the E a s t and Main Campus of t h e U n i v e r s i t y does so by t r a v e r s i n g l o c a l neighborhood s t r e e t s i n Georgetown. I n c l u d e d i n t h i s t r a f f i c i s a �GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY PARKING �a l a r g e number o f d e l i v e r y t r u c k s and GUTS buses. I t would be des i r a b l e t o remove as much o f t h i s t r a f f i c as p o s s i b l e from l o c a l r e s i d e n t i a l s t r e e t s and p u t i t i n s t e a d on a r t e r i a l s t r e e t s , whose main purpose i s t o c a r r y l a r g e volumes o f t r a f f i c . Although p r e s e n t p l a n s do n o t c a l l f o r s i g n i f i c a n t i n c r e a s e s i n t r a f f i c generated by t h e U n i v e r s i t y , t r u c k t r a f f i c w i l l i n c r e a s e somewhat w i t h t h e a d d i t i o n o f 12 l a r g e c o a l t r u c k s and 1 l a r g e lime t r u c k making d e l i v e r i e s t o the new Atmospheric F l u i d i z e d Bed (AFB) Power P l a n t . The most d i r e c t a c c e s s p o i n t f o r t h e s e t r u c k d e l i v e r i e s would be through the Canal Road e n t r a n c e . However, a t t h e p r e s e n t t i m e , t h e t r u c k s ( a s w e l l a s o t h e r t r a f f i c u t i l i z i n g t h e Southern E n t r a n c e f o r both a c c e s s and e g r e s s ) must c i r c l e around t h e p e r i m e t e r o f t h e campus on l o c a l Georgetown s t r e e t s t o e i t h e r e n t e r o r l e a v e v i a t h e Southern Entrance. GUTS buses (as w e l l as o t h e r Key B r i d g e t r a f f i c ) t o and from V i r g i n i a p r e s e n t l y use l o c a l Georgetown s t r e e t s t o t h e e a s t o f campus and c o n t r i b u t e t o t h e c r i t i c a l t u r n i n g volumes a t t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n o f M S t r e e t and Key B r i d g e . S i g n i f i c a n t d e l a y s a r e encount e r e d both a t t h i s i n t e r s e c t i o n and i n making t h e c i r c u i t o u s r o u t e through t h e Georgetown s t r e e t s e a s t o f campus. A primary o b j e c t i v e o f t h e U n i v e r s i t y i s t o p r o v i d e a high l e v e l o f t r a n s i t s e r v i c e between t h e U n i v e r s i t y and M e t r o r a i l i n order t o induce more persons a c c e s s i n g t h e U n i v e r s i t y t o s w i t c h t o t r a n s i t . By p e r m i t t i n g GUTS buses from V i r g i n i a t o a c c e s s t h e U n i v e r s i t y v i a t h e Southern E n t r a n c e , s u b s t a n t i a l t r a n s i t t r a v e l time s a v i n g s t o t h e R o s s l y n M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n and o t h e r p o i n t s i n V i r g i n i a would be e x p e r i e n c e d , t h u s s i g n i f i c a n t l y improving t h e e f f i c i e n c y o f t h e GUTS system. Upgrading t h e Canal Road e n t r a n c e t o t h e U n i v e r s i t y could a l s o o f f e r t h e p o t e n t i a l f o r s i g n i f i c a n t l y improving emergency v e h i c l e a c c e s s t o t h e Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y Medical C e n t e r . Ambulances r e sponding t o a c c i d e n t s along t h e C a n a l Road C o r r i d o r p r e s e n t l y t a k e v i c t i m s t o George Washington U n i v e r s i t y Medical Center r a t h e r than t h e c l o s e r Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y Medical Center because q u i c k a c c e s s cannot be made t o t h e Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y Medical C e n t e r . �PHYSICAL SETTING The number of a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r upgrading t h e Canal Road ent r a n c e t o Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y i s l i m i t e d by t h e p h y s i c a l s e t t i n g i n which t h e e n t r a n c e i s l o c a t e d . The C&O Canal p a r a l l e l s Canal Road on i t s south s i d e ( s e e F i g u r e 2 3 ) . The r e t a i n i n g w a l l on the n o r t h s i d e o f t h e Canal i s o n l y 2 f e e t from the curb of Canal Road. The C&O Canal i s a r e g i s t e r e d h i s t o r i c a l landmark and i s owned and m a i n t a i n e d as a n a t i o n a l park by t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s Government. Any change i n alignment or widening of Canal Road t o t h e south would encroach upon t h e c a n a l and r e s u l t i n h i g h l y u n d e s i r a b l e impacts . Immediately t o t h e n o r t h o f Canal Road t h e Potomac P a l i s a d e s r i s e a p p r o x i m a t e l y 50-55 f e e t t o t h e p l a t e a u upon which Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y ' s lower campus i s s i t u a t e d . The Potomac P a l i s a d e s a r e an outcropping of igneous rock which r u n along t h e Potomac R i v e r f o r a d i s t a n c e o f n e a r l y 200 m i l e s . The e a s t e r n end o f t h i s outcropping i s l o c a t e d j u s t t o t h e west of Key B r i d g e . P o r t i o n s of the f a c e of t h e Potomac P a l i s a d e s a r e o n l y f o u r f e e t from the n o r t h curb o f Canal Road i n t h e a r e a immediately t o the west of t h e U n i v e r s i t y ' s Southern E n t r a n c e . The N a t i o n a l Park S e r v i c e i s i n the midst o f an a c t i v e program t o t r y t o p r e s e r v e t h e Potomac P a l i s a d e s i n i t s n a t u r a l s t a t e t o as g r e a t a degree as p o s s i b l e . Any change of t h e alignment or widening o f Canal Road t o the n o r t h i n the s e c t i o n i n which t h e f a c e o f t h e P a l i s a d e s i s w i t h i n o n l y a few f e e t o f Canal Road would encroach upon t h e f a c e of the P a l i s a d e s . I t i s worth n o t i n g t h a t f o r a d i s t a n c e of a p p r o x i m a t e l y 200 f e e t t o t h e e a s t o f t h e e x i s t i n g Southern E n t r a n c e t o t h e U n i v e r s i t y , t h e r e i s no r o c k o u t c r o p p i n g , t h e s u r f a c e being d i r t f i l l . Thus, movement o f t h e e n t r a n c e t o t h e e a s t c o u l d p e r m i t some r e a lignment o f C a n a l Road w i t h o u t e n c r o a c h i n g upon t h e rock f a c e of the P a l i s a d e s . The e x i s t i n g e l e v a t i o n o f C a n a l Road a t t h e Southern E n t r a n c e t o Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y i s 50 f e e t above s e a l e v e l . The p l a t e a u ��a t the top of the c l i f f f a c e averages 103 f e e t above sea l e v e l i n e l e v a t i o n , r e s u l t i n g i n the need f o r v e h i c l e s e n t e r i n g the campus t o overcome a grade d i f f e r e n t i a l of 53 f e e t . The e x i s t i n g roadway i n t o the U n i v e r s i t y runs a t a 6 p e r c e n t grade f o r much of i t s length. DESCRIPTION OF SOUTHERN ENTRANCE ALTERNATIVES A number of a l t e r n a t i v e s have been developed f o r the Southe r n E n t r a n c e t o Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y based upon the p h y s i c a l cons t r a i n t s i d e n t i f i e d i n the p r e v i o u s s e c t i o n , t r a f f i c o p e r a t i o n cons i d e r a t i o n s , and the d e s i r e of Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y to make the Southern E n t r a n c e the main a c c e s s p o i n t to the campus. For the purpose of a l t e r n a t i v e s a n a l y s i s , the a l t e r n a t i v e s w i l l be d i v i d e d i n t o p h y s i c a l a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r the i n t e r s e c t i o n of Canal Road and the Southern E n t r a n c e , o p e r a t i o n a l a l t e r n a t i v e s both f o r the Southern E n t r a n c e i n t e r s e c t i o n and o t h e r i n t e r s e c t i o n s i n the Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y a r e a , and a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r p e r m i t t i n g v e h i c l e s to overcome the grade d i f f e r e n t i a l between C a n a l Road and the p l a t e a u on which the U n i v e r s i t y i s l o c a t e d . The f i n a l Southern E n t r a n c e a l t e r n a t i v e would c o n s i s t of a package of one of each of the types of a l t e r n a t i v e s i d e n t i f i e d above. PHYSICAL INTERSECTION ALTERNATIVES Working w i t h i n the p h y s i c a l c o n s t r a i n t s of the g e n e r a l l o c a t i o n of the Southern E n t r a n c e to Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y , s i x p h y s i c a l i n t e r s e c t i o n a l t e r n a t i v e s were i d e n t i f i e d . These a l t e r n a t i v e s are as f o l l o w s : (1) (2) N u l l a l t e r n a t i v e : the i n t e r s e c t i o n would be l e f t as i t i s today w i t h no l e f t t u r n s from the Univ e r s i t y t o eastbound Canal Road or from eastbound C a n a l Road t o the U n i v e r s i t y a l l o w e d . At grade s i g n a l i z e d i n t e r s e c t i o n a t p r e s e n t a c c e s s l o c a t i o n w i t h no w i d e n i n g or change i n C a n a l Road a l i g n m e n t . Under t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e an opening �would be made i n t h e e x i s t i n g median s t i p through which l e f t t u r n s c o u l d be made, but no t u r n bays would be i n s t a l l e d . (3) At grade s i g n a l i z e d i n t e r s e c t i o n a t p r e s e n t acc e s s l o c a t i o n w i t h p r o v i s i o n of a 200 f o o t l e f t t u r n bay from eastbound Canal Road i n t o the U n i v e r s i t y and a r e a l i g n m e n t of westbound Canal Road to a maximum of 12 f e e t n o r t h of i t s e x i s t i n g alignment. (4) At grade s i g n a l i z e d i n t e r s e c t i o n 200 f e e t to the e a s t o f t h e e x i s t i n g U n i v e r s i t y e n t r a n c e w i t h prov i s i o n of a 200 f o o t l e f t t u r n bay from eastbound Canal Road and a r e a l i g n m e n t o f westbound Canal Road to a maximum of 12 f e e t n o r t h of i t s e x i s t i n g alignment. Grade s e p a r a t e d i n t e r c h a n g e w i t h f l y o v e r ramps c a r r y i n g l e f t t u r n i n g movements i n t o and out o f Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y . A t h i r d roadway w i t h t h r e e l a n e s would be b u i l t along t h e c r e s t of the Potomac P a l i s a d e s . T h i s roadway would be used by westbound Canal Road t r a f f i c , w i t h perhaps a r e v e r s i b l e l a n e t o accommodate AM peak l o a d s . The e x i s t i n g westbound l a n e s would become an a c c e s s road t o s e r v e U n i versity traffic. (5) (6) OPERATIONAL ALTERNATIVES A number of o p e r a t i o n a l a l t e r n a t i v e s a r e a v a i l a b l e , which when combined w i t h c e r t a i n p h y s i c a l a l t e r n a t i v e s , w i l l p r e v e n t s e v e r e c o n g e s t i o n from o c c u r i n g on Canal Road and o t h e r nearby roadways. The o p e r a t i o n a l a l t e r n a t i v e s c o n s i d e r e d i n t h i s a n a l y s i s are as f o l l o w s : (1) A l l o w a l l t u r n i n g movements i n t o and out of Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y a t a l l t i m e s . (2) (3) P r o h i b i t l e f t t u r n s i n t o and out of Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y by a l l v e h i c l e s d u r i n g peak p e r i o d s , a l l o w i n g f u l l a c c e s s d u r i n g the remainder o f the day. P r o h i b i t l e f t t u r n s i n t o and out of Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y by a l l v e h i c l e s , e x c e p t buses and emergency v e h i c l e s , d u r i n g peak p e r i o d s , a l l o w ing f u l l a c c e s s d u r i n g the remainder of the day. �(4) (5) (6) P r o h i b i t l e f t t u r n s i n t o and o u t o f Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y a t a l l t i m e s , except t o buses and emergency v e h i c l e s . P r o h i b i t l e f t t u r n s i n t o and o u t o f Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y d u r i n g t h e AM peak o n l y . P r o h i b i t l e f t t u r n s out o f Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y d u r i n g t h e AM peak. ALTERNATIVES TO OVERCOME GRADE DIFFERENTIAL BETWEEN CANAL ROAD AND MAIN CAMPUS (1) (2) (3) Use t h e e x i s t i n g roadway. A t t h e midpoint o f t h e e x i s t i n g roadway r e v e r s e the roadway d i r e c t i o n t o make a U-shaped roadway. B u i l d a s t r u c t u r e c o n t a i n i n g c i r c u l a r ramps t o overcome t h e grade d i f f e r e n t i a l . COMPLEMENTARY ALTERNATIVES I n a d d i t i o n t o t h e a l t e r n a t i v e s l i s t e d above f o r upgrading the Southern E n t r a n c e i n t o Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y , s e v e r a l complementary a l t e r n a t i v e s were i n v e s t i g a t e d which c o u l d m i t i g a t e some o f the t r a f f i c impacts o f t h e Southern E n t r a n c e . I n a d d i t i o n t o those l i s t e d , many o f t h e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n management schemes being i n v e s t i g a t e d both f o r t h e U n i v e r s i t y and t h e Georgetown community could r e s u l t i n improved t r a f f i c o p e r a t i o n s . The complementary a l t e r n a t i v e s which were d i r e c t l y i n v e s t i g a t e d i n r e l a t i o n t o t h e Southern Entrance a r e as f o l l o w s : (1) I n c o r p o r a t e a double l e f t t u r n a t t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n of Canal and F o x h a l l Roads f o r westbound Canal Road t r a f f i c d u r i n g t h e PM peak. (2) Maintain the Prospect S t r e e t Entrance t o the Univ e r s i t y a s a major e n t r a n c e f o r v e h i c l e s a c c e s s i n g the campus from t h e n o r t h and e a s t and t o p r o v i d e a r e l i e f v a l v e t o t h e C a n a l Road E n t r a n c e d u r i n g p e r i o d s o f peak t r a f f i c f l o w . (3) B u i l d an e n t r a n c e t o t h e proposed Main Campus p a r k i n g s t r u c t u r e from R e s e r v o i r Road. �ANALYSIS OF TRAFFIC IMPACTS OF AN UPGRADED SOUTHERN ENTRANCE As p a r t of the t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s u r v e y of Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y s t u d e n t s , f a c u l t y , and s t a f f , respondents were asked t o i n d i c a t e t h e i r t r i p o r i g i n s , d e s t i n a t i o n s , a r r i v a l t i m e s , and d e p a r t u r e times f o r a l l t r i p s t y p i c a l l y made d u r i n g a w e e k . i ^ The responses t o t h e s e q u e s t i o n s were expanded t o d e r i v e e s t i m a t e s of the t o t a l number o f v e h i c l e s a r r i v i n g and d e p a r t i n g campus both on weekdays and weekends. F i g u r e 2 4 shows the percentage of campus weekday a r r i v a l s and d e p a r t u r e s by time of day. I t i s e s t i m a t e d t h a t over the course o f a t y p i c a l weekday a t o t a l o f 8,900 persons a r r i v e a t and l e a v e campus, 53% of w h i c h a r e d e s t i n e d t o t h e Main and E a s t campus, w i t h the remainder d e s t i n e d t o the Medical Center. Survey responses i n d i c a t e t h a t the peak a r r i v a l hour on campus i s between 8 and 9 AM when 45% o f a l l a r r i v a l s t a k e p l a c e . Departures t a k e p l a c e over a more spread out p e r i o d w i t h t h e peak hour (5-6 PM) a c c o u n t i n g f o r o n l y 28% of the t o t a l d a i l y d e p a r t u r e s . Of the persons who a r r i v e on campus d u r i n g the peak AM hour, 50%, or a p p r o x i mately 2,000, d r i v e an auto which they park i n a campus p a r k i n g l o t . Of t h e s e , 57% a r e d e s t i n e d t o t h e Medical Center and would not use the proposed Southern E n t r a n c e . I f t h e P r o s p e c t S t r e e t entrance t o the Main and E a s t Campus were l e f t open, another 10% of the autos could be expected t o use t h a t e n t r a n c e . The remaining 33% (660) a r e t r a v e l l e r s which c o u l d be expected t o use the Canal Road ent r a n c e i f i t were open t o a l l t r a v e l movements a t a l l t i m e s . Of these 660, a p p r o x i m a t e l y 37% (246) would come from the west and 67% (414) would come from the e a s t ( p r i m a r i l y a c r o s s t h e Key Bridge from V i r g i n i a ) . An a n a l y s i s of e x i s t i n g t r a f f i c i n t o and out of the U n i v e r 2/ s i t y d u r i n g peak p e r i o d s — shows t h a t the peak hour f o r a r r i v a l s 1/ 2/ R i v k i n A s s o c i a t e s I n c . " T e c h n i c a l Memorandum 4: Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Survey," August 1979. T r a f f i c counts t a k e n M a r c h - A p r i l 1977 by Stephen G. P e t e r s e n , P.E. �TIME O F DAY O F CAMPUS ARRIVALS AND D E P A R T U R E S �i s a c t u a l l y 8:30-9:30 AM and s u r v e y respondents tended t o i n d i c a t e e a r l i e r a r r i v a l t i n e s than a c t u a l l y o c c u r . T h e r e f o r e , by u s i n g AM peak hour demand numbers d e r i v e d from t h e s u r v e y a c o n s e r v a t i v e a n a l y s i s was performed. Use of t h e s e numbers a l s o tends t o make the a n a l y s i s c o n s e r v a t i v e because modal s h i f t s which can be expected to occur as a r e s u l t of t r a n s i t s e r v i c e improvements which w i l l t a k e p l a c e i n the n e x t s e v e r a l y e a r s were not t a k e n i n t o account. A l though t r a f f i c i n t o and out of the U n i v e r s i t y i s s i g n i f i c a n t l y l e s s d u r i n g the PM peak hour, c a p a c i t y a n a l y s e s were a l s o performed f o r t h i s time p e r i o d because g e n e r a l commuter t r a f f i c on Canal Road i s heavier a t t h a t time. F i g u r e s 2 5 and 26 show t r a f f i c movements which c o u l d be expected t o be made a t t h e C a n a l Road e n t r a n c e i f a l l t u r n i n g movements were a l l o w e d both under the c o n d i t i o n i n which the P r o s p e c t S t r e e t e n t r a n c e i s l e f t open and t h e c o n d i t i o n i n which i t i s c l o s e d . During the AM peak p e r i o d , Canal Road eastbound p r e s e n t l y f l o w s n e a r l y a t c a p a c i t y . I n order t o accommodate the v e h i c l e s t u r n i n g l e f t i n t o the U n i v e r s i t y from Canal Road, i t would be nece s s a r y t h a t a l e f t t u r n bay be p r o v i d e d which c o n t a i n s enough s t o r age space f o r the l e f t t u r n i n g movement. Due t o the p h y s i c a l cons t r a i n t s on e i t h e r s i d e of C a n a l Road, t h e l e f t t u r n bay would be l i m i t e d t o 200 f e e t i n l e n g t h . T h i s l e n g t h should be adequate i f a s h o r t c y c l e l e n g t h i s m a i n t a i n e d , a long l e f t arrow i s m a i n t a i n e d , or a p e r m i s s i v e l e f t on s o l i d green i s a l l o w e d . Because t r a f f i c on Canal Road eastbound i s p r e s e n t l y so heavy d u r i n g the AM peak hour ( 2 9 4 7 ) , i t might be n e c e s s a r y t h a t l e f t t u r n s out of the U n i v e r s i t y onto Canal Road eastbound be p r o h i b i t e d d u r i n g the AM peak p e r i o d . During t h e PM peak hour westbound C a n a l Road t r a f f i c volumes are not as heavy as eastbound AM peak hour volumes, so l e f t t u r n s out of the U n i v e r s i t y can be more e a s i l y accommodated. I f a s i n g l e l a n e i s p r o v i d e d f o r l e f t t u r n s out of U n i v e r s i t y , the L e v e l of S e r v i c e f o r the i n t e r s e c t i o n would be "E." However, p r o v i s i o n of a double l e f t t u r n l a n e from t h e U n i v e r s i t y would a l l o w t r a f f i c t o c o n t i n u e t o move a t L e v e l o f S e r v i c e "D." Therefore, i t i s ��AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC AT GU SOUTHERN ENTRANCE IF PROSPECT S T R E E T ENTRANCE IS CLOSED �recommended t h a t t h e e x i t from t h e U n i v e r s i t y be designed such t h a t a double l e f t t u r n i s p r o v i d e d f o r . Opening the Canal Road e n t r a n c e t o the U n i v e r s i t y could be expected t o impact two o t h e r s i g n a l i z e d i n t e r s e c t i o n s i n the immed i a t e v i c i n i t y , t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n of M S t r e e t and Key B r i d g e and the i n t e r s e c t i o n o f Canal and F o x h a l l Roads. The primary impact of the change i n U n i v e r s i t y approach p a t t e r n s d u r i n g the AM peak on the i n t e r s e c t i o n of M S t r e e t and Key B r i d g e i s to s h i f t a number of r i g h t t u r n i n g v e h i c l e s t o making l e f t t u r n s . Because o f the l a r g e r e d u c t i o n s i n Key B r i d g e t r a f f i c volumes s i n c e the opening of the B l u e L i n e and s i n c e the r i g h t t u r n volumes o f f Key B r i d g e a r e the c r i t i c a l volumes a t t h i s t i m e , i t i s f e l t t h a t w i t h minor s i g n a l t i m i n g changes t h e i n c r e a s e d l e f t t u r n volumes c o u l d be accommodated d u r i n g the AM peak. During the PM peak, when more s i g n i f i c a n t cong e s t i o n o c c u r s , t h e e f f e c t of the s h i f t i n U n i v e r s i t y t r a f f i c would be t o decrease the c r i t i c a l l e f t t u r n volumes from westbound M S t r e e t t o Key B r i d g e and i n c r e a s e the n o n - c r i t i c a l r i g h t t u r n v o l umes from eastbound M S t r e e t t o Key B r i d g e , thereby improving l e v e l of s e r v i c e . I t should be noted t h a t l e v e l of s e r v i c e a t the i n t e r s e c t i o n of M S t r e e t and 33rd and 34th S t r e e t s should a l s o be improved d u r i n g both peak p e r i o d s because s i g n i f i c a n t r e d u c t i o n s i n U n i v e r s i t y t r a f f i c w i l l be made a t both i n t e r s e c t i o n s . The i n t e r s e c t i o n which w i l l be most n e g a t i v e l y impacted by the upgrading of t h e Southern E n t r a n c e w i l l be the i n t e r s e c t i o n of F o x h a l l and Canal Roads. An a n a l y s i s of e x i s t i n g t r a f f i c volumes a t t h i s i n t e r s e c t i o n shows t h a t i t runs over c a p a c i t y both d u r i n g the AM and PM peaks w i t h the PM peak e x p e r i e n c i n g the l o n g e s t backups. I t i s not uncommon f o r westbound Canal Road t r a f f i c t o back up beyond t h e Southern E n t r a n c e , a d i s t a n c e of over 1,000 f e e t . To a l l e v i a t e some of t h i s c o n g e s t i o n and t o p e r m i t the a d d i t i o n a l U n i v e r s i t y t r a f f i c t o e x i t onto Canal Road, i t i s recommended t h a t t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n of Canal Road and F o x h a l l Road be r e c o n s t r u c t e d to i n c o r p o r a t e a double l e f t t u r n l a n e onto Canal Road d u r i n g the PM peak p e r i o d . With e x i s t i n g t r a f f i c l e v e l s the i n t e r s e c t i o n �o p e r a t i o n would improve t o L e v e l o f S e r v i c e "C." The a d d i t i o n a l U n i v e r s i t y t r a f f i c would r e s u l t i n a L e v e l o f S e r v i c e on t h e borderl i n e between "C" and "D" i f a double l e f t t u r n onto Canal Road i s permitted. I t should be noted t h a t t h e D.C. Department o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n p l a n s t o implement a double l e f t t u r n a t t h i s l o c a t i o n d u r i n g t h e Summer o f 1980. The a d d i t i o n a l U n i v e r s i t y t r a f f i c through t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n of Canal and F o x h a l l Roads d u r i n g t h e AM peak w i l l r e s u l t i n a f u r t h e r d e t e r i o r a t i o n o f t r a f f i c c o n d i t i o n s d u r i n g t h a t time p e r i o d . However, i t should be noted t h a t t h e l a r g e m a j o r i t y o f U n i v e r s i t y a r r i v a l s d u r i n g t h e 8:00 t o 9:00 AM p e r i o d a r e c o n c e n t r a t e d d u r i n g the l a t t e r p a r t o f t h e hour when t h e g e n e r a l commuter peak has begun t o l e s s e n somewhat. One o f t h e p r i m a r y t r a f f i c impacts which would r e s u l t from the opening o f t h e Canal Road e n t r a n c e and t h e e l i m i n a t i o n o f a c c e s s through Healy C i r c l e would be a l e s s e n i n g o f t r a f f i c volumes on R e s e r v o i r Road. I t i s e s t i m a t e d t h a t over 200 v e h i c l e s which p r e s e n t l y use R e s e r v o i r Road d u r i n g t h e peak AM hour would no longer use R e s e r v o i r Road, t h e r e b y s i g n i f i c a n t l y improving t r a f f i c flow a t s e v e r a l s e v e r e l y congested i n t e r s e c t i o n s , i n c l u d i n g t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n s o f F o x h a l l and R e s e r v o i r Roads and 35th S t r e e t and R e s e r v o i r Road. ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS OF SOUTHERN ENTRANCE ALTERNATIVES The a n a l y s i s o f impacts of Southern E n t r a n c e a l t e r n a t i v e s i s d i v i d e d i n t h e same manner t h e d e s c r i p t i o n o f a l t e r n a t i v e s was e a r l i e r i n t h e c h a p t e r , i . e . , an a n a l y s i s of t h e p h y s i c a l i n t e r s e c t i o n a l t e r n a t i v e s , o p e r a t i o n a l a l t e r n a t i v e s , and a l t e r n a t i v e s t o overcome t h e grade d i f f e r e n t i a l between Canal Road and t h e Main Campus. �Physical Intersection Alternatives (1) N u l l a l t e r n a t i v e . The d i s a d v a n t a g e s of m a i n t a i n i n g the Southern E n t r a n c e as i t i s a t p r e s e n t have been o u t l i n e d e a r l i e r i n t h i s c h a p t e r . S i g n i f i c a n t d e l a y s a r e encountered by v e h i c l e s a c c e s s i n g and e g r e s s i n g Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y by being f o r c e d to t r a v e l on l o c a l Georgetown s t r e e t s . I f the Southern E n t r a n c e i s not upgraded and the Healy C i r c l e E n t r a n c e i s c l o s e d , the P r o s p e c t S t r e e t E n t r a n c e would become the o n l y f u l l y a c c e s s i b l e e n t r a n c e to the U n i v e r s i t y , r e s u l t i n g i n a t r a f f i c o v e r l o a d of P r o s p e c t S t r e e t . The h i g h e r number of v e h i c l e m i l e s of t r a v e l and h i g h e r l e v e l s of c o n g e s t i o n on R e s e r v o i r Road, P r o s p e c t S t r e e t , and M S t r e e t under the n u l l a l t e r n a t i v e w i l l r e s u l t i n h i g h e r a i r p o l l u t i o n and energy consumption l e v e l s . (2) At grade s i g n a l i z e d i n t e r s e c t i o n a t p r e s e n t a c c e s s l o c a t i o n w i t h no widening or change i n Canal Road alignment. This a l t e r n a t i v e would r e s u l t i n unacceptable t r a f f i c c o n g e s t i o n l e v e l s d u r i n g peak p e r i o d s and should o n l y be c o n s i d e r e d i f combined w i t h t u r n r e s t r i c t i o n s d u r i n g the peak p e r i o d s . The major advantages o f such an a l t e r n a t i v e would be i t s low c o s t , e s s e n t i a l l y the o n l y c o s t s being those a s s o c i a t e d w i t h opening the median b a r r i e r , s i g n a l i z a t i o n , and s i g n i n g ; and t h e f a c t t h a t t h e r e would be no c o n s t r u c t i o n impacts or encroachment on space which i s not p r e s e n t l y used as roadway. (3) At grade s i g n a l i z e d i n t e r s e c t i o n a t p r e s e n t a c c e s s l o c a t i o n w i t h p r o v i s i o n of a 200 f o o t l e f t t u r n bay from eastbound Canal Road i n t o the U n i v e r s i t y and a r e a l i g n m e n t of westbound Canal Road t o a maximum of 12 f e e t n o r t h of i t s e x i s t i n g alignment. This a l t e r n a t i v e would a l l o w f o r a s t o r a g e l a n e f o r l e f t t u r n i n g veh i c l e s and t h e r e f o r e would p r o v i d e an a c c e p t a b l e L e v e l of S e r v i c e under the c o n d i t i o n s o u t l i n e d i n the " T r a f f i c Impacts" s e c t i o n . However, i n order t o c o n s t r u c t t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e , i t would be necess a r y t o remove a p o r t i o n of the c l i f f f a c e i n the a r e a immedia t e l y t o t h e west of t h e e x i s t i n g e n t r a n c e . T h i s would �c o n f l i c t w i t h the N a t i o n a l Park S e r v i c e ' s e f f o r t s t o p r e s e r v e the Potomac P a l i s a d e s i n t h e i r n a t u r a l s t a t e . (4) At grade i n t e r s e c t i o n 200 f e e t t o the e a s t of the e x i s t ing U n i v e r s i t y e n t r a n c e w i t h p r o v i s i o n of a 200 f o o t l e f t t u r n bay from eastbound Canal Road i n t o the U n i v e r s i t y and a r e a l i g n ment of westbound Canal Road t o a maximum of 12 f e e t n o r t h of i t s e x i s t i n g alignment. (See F i g u r e 27). T h i s a l t e r n a t i v e opera t i o n a l l y would be s i m i l a r t o the p r e v i o u s one but would not i n v o l v e encroachment upon the f a c e of the Potomac P a l i s a d e s i n the v i c i n i t y of t h e U n i v e r s i t y e n t r a n c e . The a c t u a l a c c e s s p o i n t from Canal Road would be i n an a r e a which i s p r e s e n t l y d i r t f i l l and as a r e s u l t t h e p r e s e n t l y exposed r o c k f a c e would be u n d i s t u r b e d . The p r o v i s i o n of a s t o r a g e l a n e f o r l e f t t u r n v e h i c l e s would a l l o w f o r an a c c e p t a b l e l e v e l of s e r v i c e through the i n t e r s e c t i o n . (5) Grade s e p a r a t e d i n t e r c h a n g e w i t h f l y o v e r ramps c a r r y i n g l e f t t u r n i n g movements i n t o and out of Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y . O p e r a t i o n a l l y the e n t r a n c e t o the U n i v e r s i t y would have s i g n i f i c a n t l y l e s s impact on Canal Road i f l e f t t u r n i n g movements i n t o and out of the U n i v e r s i t y d i d not have t o c r o s s oncoming t r a f f i c a t grade. However, the p r o v i s i o n of a grade s e p a r a t e d i n t e r c h a n g e at the Southern E n t r a n c e would i n v o l v e e n c r o a c h i n g upon the C&O C a n a l , t h e Potomac P a l i s a d e s , o r both. Even an i n t e r c h a n g e c o n f i g u r a t i o n w i t h t i g h t c u r v e s and minimal v e r t i c a l and l a t e r a l c l e a r ances would r e q u i r e a s u b s t a n t i a l l y w i d e r r i g h t of way than i s p o s s i b l e w i t h o u t e n c r o a c h i n g upon t h e Canal or P a l i s a d e s . Because of the h i s t o r i c a l and environmental s e n s i t i v i t y of the Canal and P a l i s a d e s , t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e i s not judged a c c e p t a b l e . (6) A t h i r d roadway w i t h t h r e e l a n e s along the c r e s t of the Potomac P a l i s a d e s t o c a r r y westbound Canal Road t r a f f i c , w i t h the e x i s t i n g westbound l a n e s becoming an a c c e s s road t o s e r v e U n i v e r sity traffic. T h i s a l t e r n a t i v e would i n v o l v e t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n of a grade s e p a r a t e d i n t e r c h a n g e a t the i n t e r s e c t i o n of Canal and F o x h a l l Roads and c o u l d r e s u l t i n improved t r a f f i c f l o w both a t the �PROPOSED SOUTHERN ENTRANCE �Southern E n t r a n c e and the Canal Road-Foxhall Road i n t e r s e c t i o n . However, i t would be b u i l t along the c r e s t of the e n v i r o n m e n t a l l y s e n s i t i v e Potomac P a l i s a d e s and would r e s u l t i n unacceptable e n v i ronmental and v i s u a l impacts t o the P a l i s a d e s . I t i s t h e r e f o r e judged an unacceptable a l t e r n a t i v e . Summary of P h y s i c a l A l t e r n a t i v e s From a t r a f f i c o p e r a t i o n s s t a n d p o i n t , i t i s n e c e s s a r y t h a t i f t h e Southern E n t r a n c e i s t o be upgraded t o handle a l l t r a f f i c movements a t a l l t i m e s o f day t h a t a t a minimum a l e f t t u r n bay from eastbound C a n a l Road be c o n s t r u c t e d . A l t e r n a t i v e s which would p r o v i d e f o r a h i g h e r o p e r a t i o n a l l e v e l of s e r v i c e than an a t grade s i g n a l i z e d i n t e r s e c t i o n w i t h l e f t t u r n bay ( g r a d e - s e p a r a t e d a l t e r n a t i v e s ) a r e judged unacceptable because they would encroach upon t h e h i s t o r i c a l l y and e n v i r o n m e n t a l l y s e n s i t i v e C&O Canal and Potomac P a l i s a d e s . C o n s t r u c t i o n of an i n t e r s e c t i o n w i t h a l e f t t u r n bay a t t h e l o c a t i o n o f the p r e s e n t Southern E n t r a n c e t o the U n i v e r s i t y would a l s o i n v o l v e encroachment on the rock f a c e of the Potomac P a l i s a d e s and t h e r e f o r e i s not judged as f a v o r a b l y as the a l t e r n a t i v e w i t h an a t grade i n t e r s e c t i o n l o c a t e d a p p r o x i m a t e l y 200 f e e t t o t h e e a s t of t h e e x i s t i n g i n t e r s e c t i o n as shown i n F i g u r e 27. Operational A l t e r n a t i v e s (1) A l l o w a l l t u r n i n g movements i n t o and out of Georgetwon U n i v e r s i t y a t a l l t i m e s . T h i s a l t e r n a t i v e would p r o v i d e the h i g h e s t l e v e l of s e r v i c e t o Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y and would r e s u l t i n the g r e a t e s t d i v e r s i o n o f U n i v e r s i t y t r a f f i c from l o c a l Georgetown s t r e e t s . However, such an a l t e r n a t i v e c o u l d r e s u l t i n s e v e r e c o n g e s t i o n on eastbound C a n a l Road d u r i n g the AM peak p e r i o d i f through t r a f f i c on t h e s e l a n e s a r e not g i v e n 100 p e r c e n t green time. I f v e r y s h o r t and i n f r e q u e n t green t i m e s a r e g i v e n t o l e f t t u r n i n g v e h i c l e s e x i t i n g from the U n i v e r s i t y d u r i n g t h e AM peak, f u l l a c c e s s might be f e a s i b l e . �(2) P r o h i b i t l e f t t u r n s i n t o and out of Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y by a l l v e h i c l e s d u r i n g peak p e r i o d s , a l l o w i n g f u l l a c c e s s d u r i n g the remainder of the day. T h i s a l t e r n a t i v e would do l i t t l e t o change Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y t r a f f i c c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s d u r i n g peak p e r i o d s when the m a j o r i t y of such t r a f f i c a c c e s s e s or e g r e s s e s the U n i v e r s i t y . However, i t would p r o v i d e improved a c c e s s d u r i n g o f f peak p e r i o d s , t h u s a l l o w i n g a Southern E n t r a n c e a l t e r n a t i v e f o r t r u c k s making o f f - p e a k d e l i v e r i e s and o t h e r U n i v e r s i t y t r a f f i c a r r i v i n g or l e a v i n g d u r i n g o f f - p e a k p e r i o d s . T h i s o p e r a t i o n a l a l t e r n a t i v e should be most s e r i o u s l y c o n s i d e r e d i n combination w i t h a p h y s i c a l a l t e r n a t i v e i n which a l e f t t u r n bay i s not p r o v i d e d f o r eastbound Canal Road t r a f f i c t u r n i n g i n t o the U n i v e r s i t y . Otherw i s e , i t s e v e r e l y impinges upon U n i v e r s i t y a c c e s s through the Southern E n t r a n c e . (3) P r o h i b i t l e f t t u r n s i n t o and out of Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y by a l l v e h i c l e s , except buses and emergency v e h i c l e s , d u r i n g peak p e r i o d s , a l l o w i n g f u l l a c c e s s d u r i n g the remainder of t h e day. This a l t e r n a t i v e would overcome t h e d i s a d v a n t a g e s of the p r e v i o u s a l t e r n a t i v e f o r high p r i o r i t y v e h i c l e s , thus a l l o w i n g f o r g r e a t l y improved GUTS s e r v i c e between Northern V i r g i n i a and t h e main campus and improved emergency v e h i c l e a c c e s s t o the Medical Center but would do l i t t l e t o improve a c c e s s f o r the m a j o r i t y of v e h i c l e s d e s t i n e d t o or l e a v i n g Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y d u r i n g peak p e r i o d s and would do l i t t l e t o l e s s e n U n i v e r s i t y t r a f f i c impacts on l o c a l Georgetown s t r e e t s d u r i n g peak p e r i o d s , when t h e s e impacts a r e most s e v e r e . (4) P r o h i b i t l e f t t u r n s i n t o and out of Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y at a l l t i m e s , e x c e p t t o buses and emergency v e h i c l e s . Although a c c e s s t o the U n i v e r s i t y would be s i g n i f i c a n t l y improved f o r p r i o r i t y v e h i c l e s , t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e does nothing t o improve a c c e s s for a l l o t h e r v e h i c l e s going t o and from t h e U n i v e r s i t y . I t is recommended t h a t t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e r e c e i v e c o n s i d e r a t i o n o n l y i f a l e f t t u r n bay i s not c o n s t r u c t e d on Canal Road or as an i n t e r i m measure u n t i l a new i n t e r s e c t i o n can be c o n s t r u c t e d . �(5) P r o h i b i t l e f t t u r n s i n t o and out of Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y d u r i n g the AM peak o n l y . T h i s a l t e r n a t i v e would not g r a n t Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y f u l l a c c e s s a t a l l times of day, but could o v e r come some of t h e most s e v e r e c a p a c i t y problems which would r e s u l t from the upgrading o f the Southern E n t r a n c e , i . e . , AM peak p e r i o d volumes through t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n of F o x h a l l and Canal Roads and through t h e Southern E n t r a n c e i n t e r s e c t i o n . However, U n i v e r s i t y generated t r a f f i c volumes on R e s e r v o i r Road and o t h e r l o c a l Georgetown s t r e e t s would c o n t i n u e t o remain high d u r i n g the AM peak. I f t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e i s adopted, t u r n p r o h i b i t i o n e x c e p t i o n s should be g r a n t e d t o GUTS buses and emergency v e h i c l e s , perhaps through a s i g n a l preempt system. (6) P r o h i b i t l e f t t u r n s out of Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y d u r i n g the AM peak. Eastbound t r a f f i c on Canal Road a t the Southern E n t r a n c e d u r i n g the AM peak p e r i o d runs near c a p a c i t y w i t h o u t a s i g n a l a t t h e p r e s e n t time. Adding a s i g n a l a t t h i s l o c a t i o n and d e c r e a s i n g t h e amount of time a l l o t t e d t o eastbound Canal Road t r a f f i c would l i k e l y r e s u l t i n s e v e r e c o n g e s t i o n d u r i n g the AM peak even w i t h v e r y low l e f t t u r n volumes l e a v i n g the U n i v e r s i t y . Although auto demand f o r t h i s t u r n i n g movement i s f o r e c a s t t o be q u i t e low, more s e v e r e impacts could be expected i f buses were a l s o p r o h i b i t e d from making t h i s movement. T h e r e f o r e , i f the l e f t t u r n p r o h i b i t i o n out of t h e U n i v e r s i t y i s adopted d u r i n g the AM peak, i t i s recommended t h a t GUTS buses be g i v e n preemption. Summary of O p e r a t i o n a l A l t e r n a t i v e s The c h o i c e o f which o p e r a t i o n a l a l t e r n a t i v e i s implemented w i l l t o a c e r t a i n degree depend upon the p h y s i c a l a l t e r n a t i v e which i s chosen. I f no l e f t t u r n bay i s p r o v i d e d f o r eastbound Canal Road t r a f f i c t u r n i n g i n t o the U n i v e r s i t y , i t i s h i g h l y u n l i k e l y t h a t l e f t t u r n i n g movements i n t o and out of the U n i v e r s i t y c o u l d be a l l o w e d d u r i n g peak p e r i o d s w i t h o u t c a u s i n g s e v e r e congestion �problems. Even w i t h the p r o v i s i o n of a l e f t t u r n bay, s e r i o u s c o n s i d e r a t i o n should be g i v e n t o p r o h i b i t i n g l e f t t u r n s out of the U n i v e r s i t y onto eastbound Canal Road d u r i n g the AM peak, u n l e s s o p e r a t i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e shows t h a t a l l o w i n g t h i s movement w i l l not r e s u l t i n undue congestion. No m a t t e r which o p e r a t i o n a l p l a n i s chosen, i t would be d e s i r a b l e i f both GUTS buses and emergency v e h i c l e s were a l l o w e d to make a l l movements a t a l l t i m e s , i f necessary through the use of a preempt system. A l t e r n a t i v e s t o Overcome Grade D i f f e r e n t i a l Between Canal Road and Main Campus (1) Use the e x i s t i n g roadway. The e x i s t i n g roadway between C a n a l Road and t h e main l e v e l of the U n i v e r s i t y campus t u r n s w e s t ward s h o r t l y a f t e r l e a v i n g Canal Road and climbs a t a 5-6% grade t o the west end of Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y ' s P a r k i n g Lot 3. The roadway i s q u i t e steep f o r t r u c k s and buses and i s d i f f i c u l t to n e g o t i a t e d u r i n g snow or i c e storms. I t t a k e s up a c o n s i d e r a b l e amount of v a l u a b l e l a n d and t e r m i n a t e s a p p r o x i m a t e l y 500 f e e t west of the l o c a t i o n of t h e proposed p a r k i n g garage which would be used by n e a r l y a l l autos a c c e s s i n g the Main Campus. I t a l s o makes a c u t along the Potomac P a l i s a d e s and c r e a t e s a v i s u a l i n t r u s i o n i n the middle of the P a l i s a d e s . However, u s i n g the e x i s t i n g roadway would o b v i a t e the need f o r f u r t h e r c o n s t r u c t i o n i n the v i c i n i t y of the P a l i s a d e s and would be the lowest c o s t a l t e r n a t i v e f o r overcoming the grade d i f f e r e n t i a l . Using the e x i s t i n g roadway c o u l d a l s o s e r v e as an i n t e r i m means of o v e r coming the grade d i f f e r e n t i a l , t h e r e b y a l l o w i n g e a r l i e r implementa t i o n of Southern E n t r a n c e - C a n a l Road i n t e r s e c t i o n . (2) At t h e midpoint of the e x i s t i n g roadway r e v e r s e the roadway d i r e c t i o n t o make a U-shaped roadway. T h i s a l t e r n a t i v e would p e r m i t v e h i c l e s t o a r r i v e a t t h e l e v e l of the Main Campus i n the proposed p a r k i n g garage. However, the problems caused by �s t e e p grades would r e m a i n , v a l u a b l e l a n d would c o n t i n u e t o be used, and a new c u t i n t o the f a c e o f t h e P a l i s a d e s would be r e q u i r e d . (3) B u i l d a s t r u c t u r e c o n t a i n i n g c i r c u l a r ramps t o overcome t h e grade d i f f e r e n t i a l . A h e l i x s t r u c t u r e as shown i n F i g u r e s 28 and 29 has been proposed by Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y which could s e r v e both as a means t o overcome the grade d i f f e r e n t i a l between Canal Road and t h e Main Campus and as a t e r m i n a l f a c i l i t y f o r GUTS and o t h e r p u b l i c t r a n s p o r t a t i o n r o u t e s . The proposed s t r u c t u r e would be designed t o p e r m i t t h e passage o f a l i g h t r a i l l i n e through i t i f such a l i n e i s b u i l t along the Cabin John r i g h t of way. The s t r u c t u r e would have e a r t h berms p l a c e d on i t s south s i d e i n o r d e r t o e f f e c t i v e l y s h i e l d i t and h e l p p r o v i d e a c o n t i n u o u s l i n e a c r o s s t h e c r e s t o f t h e P a l i s a d e s . The e n t r a n c e a t t h e Canal Road l e v e l would be a monumental e n t r a n c e t o t h e U n i v e r s i t y . Although the h e l i x s t r u c t u r e would be b u i l t i n t o t h e P a l i s a d e s , i t o f f e r s p o t e n t i a l t o improve upon t h e impact t h e Southern E n t r a n c e p r e s e n t l y has on t h e P a l i s a d e s . The roadway which p r e s e n t l y b i s e c t s the P a l i s a d e s would be covered by e a r t h and t r e e s . With the c o n s t r u c t i o n of an e a r t h berm a c r o s s the c r e s t o f the P a l i s a d e s the b u i l d i n g would be e f f e c t i v e l y hidden and have l e s s of a v i s u a l impact t h a n t h e p r e s e n t roadway. The b u i l d i n g could s e r v e a s an i n t e r m o d a l t r a n s f e r p o i n t both f o r p a s s e n g e r s t r a n s f e r r i n g among WMATA and/or GUTS buses and p a s s e n g e r s t r a n s f e r r i n g t o an i n t r a - U n i v e r s i t y t r a n s i t system. V e h i c l e s e n t e r i n g campus would a r r i v e a t the l e v e l of the U n i v e r s i t y i n t h e g e n e r a l v i c i n t i y of the proposed Main Campus p a r k i n g garage and U n i v e r s i t y C e n t e r . Summary o f A l t e r n a t i v e s t o Overcome Grade D i f f e r e n t i a l Canal Road and Main Campus. Between Use o f t h e e x i s t i n g roadway between Canal Road and the Main Campus, o r a m o d i f i e d v e r s i o n o f the e x i s t i n g roadway p r e s e n t s s e v e r a l problems w h i c h c o u l d p o t e n t i a l l y be overcome by a ramp �P R O P O S E D G.U. TRANSPORTATION TERMINAL �P R O P O S E D G.U. TRANSPORTATION TERMINAL �s t r u c t u r e which i s d e s i a n e d to minimize the impact of the Southern E n t r a n c e on the Potomac P a l i s a d e s . The design of such a s t r u c t u r e must be such t h a t i t enhances the P a l i s a d e s and should be such t h a t i t can s e r v e as a t e r m i n a l f a c i l i t y f o r t r a n s i t l i n e s a c c e s s i n g Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y a t the Southern E n t r a n c e . Becasue the imp l e m e n t a t i o n o f such a s t r u c t u r e would r e q u i r e e n v i r o n m e n t a l r e v i e w , i t i s recommended t h a t the e n v i r o n m e n t a l review p r o c e s s begin s h o r t l y . Complementary A l t e r n a t i v e s (1) I n c o r p o r a t e a double l e f t t u r n a t the i n t e r s e c t i o n of C a n a l and F o x h a l l Roads f o r westbound Canal Road t r a f f i c d u r i n g the PM peak. At the p r e s e n t time t r a f f i c d e s i r i n g t o t u r n l e f t onto Canal Road a t i t s i n t e r s e c t i o n w i t h F o x h a l l Road o f t e n has t o w a i t through s e v e r a l c y c l e s of the s i g n a l and f r e q u e n t l y backs up beyond the Southern E n t r a n c e . As was shown i n the d i s c u s s i o n of t r a f f i c i m p a c t s , p r o v i s i o n of a double l e f t t u r n l a n e d u r i n g the PM peak would s i g n i f i c a n t l y improve the l e v e l of s e r v i c e o f t h i s i n t e r s e c t i o n and a l l o w f o r the i n c r e a s e i n t r a f f i c expected as a r e s u l t of the C a n a l Road e n t r a n c e becoming the main e n t r a n c e of the University. The D.C. Department o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n i s scheduled to i n c o r p o r a t e PM peak double l e f t t u r n o p e r a t i o n s a t the i n t e r s e c t i o n of Canal and F o x h a l l Roads as p a r t of i t s r e s u r f a c i n g p r o j e c t f o r Canal Road which i s p r e s e n t l y scheduled t o be completed during the summer of 1980. However, i n a d d i t i o n t o the scheduled a c t i o n , s e r i o u s c o n s i d e r a t i o n s h o u l d be g i v e n t o the e x t e n s i o n of the l e f t t u r n bay s e v e r a l hundred f e e t t o the e a s t of i t s p r e s e n t terminus i n o r d e r t o i n c r e a s e the c a p a c i t y of the i n t e r s e c t i o n . T h i s would r e q u i r e the w i d e n i n g of Canal Road and the t a k i n g of a narrow s t r i p of l a n d on the n o r t h s i d e of Canal Road p r e s e n t l y administered by the N a t i o n a l Park S e r v i c e . �(2) M a i n t a i n the P r o s p e c t S t r e e t E n t r a n c e as a major ent r a n c e t o Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y . I t i s e s t i m a t e d t h a t a p p r o x i mately 20-25 p e r c e n t of U n i v e r s i t y t r a f f i c comes from or i s dest i n e d t o p o i n t s t o the n o r t h and e a s t o f campus which a r e more r e a d i l y a c c e s s s i b l e v i a the P r o s p e c t S t r e e t E n t r a n c e t h a n would be v i a t h e C a n a l Road E n t r a n c e . From a c a p a c i t y p o i n t o f view on Canal Road, i t would be d e s i r a b l e f o r t h i s t r a f f i c t o c o n t i n u e t o a c c e s s the U n i v e r s i t y v i a the P r o s p e c t S t r e e t E n t r a n c e . I n add i t i o n , i t would be d e s i r a b l e t h a t t h i s e n t r a n c e s e r v e as a r e l i e f v a l v e t o t h e Southern E n t r a n c e d u r i n g p e r i o d s of h i g h e s t t r a f f i c volumes. I t a l s o would s e r v e as the a l t e r n a t e t o t h e Southern E n t r a n c e f o r any t r a f f i c movements which a r e p r o h i b i t e d a t t h a t p o i n t d u r i n g c e r t a i n time p e r i o d s . (3) B u i l d an e n t r a n c e t o the proposed Main Campus p a r k i n g s t r u c t u r e from R e s e r v o i r Road. With t h e c l o s i n g o f Healy C i r c l e as a major a c c e s s p o i n t t o Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y , t r a f f i c concent r a t i o n s w i l l become h e a v i e r a t the two remaining a c c e s s p o i n t s , the Southern E n t r a n c e and the P r o s p e c t S t r e e t E n t r a n c e . A p o t e n t i a l means t o r e d i s t r i b u t e some o f t h i s t r a f f i c , and p a r t i c u l a r l y t o reduce i t s impact on the i n t e r s e c t i o n of F o x h a l l and Canal Roads, would be t o p r o v i d e an a c c e s s p o i n t t o the Main Campus p a r k i n g garage from R e s e r v o i r Road. Most of the t r a f f i c which would use t h i s e n t r a n c e would come from t h e west and i s a l r e a d y on R e s e r v o i r Road because i t cannot p r e s e n t l y make a l e f t t u r n i n t o the U n i v e r s i t y from Canal Road. T h e r e f o r e the main t r a f f i c impacts of such an e n t r a n c e would be t o reduce t r a f f i c e a s t U n i v e r s i t y Medical Center on R e s e r v o i r Road Georgetown s t r e e t s and t o reduce the number would both pass through t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n o f and which would make a l e f t t u r n from Canal s i t y , i f t h i s were p e r m i t t e d . of the Georgetown and o t h e r l o c a l o f v e h i c l e s which C a n a l and F o x h a l l Roads Road i n t o the U n i v e r - �Summary o f Complementary A l t e r n a t i v e s I t i s recommended t h a t i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h t h e upgrading of the Southern E n t r a n c e t h a t a double l e f t t u r n l a n e during t h e PM peak be i n c o r p o r a t e d a t t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n o f Canal and F o x h a l l Roads f o r westbound Canal Road t r a f f i c , and t h a t t h e P r o s p e c t S t r e e t E n t r a n c e be m a i n t a i n e d as a major e n t r a n c e t o t h e U n i v e r s i t y . I n a d d i t i o n , s e r i o u s c o n s i d e r a t i o n should be given by Georgetown Univ e r s i t y t o b u i l d i n g an a d d i t i o n a l entrance t o t h e Main Campus from R e s e r v o i r Road. �CHAPTER 7. OTHER CANDIDATE GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY ACTIONS I n t h e p r e v i o u s c h a p t e r v a r i o u s a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r upgrading t h e Southern E n t r a n c e t o Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y were a n a l y z e d . I n t h i s c h a p t e r a number o f other p o t e n t i a l a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r improving t r a n s p o r t a t i o n a c c e s s t o Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y a r e e v a l u a t e d . A number o f t h e a l t e r n a t i v e s a n a l y z e d i n t h i s c h a p t e r and much o f the i n f o r m a t i o n used i n the a n a l y s i s come d i r e c t l y from t h e Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Survey conducted i n t h e S p r i n g o f 1979 by R i v k i n A s s o c i a t e s and Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y . The r e s u l t s and a n a l y s i s o f t h i s s u r v e y a r e r e p o r t e d i n T e c h n i c a l Memorandum No. 4 o f t h i s study. Other a l t e r n a t i v e s and i n f o r m a t i o n used i n t h e a n a l y s i s were d e r i v e d from d i s c u s s i o n s and correspondence w i t h c o g n i z a n t Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y o f f i c i a l s . The Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Survey i d e n t i f i e d s e v e r a l d e f i c i e n c i e s and o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r improving e x i s t i n g a c c e s s t o t h e U n i v e r s i t y . Among t h e s e a r e t h e f o l l o w i n g : A h i g h l e v e l o f t r a n s i t s e r v i c e between Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y and M e t r o r a i l (and as a r e s u l t much of the Washington m e t r o p o l i t a n a r e a ) does n o t p r e s e n t l y exist. T r a n s f e r s between GUTS and M e t r o r a i l o r Metrobus a r e i n c o n v e n i e n t and e x p e n s i v e . GUTS buses t r a v e l c i r c u i t o u s r o u t e s and a s a r e s u l t do not o f f e r c o m p e t i t i v e t r a v e l times t o autos. GUTS does not o f f e r s e r v i c e a t t h e times d e s i r e d by a number o f p o t e n t i a l passengers. The GUTS t i c k e t system i s i n c o n v e n i e n t t o u s e . There i s g e n e r a l l a c k o f knowledge about what t r a n s i t s e r v i c e s o r c a r p o o l matching s e r v i c e s a r e a v a i l a b l e t o Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y commuters. C a r p o o l i n g and t r a n s i t usage i s not widespread because p a r k i n g f o r low occupant v e h i c l e s on campus i s c o n v e n i e n t and cheap compared t o o t h e r l o c a t i o n s i n Georgetown and downtown Washington. �L i t t l e i s done t o encourage o r f a c i l i t a t e t h e f o r m a t i o n o f c a r p o o l s f o r t r a v e l t o and from campus. Based upon t h e s e concerns t w e l v e c a n d i d a t e a c c e s s improvement a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y were i d e n t i f i e d and a n a l y z e d . These t w e l v e a c t i o n s a r e as f o l l o w s : (1) R e o r i e n t GUTS V i r g i n i a r o u t e s t o a v o i d duplication with Ballston Metrorail l i n e . P r o v i d e f r e q u e n t s h u t t l e s e r v i c e between R o s s l y n s t a t i o n and Georgetwon U n i v e r s i t y a t lower f a r e than f o r longer t r i p s . (2) Accept M e t r o r a i l o r Metrobus t r a n s f e r s i n l i e u o f payment o r a s a d i s c o u n t toward payment o f f a r e . (3) A l l o w f o r f a r e payment on GUTS buses, i n s t e a d of p r e s e n t t i c k e t system. (4) R e v i s e GUTS schedules t o b e t t e r c o o r d i n a t e w i t h t h e s t a r t o f c l a s s e s and a c t u a l running times. (5) Change V i r g i n i a and Law School GUTS r o u t e s so a s t o a c c e s s t h e U n i v e r s i t y a t t h e Southern E n t r a n c e . (6) E s t a b l i s h a t r a n s i t and c a r p o o l i n f o r m a t i o n c e n t e r on campus. (7) C r e a t e a t r a n s i t i n f o r m a t i o n package t o be d i s t r i b u t e d t o s t u d e n t s a t r e g i s t r a t i o n and f a c u l t y and s t a f f through t h e campus m a i l . (8) I n c r e a s e p a r k i n g c o s t s and use a d d i t i o n a l revenues t o s u b s i d i z e GUTS s e r v i c e . (9) Reduce t h e d i s c o u n t f o r monthly o r y e a r l y p a r k i n g t o encourage p a r k e r s t o pay d a i l y and use t r a n s i t when f e a s i b l e . (10) Reserve most c o n v e n i e n t p a r k i n g spaces f o r c a r p o o l s w i t h t h r e e o r more p e r s o n s . (11) Expand GUTS s e r v i c e . (12) Vanpooling program. �(1) R e o r i e n t GUTS V i r g i n i a r o u t e s t o a v o i d d u p l i c a t i o n with Ballston Metrorail l i n e . Provide frequent s h u t t l e s e r v i c e between R o s s l y n s t a t i o n and Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y a t lower f a r e than f o r l o n g e r t r i p s . A t t h e p r e s e n t time GUTS o p e r a t e s t h r e e r o u t e s i n V i r g i n i a , a s shown i n F i g u r e s 30 t o 32. The A r l i n g t o n Loop r o u t e p r o v i d e s a l l day s e r v i c e on weekdays and o p e r a t e s on one hour headways. I t p r o v i d e s s e r v i c e t o botn t h e Lee Highway and A r l i n g t o n B o u l e v a r d c o r r i d o r s f o r a d i s t a n c e o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y 2h m i l e s from campus and i s t h e backbone o f GUTS s e r v i c e t o Northern V i r g i n i a . However, t h e r o u t e o p e r a t e s on a loop and a s a r e s u l t u s e r s o f t h e s e r v i c e must endure a long roundabout r i d e f o r e i t h e r t h e i r t r i p t o o r t h e i r t r i p from campus. I n a d d i t i o n t o t h e base s e r v i c e p r o v i d e d by t h e A r l i n g t o n Loop r o u t e , peak p e r i o d s e r v i c e i s p r o v i d e d along t h e Lee Highway c o r r i d o r by t h e Lee Highway r o u t e and along t h e A r l i n g t o n B o u l e v a r d c o r r i d o r by t h e Route 50 r o u t e . S t u d e n t s , f a c u l t y , and s t a f f who use t h e s e r o u t e s a r e a b l e t o g e t d i r e c t bus s e r v i c e t o campus and pay o n l y 40C. T a k i n g WMATA buses from e i t h e r o f t h e s e c o r r i d o r s would r e q u i r e a t r a n s f e r a t R o s s l y n , would r e q u i r e a f i v e b l o c k walk from t h e n e a r e s t bus stop on t h e D.C. s i d e o f Key B r i d g e and would c o s t 8 0 c e n t s . However WMATA s e r v i c e i n both c o r r i d o r s t o t h e R o s s l y n M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n i s e x c e l l e n t w i t h headways d u r i n g t h e peak p e r i o d s being l e s s than 5 minutes. I f a c o n v e n i e n t , low c o s t t r a n s f e r t o a d i r e c t bus t o campus could be guaranteed a t t h e R o s s l y n M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n , the l e v e l o f t r a n s i t s e r v i c e n o t o n l y t o commuters from t h e Lee Highway and A r l i n g t o n Boulevard c o r r i dors b u t t o a l l p o i n t s i n Northern V i r g i n i a c o n v e n i e n t l y l i n k e d t o a M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n would be improved c o n s i d e r a b l y . Many o f t h e commuters s e r v e d by t h e e x i s t i n g GUTS r o u t e s l i v e w i t h i n w a l k i n g d i s t a n c e o f one o f t h e newly opened M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n s along t h e Orange L i n e , so f o r t h e s e commuters GUTS p r o v i d e s d u p l i c a t e t r a n s i t s e r v i c e between t h e i r r e s i d e n c e s and R o s s l y n �WtCKG tjnWVljff^VT/ nTWj AY* n*nVY O^rfv AM HWy 7:16 St. Mary't Ln H i g h ft Oulnn St. Ln H l g h n n ft Adana St. L n Hlghyrry ft CKmland Ln MlghvMyftKlrkwood Klfkoood Rd. ft 13th St Oanvlllt St.ft10th St. Bartonft9th St. Pmhlng Or.ftWavna St. Arlington Blvd.ftQ u i t n St. 14th ft flhodn St. Arlington T o w t n (Lynn St.) Metro Station (But Alltv On Moors St.) St. Mary'l Haaly w 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 23 7* 2B 37 29 31 32 33 3(3 37 38 7 40 7 SO 7 55 8 OS _ • 13 8:14 BIS 8:17 8:18 8 20 8:21 8:22 8:28 8:28 8 28 8 30 8 45 8:50 S 06 _ • IS 8:14 9:18 »:17 9 18 9 20 9:21 9:22 9:28 9 76 9:28 9 30 9:45 9 50 10:20 10:24 10:32 10:33 10:34 10:38 10:37 10:39 10:40 10:41 10:43 10:44 10:46 10:47 10:57 11:00 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 20 24 32 33 34 38 37 39 40 41 43 44 46 11 47 11 57 12 00 12:20 12:24 12:32 12:33 12:34 12:36 12:37 12:39 12:40 12:41 12:43 12:44 12:46 12:47 12:57 1:00 1:20 1:24 1:32 1:33 1:34 1:36 1:37 1:39 1:40 1:41 1:43 1:44 1:40 1:47 1:67 2:00 2:20 2:24 2:32 2:33 2:34 2:36 2:37 2:39 2:40 2:41 2:43 2:44 2 48 2:47 2 57 3 00 3:20 3:24 3:32 3:33 3:34 3:36 3:37 3:39 3:40 3:41 3:43 3:44 3:46 3:47 3:57 4:00 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 20 24 34 36 37 39 40 43 44 46 47 48 50 4 62 5 OS 5 08 6:20 8:24 8:34 6:36 5:37 6:39 8:40 6:43 6:44 8:46 6:47 8 48 5 50 8:52 6 06 8 08 6 20 8 24 6 34 8 36 6 37 6 39 6 40 6 43 6 44 6 46 6 47 6 48 8 50 6 62 7 05 7 08 7 20 7 24 7 32 7 33 7 34 7 38 7 37 7 39 7 40 7 41 7 43 7 44 7 46 7:47 7:57 8 00 8:20 8 24 8 32 8:33 8:34 8 36 8 37 | 8 39 6:40 8:41 8 43 8:44 8:46 9 20 9 24 9:32 9:33 9:34 9:36 9 37 B 39 9 40 9 41 9 43 9 44 9:46 •:47 1 »:47 8:56 6:58 9:66 9:58 20 24 32 33 10 20 10:24 10:32 10:33 10:34 10:38 10:37 10:39 10 40 10:41 10:43 10 44 10 46 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 10:47 10 56 10 58 1147 11 56 11 68 10:30 3 4 3 8 3 7 3 9 oie 047 44 4 3 .m . 4 : 3 4 3 0 3 8 8 0 GUTS ARLINGTON LOOP ROUTE 8 6 3 6 1 1 6 1 0 : 2 0 1 1 0 : 2 1 8 8 : 4 3 9 5 3 8 4 0 8 4 0 1 4 M : 2 8 8 1 0 2 1 : 1106 11:08 11:1* 11:17 11:11 3 0 1 1 : 2 1 "2 2 " 12 = 1 0 : 2 4 4 1 3 10:08 10:08 10:18 10:17 10:1* 4 3 ! 8 4.45 . . i i tn.CO 1U 5 2 144 : 2 T 1 I7 1U:1>J 1 1 » 4 48 1 1 0 1 11:36 4 54 11 0 6 11:40 4 5B 0 1:20 8 73 8 31 6:32 6 33 11 2 0 21 22 0 40 1 4:20 4:23 4:31 4:32 *=JJ 24 104B 40 4 1 46 11:08 11:13 11 14 11 18 11 17 11 18 10 3» 1039 10 40 10 42 10 4 3 4 4 3 4 2 4 : 1 545 8 0 3 2 ' 8 ! 0 1 8:46 6 64 5 68 " 1 0 3 0 11:30 * 0 2 8 11:2 10:31 11:31 10:39 11:39 10:42 1 1 4 7 �Lee Highway Schedule LIE HIGHWAY ccc Hasty t Kay Blvd. ft Oda St. I.n Highway A Quinn St. Lm Highway A Adtrni S t . Ln Highway A Clawjland St Lm Highway A Kirkwood S t . Laa Highway A Ctawtland S t . Laa Highway A Adamt S t Laa Highway A Oumn S i . Kay Blvd. A Oda S t (by drtvawayt) CCC Haaiy AM _ 7:23 _ _ _ _ 7:34 7:36 7 37 7:38 7 40 7:50 7:55 WEEKDAYS AM AM m» PM 4:14 10 9 10 4 19 _ _ 4 30 4 32 _ _ 4 34 4:36 _ 6:34 9 24 4 37 8 76 9 26 4 39 B 27 9 27 4 40 8 29 9 29 4 41 8 30 9 30 4 42 8 45 9 45 4 52 8 50 9 50 4 56 B GUTS L E E HIGHWAY 5:14 5:19 632 5 34 5:36 5 37 539 6 40 5 41 5 42 5 43 5 54 5 58 PM 6 14 6 19 6 30 6 32 6 34 6 35 6 37 6 39 6 40 6 41 642 6 52 6 56 ROUTE �Rt. 50 Schedule WEEKDAYS ROUTE 60 AM Si Mary'l Haaly Kannady 7:15 Arlington Towers If I Mayai A 14th A Maada Piospect House A A A A Faitlaul Queen St. Rhodes St Courthouse R d Courthouse R d Pershing O r A W e y n e St. 9th A Ber ton St 1 l l h A Barton St 16th A Courthouse R d . 16th A R h o d e s St 14th A R h o d e s St A r l i n g t o n TotMers I L y n n S i 1 Matro Station (Bus CCC St M a r y ' s Healy GUTS ROUTE 50 ROUTE I PM _ 4 19 21 >M PM 6 12 5 14 5 19 6 6 6 12 14 6 6 21 4 30 5 21 5 30 4 - 9 05 12 4 - 8 05 4 4 5 37 4 40 4 41 5 38 5 40 5 41 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 47 4 44 5 42 5 44 6 42 6 44 45 46 5 45 6 4S 4 4 48 6 46 5 46 6 6 4 50 00 6 50 6 00 6 6(1 02 06 6 02 7 7 D O a/ 14 19 Institute 136th A P r o s p e c t l M a t r o S t a t i o n 1 1 9 t h ft M o o r t l 12th 14th 15th 13th 1 UN - CCC v M o o r . St I - 32 7 24 8 7 75 8 15 9 14 9 15 4 33 4 34 7 26 B 16 8 1 7 9 9 4 35 8 18 9 18 7 29 8 19 7 31 8 8 8 9 9 7 27 7 28 7 32 7 33 14 22 23 24 16 17 19 22 9 23 9 24 8 26 8 27 9 28 8 30 I 9 9 7 39 7 50 7 52 8 9 7:55 8 7 35 7 36 7:37 7 36 32 B 48 8 50 55 26 9 27 28 30 32 9 48 9 50 9 55 4 36 4 37 4 38 4 5 5 5 32 6 33 6 34 5 35 b 36 5 37 6 (16 30 33 34 3>, 36 3; 38 40 41 46 48 7 06 �and i s used i n s t e a d of M e t r o r a i l because i t i s d i r e c t l y l i n k e d t o campus. P r o v i s i o n o f a f r e q u e n t , low c o s t s h u t t l e s e r v i c e between the R o s s l y n s t a t i o n and campus would r e s u l t i n lower t r a v e l times and s i g n i f i c a n t l y more f r e q u e n t s e r v i c e f o r most of t h e s e commuters. The key t o s u c c e s s of the proposed a c t i o n , however, would be the guarantee of a f r e e or v e r y low c o s t t r a n s f e r from both M e t r o r a i l and Metrobus and the p r o v i s i o n of f r e q u e n t and d i r e c t s h u t t l e s e r v i c e between the R o s s l y n s t a t i o n and campus. Means f o r g u a r a n t e e i n g a low c o s t t r a n s f e r a r e d i s c u s s e d i n the a n a l y s i s of the n e x t a l t e r n a t i v e . However, i t should be noted t h a t u n l e s s a low c o s t t r a n s f e r i s p e r m i t t e d , t r a n s i t commuting c o s t s f o r Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y s t u d e n t s , f a c u l t y , and s t a f f who p r e s e n t l y use GUTS buses from Northern V i r g i n i a would i n c r e a s e c o n s i d e r a b l y . The a b i l i t y of Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y t o p r o v i d e f r e q u e n t s e r v i c e would be i n c r e a s e d c o n s i d e r a b l y i f GUTS buses were a l l o w e d t o make a l l movements a t the U n i v e r s i t y ' s Canal Road e n t r a n c e . E x c e p t i n c a s e s o f s e v e r e c o n g e s t i o n a round t r i p between campus and the R o s s l y n M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n c o u l d be accomplished i n 15 minutes, t h u s p e r m i t t i n g 15 minutes headways w i t h o n l y one bus i n o p e r a t i o n . T h i s one bus c o u l d be supplemented by one or two o t h e r s d u r i n g peak p e r i o d s i f demand w a r r a n t e d i t , and thus e i t h e r e i g h t or f i v e minute headways on the s h u t t l e r o u t e could be maint a i n e d . T r a n s i t demand t o campus from Northern V i r g i n i a could be expected t o i n c r e a s e s i g n i f i c a n t l y because of the i n c r e a s e d l e v e l o f s e r v i c e . At t h e p r e s e n t time a p p r o x i m a t e l y o n e - f o u r t h of the t o t a l Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y commuting p o p u l a t i o n (2,58 5 of 10,295 commuters) i s from A r l i n g t o n County!^ Y e t of t h e s e commuters o n l y about 22 0 use GUTS t o t r a v e l t o and from campus. S i n c e n e a r l y a l l of t h e s e commuters have c o n v e n i e n t a c c e s s t o e i t h e r a M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n or a Metrobus route which i s d e s t i n e d t o the R o s s l y n s t a t i o n , the number who would use t r a n s i t i f c o n v e n i e n t , l o w - c o s t d i r e c t t r a n s i t s e r v i c e between the R o s s l y n s t a t i o n and campus were p r o v i d e d c o u l d be expected t o a t l e a s t 1/ Data from T e c h n i c a l Memorandum No. T r a n s p o r t a i o n Survey. 4: Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y �double, w h i l e GUTS v e h i c l e o p e r a t i n g requirements would drop or remain t h e same depending on t h e l e v e l o f peak p e r i o d s h u t t l e s e r v i c e provided. (2) Accept M e t r o r a i l o r Metrobus t r a n s f e r s i n l i e u o f payment or as a d i s c o u n t toward payment of f a r e . One o f t h e most p r e v a l e n t comments made by respondents t o t h e Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Survey was t h a t t h e l e v e l o f t r a n s i t s e r v i c e p r o v i d e d t o t h e Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y campus from t h e respondent's t r i p o r i g i n i s inadequate. However t h e m a j o r i t y of commuters t o Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y l i v e i n a r e a s which do n o t have h i g h enough t r a v e l demand t o Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y t o j u s t i f y d i r e c t t r a n s i t s e r v i c e . A l a r g e number o f t h e s e commuters, however, have c o v e n i e n t a c c e s s t o M e t r o r a i l and need o n l y a convenient connection between M e t r o r a i l and campus t o make t r a n s i t an a t t r a c t i v e t r a v e l o p t i o n . T h i s i s p a r t i c u l a r l y t r u e o f commuters from Northern V i r g i n i a . However, t h e r e a r e two requirements i f a t r a n s i t c o n n e c t i o n between M e t r o r a i l and campus i s t o be w e l l used. One i s t h a t i t p r o v i d e f r e q u e n t , r e l i a b l e , and d i r e c t s e r v i c e . The o t h e r i s t h a t i t have low f a r e s . O t h e r w i s e , t h e t o t a l c o s t o f t a k i n g t r a n s i t t o campus w i l l be so h i g h t h a t commuters w i l l be d i s c o u r a g e d from u s i n g t h i s mode. I f a commuter uses both M e t r o r a i l and GUTS o r Metrobus and GUTS two f a r e s must be p a i d , r e s u l t i n g i n q u i t e high t o t a l c o s t s f o r these t r i p s . I t i s p a r t l y f o r t h i s reason t h a t l e s s than one p e r c e n t o f t h e Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Survey respondents i n d i c a t e d they used GUTS i n combination w i t h M e t r o r a i l o r Metrobus. I f more e f f e c t i v e t r a n s i t a c c e s s i s t o be p r o v i d e d t o the campus, d i s c o u n t s should be a l l o w e d on GUTS buses f o r passengers who a r e t r a n s f e r r i n g t o o r from M e t r o r a i l o r Metrobus. • This i s p a r t i c u l a r l y necessary i f the r o u t e s a r e t o be r e p l a c e d by a s h u t t l e R o s s l y n M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n and campus. gement between GUTS and WMATA would be e x i s t i n g V i r g i n i a GUTS s e r v i c e between t h e The i d e a l t r a n s f e r a r r a n one where GUTS t r a n s f e r s �were accepted on Metrobus and M e t r o r a i l and v i c e v e r s a . However, t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of a r r a n g i n g such a t r a n s f e r agreement appears remote, so a l t e r n a t i v e arrangements should be i n v e s t i g a t e d . Under one such scheme a M e t r o r a i l or Metrobus t r a n s f e r could be p r e s e n t e d t o t h e GUTS d r i v e r ( t o g e t h e r w i t h a d i s c o u n t e d f a r e t i c k e t i f a f a r e were r e q u i r e d i n a d d i t i o n t o the t r a n s f e r ) . The d r i v e r could then i s s u e a s p e c i a l t r a n s f e r which would be good f o r the r e t u r n t r i p t o Metrobus or M e t r o r a i l . Another o p t i o n f o r t r i p s l e a v i n g campus would be t o c o l l e c t f a r e t i c k e t s as passengers a l i g h t from t h e bus. I f t h e passenger a l i g h t s a t c e r t a i n p r e d e s i g n a t e d t r a n s f e r p o i n t s , such as t h e n e a r e s t M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n o r key bus t r a n s f e r p o i n t s , a d i s c o u n t f a r e t i c k e t would be p e r m i t t e d t o be used. For t r i p s t o campus a Metrobus or M e t r o r a i l t r a n s f e r would have t o be shown t o t h e d r i v e r i n order t o use a d i s c o u n t f a r e t i c k e t . An important i s s u e a s s o c i a t e d w i t h p e r m i t t i n g d i s c o u n t e d f a r e s f o r Metrobus and M e t r o r a i l t r a n s f e r s i s who w i l l pay f o r the revenue l o s t as a r e s u l t of t h e f a r e d i s c o u n t s . At the p r e s e n t time GUTS revenues on i t s f i v e r e g u l a r r o u t e s pay f o r o n l y 36 perc e n t of o p e r a t i n g c o s t s . The U n i v e r s i t y i s understandably not a n x i o u s t o i n c r e a s e t h e s u b s i d y i t must pay GUTS t o m a i n t a i n p r e s e n t l e v e l s o f bus o p e r a t i o n s . However, i n the near f u t u r e GUTS o p e r a t i o n s a r e scheduled t o be reduced by a p p r o x i m a t e l y 30 p e r c e n t w i t h the c l o s i n g o f Alban Towers and t h e simultaneous t e r m i n a t i o n of the Alban Towers GUTS r o u t e . T h i s r o u t e p r e s e n t l y runs a l l day on one-hour headways and accounts f o r almost one t h i r d of the hours of s e r v i c e p r o v i d e d by GUTS. Thus t h e s u b s i d y the U n i v e r s i t y p r e s e n t l y p r o v i d e s t o operate the Alban Towers r o u t e c o u l d be s h i f t e d t o make up f o r some of the revenue l o s t as a r e s u l t of d i s c o u n t e d f a r e s f o r M e t r o r a i l and Metrobus t r a n s f e r s . I n a d d i t i o n , i t i s f o r e c a s t e d t h a t r i d e r s h i p on GUTS from Northern V i r g i n i a c o u l d be expected t o more than double i f �low-cost t r a n s f e r s a r e p e r m i t t e d on a f r e q u e n t l y running s h u t t l e bus t o t h e R o s s l y n M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n . Even i f v e h i c l e o p e r a t i n g requirements f o r Northern V i r g i n i a GUTS r o u t e s remained t h e same as today, a doubling o f GUTS r i d e r s h i p c o u l d a l l o w a h a l v i n g of the p r e s e n t f a r e f o r t r a n s f e r r i d e r s w i t h no l o s s i n revenue or i n c r e a s e i n s u b s i d y . I f a t r a n s f e r p o l i c y i s adopted which r e q u i r e d an i n c r e a s e i n GUTS s u b s i d i e s , i t i s recommended t h a t t h e a d d i t i o n a l moneys come from i n c r e a s e d p a r k i n g c o s t s . (3) A l l o w f o r f a r e payment on GUTS buses, i n s t e a d of p r e s e n t t i c k e t system. A t t h e p r e s e n t time u s e r s o f t h e GUTS system must prepurchase t i c k e t s on campus i f they a r e t o t a k e a t r i p on a GUTS bus. T h i s prepurchase requirement was c i t e d a s an i n c o n v e n i e n c e by a number o f respondents t o t h e Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Survey, and undoubtedly d i s c o u r a g e s some p o t e n t i a l r i d e r s from u s i n g t h e system. A number o f r e spondents f e l t t h a t r i d e r s should be a l l o w e d t o pay a cash f a r e on t h e bus, i n much t h e same manner Metrobus r i d e r s do. T h e i r argument becomes even s t r o n g e r i f d i f f e r e n t i a l f a r e s a r e e s t a b l i s h e d f o r Metrobus and M e t r o r a i l t r a n s f e r r i n g passengers because i t would be even more i n c o n v e n i e n t t o have t o c a r r y d i f f e r e n t t y p e s o f t i c k e t s f o r d i f f e r e n t d e s t i n a t i o n s . However, Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y a s a m a t t e r o f p o l i c y would p r e f e r not t o permit cash t r a n s a n c t i o n s t o t a k e p l a c e on GUTS buses, p r i m a r i l y f o r s e c u r i t y r e a s o n s . I f o n l y t i c k e t s a r e a l l o w e d , i t i s much e a s i e r t o l i m i t boardings t o o n l y Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y s t u d e n t s , f a c u l t y , and s t a f f ; t h e r e i s l e s s l i k e l i h o o d o f d r i v e r s t r y i n g t o cheat t h e system; and t h e r e i s l e s s l i k e l i h o o d o f attempted b u r g l a r y . T h i s being t h e c a s e , i t i s important t h a t i t be a s easy a s p o s s i b l e t o purchase t i c k e t s . Knowledge o f where t i c k e t s can be bought i s a t p r e s e n t not good. The l o c a t i o n o f t i c k e t machines and o u t l e t s should be c l e a r l y posted throughout t h e Main Campus, Medical C e n t e r , and Law C e n t e r . C o n s i d e r a t i o n should be g i v e n t o expanding t i c k e t �s a l e s l o c a t i o n s t o i n c l u d e r e c e p t i o n i s t s who can make change. A number o f c o m p l a i n t s were r a i s e d i n t h e Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Survey r e g a r d i n g t h e need t o use f o u r dimes i n t h e t i c k e t machines. E v e r y e f f o r t should be made t o make t h e purchase o f t i c k e t s as convenient a s p o s s i b l e i n order not t o d i s c o u r a g e p o t e n t i a l u s e r s o f t h e system from u s i n g i t . (4) R e v i s e GUTS schedules t o b e t t e r c o o r d i n a t e w i t h t h e s t a r t o f c l a s s e s and a c t u a l running t i m e s . A l a r g e number o f comments were made by respondents t o t h e Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Survey about GUTS schedules not being w e l l coord i n a t e d w i t h c l a s s and work s c h e d u l e s . F o r example most r o u t e s a r e designed t o a r r i v e on campus 5-10 minutes b e f o r e t h e hour. However many s t u d e n t s ' f i r s t c l a s s e s s t a r t a t 8:50 AM, so GUTS a r r i v e s on campus too l a t e t o adequately s e r v e t h e needs of t h e s e s t u d e n t s . Because o f t h e u n p r e d i c t a b i l i t y o f t r a f f i c c o n d i t i o n s i n t h e Georgetown a r e a , GUTS o f t e n does not meet i t s schedule r e s u l t i n g i n s t u d e n t s being l a t e f o r c l a s s . More s l a c k time would appear t o be n e c e s s a r y i n some o f t h e s c h e d u l e s . GUTS does not r u n e a r l y enough t o adequately s e r v e Medical Center s t a f f , many o f whom s t a r t work a t 7 AM. D e c i s i o n s r e g a r d i n g GUTS schedules a r e made by a U n i v e r s i t y committee on t r a n s p o r t a t i o n . E v e r y e f f o r t i s made t o t a i l o r s c h e d u l e s t o s t u d e n t s ' c l a s s s c h e d u l e s . Perhaps through c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f some o f t h e a b o v e - c i t e d comments, t h e committee c o u l d s l i g h t l y r e v i s e s c h e d u l e s t o overcome t h e d e f i c i e n c i e s noted. Much more s c h e d u l i n g f l e x i b i l i t y could a l s o be a t t a i n e d by t h e replacement o f t h e e x i s t i n g GUTS V i r g i n i a r o u t e s w i t h a s h u t t l e s e r v i c e from t h e R o s s l y n M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n running on f r e q u e n t headways. Under t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e i f s t u d e n t s , f a c u l t y , o r s t a f f wanted t o a r r i v e on campus a t a d i f f e r e n t time than 5 t o 10 minutes b e f o r e t h e hour they c o u l d do do. �(5) Change V i r g i n i a and Law School GUTS r o u t e s so as to a c c e s s the U n i v e r s i t y a t the Southern E n t r a n c e . Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y ' s Master P l a n c a l l s f o r the Canal Road e n t r a n c e t o become the main a c c e s s p o i n t to the campus f o r a l l t r a n s p o r t a t i o n modes. P r e s e n t p l a n s c a l l f o r a t e r m i n a l f a c i l i t y to be b u i l t a t the Southern E n t r a n c e which would permit buses t o t u r n around and passengers t o c o n v e n i e n t l y t r a n s f e r from GUTS and WMATA buses t o an i n t r a - u n i v e r s i t y t r a n s p o r t a t i o n system. The planned U n i v e r s i t y Center would be i n the immediate v i c i n i t y of the proposed t e r m i n a l f a c i l i t y and would be a major f o c a l p o i n t f o r persons ent e r i n g and l e a v i n g campus. With a l l t h e s e planned changes, and assuming the Canal Road e n t r a n c e i s upgraded t o a l l o w a l l t u r n i n g movements, i t i s q u i t e l o g i c a l f o r GUTS r o u t e s t o be changed so they a c c e s s the U n i v e r s i t y a t i t s Southern E n t r a n c e . T h i s would reduce the t r a v e l times f o r V i r g i n i a r o u t e s c o n s i d e r a b l y because they would no longer have t o make t h e i r c i r c u i t o u s r o u t e around campus. I t would enable a s h u t t l e s e r v i c e from the R o s s l y n M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n t o operate w i t h round t r i p t r a v e l times of f i f t e e n minutes, thus a l l o w i n g f r e q u e n t s e r v i c e between campus and M e t r o r a i l . F i n a l l y , i t would remove GUTS buses from Georgetown's r a s i d e n t i a l s t r e e t s e a s t of campus, t h u s r e d u c i n g t h e i r impact on the r e s i d e n c e s along these s t r e e t s . (6) E s t a b l i s h a t r a n s i t and c a r p o o l i n f o r m a t i o n c e n t e r on campus. A c l e a r f i n d i n g of the Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Survey was t h a t many respondents were not aware of what t r a n s i t s e r v i c e s a r e a v a i l a b l e t o Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y commuters. A number o f respondents i n d i c a t e d the need f o r b e t t e r i n f o r m a t i o n d i s s e m i n a t i o n r e g a r d i n g t r a n s i t r o u t e s s e r v i n g the U n i v e r s i t y , and some i n c l u d e d s u g g e s t i o n s as t o how t h i s could be done e f f e c t i v e l y . One way t o make i n f o r m a t i o n more r e a d i l y a v a i l a b l e would be t o c r e a t e a t r a n s i t i n f o r m a t i o n c e n t e r or c e n t e r s where r o u t e s would be �shown on a map o f t h e Georgetown a r e a , schedules t o both GUTS and Metrobus r o u t e s would be a v a i l a b l e a t a l l t i m e s , and i n f o r m a t i o n on how t o use GUTS, Metrobus, and M e t r o r a i l would be posted. A main i n f o r m a t i o n c e n t e r c o u l d be e s t a b l i s h e d a t a c e n t r a l l o c a t i o n such a s Healy H a l l o r t h e planned U n i v e r s i t y Center where a l a r g e t r a n s i t d i s p l a y could be s e t up t o g e t h e r w i t h a c a r p o o l matching board. The c a r p o o l matching board c o u l d have a map of the m e t r o p o l i t a n a r e a d i v i d e d i n t o zones t o g e t h e r w i t h a signup sheet where persons i n t e r e s t e d i n forming a c a r p o o l would l e a v e t h e i r name, a d d r e s s , telephone number, zone o f o r i g i n , time o f a r r i v a l and d e p a r t u r e and whether they needed a r i d e o r would d r i v e t h e c a r p o o l . A l s o , i n f o r m a t i o n about t h e M e t r o p o l i t a n Washington C o u n c i l o f Governments' (MWCOG) c a r p o o l matching program c o u l d be d i s p l a y e d . I n a d d i t i o n t o t h e c e n t r a l t r a n s i t / carpool information center, smaller t r a n s i t information centers c o u l d be s e t up i n s t r a t e g i c l o c a t i o n s around campus such as t h e l i b r a r y , b o o k s t o r e , r e c e p t i o n a r e a s o f t h e Medical Center, and a t t h e law c e n t e r . These s m a l l e r c e n t e r s could c o n t a i n t r a n s i t r o u t e maps and s c h e d u l e s , i n f o r m a t i o n on how t o use t h e system, and i n f o r m a t i o n about t h e on-campus and MWCOG c a r p o o l matching programs. (7) C r e a t e a t r a n s i t i n f o r m a t i o n package t o be d i s t r i b u t e d t o s t u d e n t s a t r e g i s t r a t i o n and f a c u l t y and s t a f f through t h e campus m a i l . T h i s a l t e r n a t i v e i s a l s o an attempt t o b e t t e r d i s seminate i n f o r m a t i o n t o s t u d e n t s , f a c u l t y , and s t a f f about what t r a n s i t s e r v i c e s a r e a v a i l a b l e f o r t h e i r use. A r e p r o d u c i b l e bookl e t c o u l d be developed c o n t a i n i n g r o u t e maps and schedule i n f o r mation f o r GUTS and Metrobus r o u t e s s e r v i n g t h e U n i v e r s i t y , and key i n f o r m a t i o n on how t o use GUTS and WMATA s e r v i c e s . T h i s b o o k l e t c o u l d be made a v a i l a b l e t o s t u d e n t s a t r e g i s t r a t i o n and c o u l d be p e r i o d i c a l l y m a i l e d t o f a c u l t y and s t a f f through t h e campus m a i l . Copies could a l s o be made a v a i l a b l e a t any time a t the Healy H a l l i n f o r m a t i o n booth and o t h e r c e n t r a l l o c a t i o n s �around the U n i v e r s i t y . I f the b o o k l e t were kept to about 10 pages i n l e n g t h , i t would not become cumbersome and r e p r o d u c t i o n c o s t s could be kept low,yet enough i n f o r m a t i o n could be p r e s e n t e d t h a t anyone could use the t r a n s i t s e r v i c e s a v a i l a b l e to Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y commuters. (8) I n c r e a s e p a r k i n g c o s t s and use a d d i t i o n a l revenues to s u b s i d i z e GUTS s e r v i c e . T h i s measure has been proposed as a means t o pay f o r any a d d i t i o n a l s u b s i d i e s r e q u i r e d f o r GUTS e i t h e r through i n c r e a s e d o p e r a t i n g c o s t s , i n c r e a s e s i n s e r v i c e , or r e d u c t i o n s i n f a r e s f o r passengers t r a n s f e r r i n g between Metrobus or M e t r o r a i l and GUTS. T h i s measure would a c t both as a d i s i n c e n t i v e to commuting by auto and as an i n c e n t i v e t o commuting by GUTS because i t would permit h i g h e r l e v e l s of GUTS s e r v i c e a t lower f a r e s . I t should be noted, however, t h a t Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y a l r e a d y pays f o r GUTS s u b s i d i e s through p a r k i n g f e e s and p l a n s to c o n t i n u e t o do so. GUTS f a r e s and p a r k i n g r a t e s are both e s t a b l i s h e d by the t r a n s p o r t a t i o n committee of the U n i v e r s i t y which c o n s i s t s of r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of a l l p a r t s of the U n i v e r s i t y . GUTS p r e s e n t l y c o l l e c t s enough revenues from the f a r e box t o pay f o r o n l y 36 p e r c e n t of i t s o p e r a t i n g c o s t s , so i t can be seen t h a t revenues from p a r k i n g f e e s a l r e a d y pay f o r a s u b s t a n t i a l p o r t i o n of the GUTS o p e r a t i o n , and i t i s l i k e l y t h a t o p e r a t i n g c o s t s w i l l cont i n u e to c l i m b a t a f a s t e r r a t e than f a r e s , r e s u l t i n g i n h i g h e r subsidy r e q u i r e m e n t s i n the f u t u r e . T h e r e f o r e i t i s l i k e l y t h i s measure w i l l occur n a t u r a l l y over t i m e . The one measure which has been recommended which may r e s u l t i n s i g n i f i c a n t i n c r e a s e s i n subsidy r e q u i r e m e n t s i s d i s c o u n t f a r e s f o r passengers t r a n s f e r r i n g between GUTS and M e t r o r a i l or Metrobus. Increasing p a r k i n g f e e s would appear to be the most a c c e p t a b l e means of paying f o r a d d i t i o n a l s u b s i d i e s r e q u i r e d as a r e s u l t of t h i s measure. (9) Reduce the d i s c o u n t f o r monthly or y e a r l y p a r k i n g to encourage p a r k e r s t o pay d a i l y and use t r a n s i t when f e a s i b l e . At the p r e s e n t time Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y i s s u e s annual p a r k i n g �p e r m i t s t o f a c u l t y , s t a f f , and s t u d e n t s who commute t o campus. The 9 month fee f o r Main Campus s t u d e n t s i s $66.60 and Medical Center s t u d e n t s i s $180.00. The 12 month fee f o r Main Campus f a c u l t y and s t a f f i s $138.10 and Medical Center f a c u l t y and s t a f f i s $240.00. A t o t a l of 3,642 annual p a r k i n g p e r m i t s are i s s u e d to Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y f a c u l t y , s t a f f , and s t u d e n t s . I f an auto commuter does not have an annual p a r k i n g p e r m i t , he or she must pay a d a i l y fee of $2.00 t o park on campus. I t was noted by s e v e r a l respondents to the Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Survey t h a t once they had p a i d the annual p a r k i n g fee t h e r e was l i t t l e i n c e n t i v e t o t a k e t r a n s i t on those days they d i d not have to d r i v e . I t was noted by o t h e r s t h a t the average d a i l y f e e w i t h a permit worked out t o be c o n s i d e r a b l y l e s s than the one day f e e for non-permit h o l d e r s (anywhere from 37 c e n t s t o $1.00 f o r perm i t h o l d e r s v e r s u s $2.00 f o r non-permit h o l d e r s ) . T h e r e f o r e , f o r those who might be i n c l i n e d t o t a k e t r a n s i t some of the time i f they had t o pay the f u l l d a i l y f e e f o r p a r k i n g e v e r y day, t h e r e i s l i t t l e i n c e n t i v e t o do so w i t h an annual p e r m i t . For t h i s reason i t has been suggested t h a t the d i s c o u n t g i v e n permit h o l d e r s be reduced t o encourage p a r k e r s t o pay d a i l y and t a k e t r a n s i t when f e a s i b l e . However, t h e r e a r e two major d i s a d v a n t a g e s t o such an a l t e r n a t i v e . F i r s t , by h a v i n g a much h i g h e r d a i l y charge for non-permit h o l d e r s , i t i s much e a s i e r t o c o n t r o l t h e number of non-permit h o l d e r s p a r k i n g on campus, t h u s g u a r a n t e e i n g the a v a i l a b i l i t y of spaces f o r those commuters who most need them (the a v a i l a b i l i t y of annual p e r m i t s being based on n e e d ) . Second, under the p r e s e n t system r e l a t i v e l y l i t t l e cash i s c o l l e c t e d by the p a r k i n g l o t a t t e n d a n t s , t h u s m i n i m i z i n g the s e c u r i t y r i s k s r e s u l t i n g from t h e i r c o l l e c t i n g money. By i n c r e a s i n g the prop o r t i o n of p a r k e r s who pay d a i l y , the amount of cash c o l l e c t e d by a t t e n d a n t s would i n c r e a s e s u b s t a n t i a l l y , and so would the a s s o c i a t e d s e c u r i t y r i s k s . For t h e s e r e a s o n s , t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e i s no longer recommended f o r f u r t h e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n . �(10) Reserve most convenient p a r k i n g spaces f o r c a r p o o l s w i t h t h r e e or more persons. W i t h i n the r e s o u r c e s a v a i l a b l e , i t i s the p o l i c y of the U n i v e r s i t y to p r o v i d e p a r k i n g accomodations t o the f a c u l t y , s t a f f , a n d student body, when a v a i l a b l e , i n the a r e a most convenient t o the i n d i v i d u a l . I n order t o encourage a h i g h e r p r o p o r t i o n of commuters t o Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y t o c a r p o o l i t has been suggested t h a t the most c o n v e n i e n t l y l o c a t e d spaces be r e s e r v e d f o r c a r p o o l s . T h i s measure c o u l d r e s u l t i n s i g n i f i c a n t time s a v i n g s f o r c a r p o o l e r s who park i n the l a r g e r l o t s or those who a r e not p r e s e n t l y a s s i g n e d t o the l o t which i s most c o n v e n i e n t f o r them. A system f o r r e s e r v i n g the most c o n v e n i e n t spaces f o r c a r p o o l e r s a t a u n i v e r s i t y should a l l o w f o r f l e x i b i l i t y because c a r p o o l s w i l l change almost on a d a i l y b a s i s due t o t h e high v a r i a n c e s i n commuting s c h e d u l e s . One way t o a l l o w f o r t h i s v a r i a n c e i s t o have p a r k i n g l o t a t t e n d a n t s i s s u e a t i c k e t (to be d i s p l a y e d i n t h e w i n d s h i e l d ) t o each c a r e n t e r i n g campus w i t h t h r e e or more persons. Only c a r s w i t h t h e s e t i c k e t s would be p e r m i t t e d i n the spaces designated f o r c a r p o o l s . Another way t o g i v e c a r p o o l s p r i o r i t y i s t o a l l o w them e n t r y t o campus even a f t e r p a r k i n g l o t s have f i l l e d ( s a v i n g s e v e r a l spaces s p e c i f i c a l l y f o r t h e s e l a t e coming c a r p o o l s ) . The U n i v e r s i t y p r e s e n t l y s e l l s s p e c i a l c a r p o o l p a r k i n g p e r m i t s which can be t r a n s f e r r e d among the c a r s of the c a r p o o l members. T h i s p r a c t i c e should be c o n t i n u e d , and c o n s i d e r a t i o n g i v e n t o reduced r a t e s both f o r annual c a r p o o l p e r m i t s and d a i l y p a r k i n g f e e s f o r c a r p o o l s . The p r a c t i c e of i s s u i n g s p e c i a l t i c k e t s t o c a r p o o l s w i t h t h r e e or more persons and r e s e r v i n g the most convenient spaces f o r c a r s d i s p l a y i n g t h e s e t i c k e t s could begin immediately. At t h e p r e s e n t time t h i s program could be expected t o be most e f f e c t i v e i n t h e l a r g e r l o t s and garages. T h i s measure w i l l be even more e f f e c t i v e however once a l l Main Campus p a r k i n g i s cons o l i d a t e d i n t o t h e proposed s i n g l e p a r k i n g garage t o be l o c a t e d j u s t n o r t h of the U n i v e r s i t y ' s Southern E n t r a n c e . �(11) Expand GUTS s e r v i c e . A l a r g e number o f t h e respondents t o t h e Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Survey i n d i c a t e d a d e s i r e t o have d i r e c t GUTS s e r v i c e t o campus from t h e a r e a i n which they l i v e . T e c h n i c a l Memorandum No. 4 summarizes t h e number of respondents e x p r e s s i n g such a d e s i r e by l o c a t i o n o f r e s i d e n c e . For t h e most p a r t t h e respondents r e s i d e n c e s a r e d i s p e r s e d throughout t h e Washington m e t r o p o l i t a n a r e a w i t h no s i n g l e c o r r i d o r having a high enough response r a t e t o w a r r a n t c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f a new GUTS r o u t e . The h i g h e s t d e n s i t y o f responses was i n the c o r r i d o r n o r t h west o f campus, and i t was p a r t i a l l y based upon t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t t h e proposed WMATA r o u t e between Chevy Chase C i r c l e and F a r r a g u t Square v i a American U n i v e r s i t y was recommended. I t should be noted t h a t Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y does not d e s i r e t o s u b s t a n t i a l l y i n c r e a s e GUTS s u b s i d y requirements and i s u n l i k e l y t o s t a r t new GUTS s e r v i c e i n c o r r i d o r s f o r which high demand p o t e n t i a l has not been i d e n t i f i e d . Given t h e s e c o n s i d e r a t i o n s , i t i s concluded t h a t t h e focus o f r e v i s i n g GUTS r o u t e s should be upon improving a c c e s s t o M e t r o r a i l , which can p r o v i d e a high l e v e l o f t r a n s i t s e r v i c e t o many o f t h e d i s p e r s e l o c a t i o n s t o which t r a n s i t s e r v i c e i s d e s i r e d . I t i s recommended t h a t e f f o r t s c o n c e n t r a t e upon p r o v i d i n g f r e q u e n t s h u t t l e s e r v i c e between t h e R o s s l y n M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n and Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y w i t h d i s c o u n t f a r e s f o r p a s s e n g e r s t r a n s f e r r i n g between GUTS and Metrobus o r Metror a i l , r a t h e r than p r o v i d i n g new r o u t e s i n t o c o r r i d o r s not p r e s e n t l y s e r v e d by GUTS. (12) Vanpooling program. Vanpooling has proven t o be an e f f e c t i v e p a r a t r a n s i t a l t e r n a t i v e f o r employees a t l a r g e employment c e n t e r s throughout t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s . I n a t y p i c a l vanpooling program groups o f 10-12 employees w i l l commute t o g e t h e r i n l e a s e d or employer-provided vans f o r a b a s i c monthly charge which covers t h e i r p o r t i o n o f t h e van's monthly o p e r a t i n g c o s t s . Vanpools have proven t o be most popular among employees l i v i n g 15 m i l e s o r more �from the employment s i t e who do not have a good t r a n s i t a l t e r n a t i v e between t h e i r r e s i d e n c e and employment l o c a t i o n . G e n e r a l l y , the members of a vanpool a l l l i v e i n a s i n g l e a r e a or along a w e l l d e f i n e d r a d i a l c o r r i d o r l e a d i n g to the employment s i t e , and a l l members of the vanpool have n o n - v a r i a b l e and s i m i l a r working hours. Very few s t u d e n t s or f a c u l t y members a t Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y f i t t h i s c a t e g o r y , and t h e r e f o r e v e r y few of t h e s e commuters c o u l d be expected t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n a vanpool program. However, more i n t e r e s t c o u l d be expected t o be generated among the 3,834 s t a f f members of the U n i v e r s i t y who tend t o have l e s s v a r i a n c e and more commonality i n t h e i r working hours. Even a v e r y s m a l l vanpool program of 10 vans c o u l d be expected t o reduce the number of v e h i c l e s d r i v i n g t o and p a r k i n g on campus by a p p r o x i m a t e l y 80 t o 90. E x p e r i e n c e a t o t h e r employment l o c a t i o n s has shown t h a t vanpool programs tend t o have a snowball e f f e c t . Programs tend t o have modest b e g i n n i n g s , sometimes w i t h as few as 3 or 4 v a n s , and as news of the program spreads through the employment s i t e , i n t e r e s t i n c r e a s e s and the number of vanpools grows. I f the vanpool program i s g i v e n h i g h v i s i b i l i t y and vanpools a r e p r o v i d e d the most conv e n i e n t p a r k i n g s p a c e s , t h e program i s much more l i k e l y t o succeed and grow. I t i s recommended t h a t Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y f u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t e t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f p u r c h a s i n g s e v e r a l vans f o r use i n a vanpool program and t h a t a s m a l l program t a r g e t t e d a t s t a f f members not p r e s e n t l y w e l l s e r v e d by t r a n s i t be s t a r t e d on an e x p e r i m e n t a l b a s i s . The program c o u l d be s e t up so the monthly charges f o r passengers cover o p e r a t i n g c o s t s . Even i f the program proves t o be a f a i l u r e , the v e h i c l e s c o u l d be used by the U n i v e r s i t y f o r o t h e r purposes. I f i t proves t o be a s u c c e s s , i t c o u l d be expected t o reduce campus p a r k i n g demand, and the program c o u l d be expanded as demand d i c t a t e s . �CHAPTER 8. TRAVEL DEMAND ANALYSIS The p r e v i o u s c h a p t e r s have a n a l y z e d t h e impacts which could be expected from each o f a l a r g e number o f c a n d i d a t e a c c e s s improvement a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r t h e Georgetown a r e a . I n order t o t e s t the impacts on t r a v e l demand which c o u l d be expected from the c a n d i d a t e a c c e s s improvement a l t e r n a t i v e s , a number o f t h e a l t e r n a t i v e s which were not e l i m i n a t e d from f u r t h e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n because o f n o n - t r a v e l demand r e a s o n s were combined i n t o four packages of a l t e r n a t i v e s t o be t e s t e d u s i n g t h e t r a v e l demand modeling c h a i n . ALTERNATIVES TESTED I n d e v e l o p i n g packages of a l t e r n a t i v e s t o be t e s t e d , s e v e r a l p h i l o s o p h i e s , or g e n e r a l c a t e g o r i e s o f a l t e r n a t i v e s , emerged which formed t h e b a s i s f o r grouping a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r demand a n a l y s i s purposes. T r a v e l demand runs were made f o r each o f f o u r packages of a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r f o r e c a s t y e a r 1985 as w e l l as f o r a 1979 base c a s e . The f o u r packages o f 1985 a l t e r n a t i v e s i n c l u d e d a n u l l a l t e r n a t i v e , an i n c r e a s e d t r a n s i t a l t e r n a t i v e , a t r a f f i c r e s t r a i n t a l t e r n a t i v e , and a t r o l l e y a l t e r n a t i v e . Each c a n d i d a t e a c c e s s improvement a l t e r n a t i v e d i s c u s s e d p r e v i o u s l y was e i t h e r grouped i n t o one or more o f the four packages, not i n c l u d e d i n a s p e c i f i c package because i t s impact on t r a v e l demand c o u l d not be s p e c i f i c a l l y f o r e c a s t , or dropped from f u r t h e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n because t h e a n a l y s i s o f n o n - t r a v e l demand impacts i n d i c a t e d t h e a l t e r n a t i v e should not be implemented. The t r e a t m e n t o f each c a n d i d a t e a l t e r n a t i v e i n t h e demand a n a l y s i s and t h e makeup of t h e f o u r t r a v e l demand a n a l y s i s packages i s shown i n T a b l e 2. . The n u l l a l t e r n a t i v e i n c l u d e d no changes from t h e e x i s t i n g t r a n s i t and highway systems i n t h e Georgetown a r e a e x c e p t those a c c e s s improvements which a r e p r e s e n t l y committed t o be implemented by 1985. These i n c l u d e t h e implementation o f a �T a b l e 2. Candidate Georgetown Area Access Improvements CANDIDATE PHYSICAL ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT ACTIONS (1) Traffic Restraint Alternative Trolley Alternative Not i n Demand Analysis Repsve lower K S t r e e t , moving the r a i l r o a d t r a c k s t o e i t h e r the north or south side of K S t r e e t . X No Longer to be Considered X Extend lower K S t r e e t to I n t e r s e c t with Canal Road opposite the Southern Entrance to Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y . (3) Increased Transit Alternative f i e the e x i s t i n g stub-end ramps, a t the east end of whitehurst rreetrtay to M S t r e e t and Pennsylvania Avenue. (2) Null Alternative X X (4) Depress K S t r e e t between Washington C i r c l e and whitehurst Freeway. (5) Construct a double l e f t turn lane a t the Canal Road-Foxhall Road i n t e r s e c t i o n f o r uaa by westbound Canal Road t r a f f i c during the PM pea (6) Upgrade Southern Entrance to Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y (treated separately ) X Provide pedestrian access along K S t r e e t between Georgetown and the West End , X X x X X X a (7) CANDIDATE TRAPTIC OPERATION IMPROVEMENT ACTIONS (1) One-way s t r e e t s . (a) (b) North-south s t r e e t s north of M S t r e e t (28th, 29th, 30th, 31st S t r e e t s ) (c) X South of M S t r e e t (29th, 30th, 31st, Thomas J e f f e r s o n S t r e e t s ) East-west s t r e e t s north of M S t r e e t (N, P, Q S t r e e t s ) (2) Reversible lanes on Key Bridge. (4) Remove r e v e r s i b l e lanes on M S t r e e t . X X Upgrade the t r a f f i c s i g n a l system. (3) X (5) Make r i g h t lane of Key Bridge northbound r i g h t turn only a t Whitehurst Freeway ramp. X X Extend bus lanes on M S t r e e t from Wisconsin Avenue t o Key Bridge. (6) X X X (7) High occupancy v e h i c l e lanes on Key Bridge. X (8) High occupancy v e h i c l e lanes on Whitehurst Freeway. X (9) High occupancy v e h i c l e lanes on Canal Road and Whitehurst Freeway from Chain Bridge to Washington C i r c l e . (10) (11) High occupancy v e h i c l e lanes on P and Q S t r e e t s . Reduce the number of lanes on Key Bridge to four. (12) Reduce the number of lanes on Chain Bridge to two. X X X �T a b l e 2. Candidate Georgetown Area Access Improvements (CONTINUED) CANDIDATE PARKING MANAGEMENT ACTIONS Null Alternative Increased Transit Alternative Traffic Restraint Alternative Trolley Alternative Not I n Demand Analysis X (1) Extend r e s i d e n t i a l parking permit program to evenings and weekends. (2) Extend peak hour on-street parking r e s t r i c t i o n s along M S t r e e t and Wisconsin Avenue to midday, evenings, and weekends. (3) Convert a percentage of parking spaces along M S t r e e t and Wisconsin Avenue t o loading zones. X (4) B u i l d a parking garage i n the Wisconsin Avenue commercial area north of M S t r e e t . X (5) Park and r i d e l o t s . (a) Glen Echo Amusement Park (b) X X X McLean, V i r g i n i a area (c) Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y X X (6) Remove peak hour on-street parking spaces south of M S t r e e t . X (7) Convert a percentage of on-street parking spaces south of M S t r e e t t o loading zones. X (8) Marketing of p r i v a t e garage spaces, p a r t i c u l a r l y on weekends and evenings. X (a) .expand parking v a l i d a t i o n programs (b) (9) (10) posting parking information (c) signing for parking X X Increase parking meter r a t e s and extend hours. X Increase number of on-street parking spaces which are metered. X CANDIDATE TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT ACTIONS (1) New or modified large bus routes. (a) (2) Chevy Chase C i r c l e - Tenley C i r c l e - American U n i v e r s i t y Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y - Foggy Bottom X X Glen Echo park-and-ride express s e r v i c e (b) R e i n s t i t u t i o n of Georgetown t r o l l e y s e r v i c e . No Longer to be Considered X X �Table 2. Candidate Georgetown Area Access Improvements (CONTINUED) CANDIDATE TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT ACTIONS (3) (CONTINUED) Null Alternative Increased Transit Alternative Trolley Alternative Not i n Demand Analysis S n a i l bus routes. K S t r e e t - Pennsylvania Avenue loop (b) K Street - Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y Loop (c) K Street Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y Medical (d) Foggy Bottom - Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y (e) Rosslyn - Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y Medical Center (f) Rosslyn - Wisconsin / Massachusetts Avenues (g) Rosslyn - Dupont C i r c l e (h) Rosslyn - Foggy Bottom X (1) Foggy Bottom - Dupont C i r c l e v i a Wisconsin Avenue X (j) Extension of above routes to Kennedy Center and other points i n Foggy Bottom, or to Farragut Square X Center X loop X X X X X T r a n s i t marketing. (a) X T r a n s i t information centers (b) T r a n s i t information package f o r Georgetown employees X (c) Employer subsidy of t r a n s i t f a r e s X (d) Transit fare X (e) T r a n s i t information brochure f o r patrons o f Georgetown shops, restaurants, and entertainment spots validation scheme X CANDIDATE GEORGETOWN U N I V E R S I T Y SOUTHERN ENTRANCE ALTERNATIVES Physical I n t e r s e c t i o n A l t e r n a t i v e s (1) No Longer to be Considered X (a) (4) Traffic Restraint Alternative Null a l t e r n a t i v e : the i n t e r e e c t i o n would be l e f t as i t i s today with no l e f t turns from the U n i v e r s i t y to eastbound Canal Road or from eastbound Canal Road to the U n i v e r s i t y allowed. X �T a b l e 2. Candidate Georgetown Area A c c e s s Improvements (CONTINUED) Null Alternative CANDIDATE GEORGETOWN U N I V E R S I T Y SOUTHERN ENTRANCE ALTERNATIVES (CONTINUED) Increased Transit Alternative Traffic Restraint Alternative Trolley Alternative Not i n Demand Analysis No Longer to be Considered P h y s i c a l I n t e r s e c t i o n A l t e r n a t i v e s (continued) (2) At grade s i g n a l i z e d i n t e r s e c t i o n at present access l o c a t i o n with no widening or change i n Canal Road alignment. Under t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e an opening would be made i n the e x i s t i n g median s t r i p through which l e f t turns could be made, but no turn bays would be i n s t a l l e d . (3) At grade s i g n a l i z e d i n t e r s e c t i o n at present access l o c a t i o n with provision of a 200 foot l e f t turn bay from eastbound Canal Road into the U n i v e r s i t y and a realignment of westbound Canal Road to a maximum of 12 feet north of i t s e x i s t i n g alignment. (4) At grade s i g n a l i z e d i n t e r s e c t i o n 200 feet to the east of the e x i s t i n g U n i v e r s i t y entrance with provision of a 200 foot l e f t turn bay from eastbound Canal Road and a realignment of westbound Canal Road to a maximum of 12 feet north of i t s e x i s t i n g alignment. (S) Grade separated interchange with f l y o v e r ramps c a r r y i n g l e f t movments i n t o and out of Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y . (6) X X X turning A t h i r d roadway with three lanes would be b u i l t along the c r e s t of the Potomac Palisades. This roadway would be used by westbound Canal Road t r a f f i c , with perhaps a r e v e r s i b l e lane to accommodate AM peak loads. The e x i s t i n g westbound lanes would become an access road to serve U n i v e r s i t y t r a f f i c . X X Operational A l t e r n a t i v e s X (1) Allow a l l turning movements i n t o and out of Georgetown U n i v e r i s t y a t a l l times. (2) Prohibit l e f t turns i n t o and out of Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y by a l l v e h i c l e s during peak periods, allowing f u l l access d u r i n g the remainder of the day. X Prohibit l e f t turns i n t o and out of Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y by a l l v e h i c l e s , except buses and emergency v e h i c l e s , during peak periods allowing f u l l access during the remainder of the day. X (4) Prohibit l e f t turns into and out of Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y at a l l times except to buses and emergency v e h i c l e s . X (5) P r o h i b i t l e f t turns i n t o and out of Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y during the AM peak only. X (6) Prohibit l e f t turns out of Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y during the AM peak. (3) X �Table 2 . Candidate Georgetown Area Access Improvements (CONTINUED) CANDIDATE GEORGETOWN U N I V E R S I T Y SOUTHERN ENTRANCE ALTERNATIVES (CONTINUED) A l t e r n a t v i e s to Overcome Grade D i f f e r e n t i a l Between Canal Road and Main Campus (1) Traffic Restraint Alternative Trolley Alternative Not i n Demand Analysis No Longer to be Considered X At the midpoint of the e x i s t i n g roadway reverse the roadway d i r e c t i o n to make a U-shaped roadway. (3) Increased Transit Alternative Use the e x i s t i n g roadway. (2) Null Alternative Build a s t r u c t u r e containing ramps to overcome the grade d i f f e r e n t i a l . X X Complementary A l t e r n a t i v e s (1) Incorporate a double l e f t turn a t the i n t e r s e c t i o n of Canal and F o x h a l l Raods for westbound Canal Road t r a f f i c during the PM peak. (2) Maintain the Prospect S t r e e t Entrance t o the U n i v e r s i t y as a major entrance f o r v e h i c l e s accessing the campus from the north and east and to provide a r e l i e f v a l v e to the Canal Road Entrance during periods of peak t r a f f i c flow. (3) B u i l d an entrance to the proposed Main Campus parking s t r u c t u r e from Reservoir Road. X X X X X X X X X OTHER CANDIDATE GEORGETOWN U N I V E R S I T Y ACTIONS (1) Reorient GUTS V i r g i n i a routes to avoid d u p l i c a t i o n with B a l l s t o n Metrorail l i n e . Provide frequent s h u t t l e s e r v i c e between Rosslyn s t a t i o n and Georgetown U n i v e r e i t y a t lower f a r e than for longer t r i p s . (2) Accept M e t r o r a i l or Metrobus t r a n s f e r s i n l i e u of payment or as a discount toward payment of f a r e . (3) Allow f o r f a r e payment on GUTS buses, instead of present t i c k e t system. X X X (4) Revise GUTS schedules to better coordinate with the a t a r t of c l a s s e s and a c t u a l running times. X (5) Change V i r g i n i a and Law School GUTS routes so as t o access the U n i v e r s i t y a t the Southern Entrance. (6) E s t a b l i s h a t r a n s i t and carpool information center on campus. X (7) Create e t r a n s i t information package to be d i s t r i b u t e d t o students at r e g i s t r a t i o n and f a c u l t y and s t a f f through the campus mail. X X �T a b l e 2. Candidate Georgetown Area Access Improvements (CONTINUED) OTHER CANDIDATE GEORGETOWN U N I V E R S I T Y ACTIONS (CONTINUED) (8) Increase parking costs and use additional revenues t o subsidize GUTS s e r v i c e . (9) Null Alternative Increased Transit Alternative Traffic Restraint Alternaitve Trolley Alternative Hot i n Demand Analysis Reduce the discount for monthly or y e a r l y parking to encourage parkers t o pay d a i l y and use t r a n s i t when f e a s i b l e . (10) Reserve most convenient parking spaces f o r carpools with three or more persons. (11) Vanpooling program. X X X X Expand GUTS s e r v i c e . (12) No Longer to be Considered X �double l e f t t u r n f o r westbound Canal Road t r a f f i c a t t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n of Canal and F o x h a l l Roads d u r i n g the PM peak p e r i o d ; the opening o f s e v e r a l new M e t r o r a i l l i n e s , i n c l u d i n g the l i n e s to Shady Grove and V i e n n a , both of which w i l l have a s i g n i f i c a n t impact on t r a f f i c i n Georgetown; and t h e opening of I n t e r s t a t e 66 between the C a p i t a l Beltway and R o s s l y n . The n u l l a l t e r n a t i v e f o r 1985 s e r v e s both as a base f o r comparing f u t u r e a c c e s s c o n d i t i o n s w i t h c u r r e n t c o n d i t i o n s assuming o n l y those changes which a r e p r e s e n t l y committed a r e implemented and as a base a g a i n s t which t o compare t h e o t h e r packages of c a n d i d a t e a c c e s s improvement a l t e r n a t i v e s . The i n c r e a s e d t r a n s i t a l t e r n a t i v e assumed t h e implementat i o n o f t h e t h r e e most h i g h l y r a t e d s m a l l bus r o u t e s a n a l y z e d i n Chapter 5 . These i n c l u d e d r o u t e s between R o s s l y n and Foggy Bottom v i a K S t r e e t ; R o s s l y n and W i s c o n s i n and M a s s a c h u s e t t s Avenues v i a M S t r e e t and W i s c o n s i n Avenue; and Foggy Bottom and Dupont C i r c l e v i a K S t r e e t , W i s c o n s i n Avenue, and P S t r e e t . I n a d d i t i o n i t was assumed t h a t a park and r i d e l o t would be implemented a t the Glen Echo Amusement P a r k and connected t o downtown Washington by an e x p r e s s bus r o u t e , and a l o c a l Metrobus r o u t e would be i n s t i t u t e d between Chevy Chase C i r c l e and F a r r a g u t Square v i a T e n l e y C i r c l e , American U n i v e r s i t y , and Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y . I t was a l s o assumed t h a t a l l movements could be made a t t h e Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y Southern E n t r a n c e and Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y would be connected t o t h e R o s s l y n Metror a i l S t a t i o n v i a a s h u t t l e bus and a t r a n s f e r arrangement could be worked out between GUTS buses and M e t r o r a i l . The t r a f f i c r e s t r a i n t a l t e r n a t i v e i n c l u d e d s e v e r a l measures designed t o reduce t h e amount of v e h i c u l a r t r a f f i c p a s s i n g through Georgetown p r o p e r . I t was assumed t h a t t h e ramps a t the e a s t end of W h i t e h u r s t Freeway a r e connected t o L S t r e e t , and 26th S t r e e t between L and M S t r e e t s i s made two-way. I n a d d i t i o n i t was assumed t h a t t h e r i g h t l a n e o f northbound Key B r i d g e would become �a r i g h t t u r n o n l y lane a t t h e ramp t o W h i t e h u r s t Freeway i n order t o encourage through t r a f f i c t o use W h i t e h u r s t Freeway. I t was f u r t h e r assumed t h a t a modest r e d u c t i o n i n the c a p a c i t y of Key B r i d g e would be a c h i e v e d , most l i k e l y through s i g n a l r e t i m i n g a t the n o r t h end of the b r i d g e . I t was a l s o assumed t h a t an HOV l a n e would be implemented on C a n a l Road between the Maryland S t a t e L i n e and F o x h a l l Road and on Chain B r i d g e d u r i n g the AM peak p e r i o d , t o g e t h e r w i t h a park and r i d e l o t a t the Glen Echo Amusement P a r k . The t r a f f i c r e s t r a i n t package a l s o assumed removal of the peak p e r i o d r e v e r s i b l e l a n e s on M S t r e e t through Georgetown. The t r o l l e y a l t e r n a t i v e t o as g r e a t a degree as p o s s i b l e i n c l u d e d o n l y those a c t i o n s which i t was f e l t would be n e c e s s a r y to make t r o l l e y s e r v i c e f e a s i b l e . I t was assumed t h a t t r o l l e y s e r v i c e would be provided between W i s c o n s i n Avenue and M S t r e e t and the Foggy Bottom S t a t i o n and would operate on t e n minute headways i n i t s own e x c l u s i v e r i g h t of way. I t was assumed t h a t the ramps a t the e a s t end of W h i t e h u r s t Freeway would be t i e d t o L S t r e e t i n order to p r o v i d e an a l t e r n a t e r o u t e t o M S t r e e t which would l o s e two t r a f f i c l a n e s . As a r e s u l t of the c e n t e r l a n e s o f M S t r e e t being d e d i c a t e d t o the t r o l l e y , i t was a l s o assumed t h a t r e v e r s i b l e l a n e o p e r a t i o n s on M S t r e e t would be e l i m i n a t e d . ANALYSIS PROCEDURES AND ASSUMPTIONS I n performing the a n a l y s i s of changes i n t r a v e l demand which c o u l d be expected f o r each o f the packages of a l t e r n a t i v e s t e s t e d , t h e t r a d i t i o n a l f o u r s t e p t r a v e l demand modeling c h a i n was employed. The s t e p s of the c h a i n i n c l u d e t r i p g e n e r a t i o n , the d e t e r m i n a t i o n of the number o f t r i p s produced and a t t r a c t e d by each type of l a n d use; t r i p d i s t r i b u t i o n , the d e t e r m i n a t i o n of where the generated t r i p s go t o or come from; modal c h o i c e , the �d e t e r m i n a t i o n of how t r i p s t o and from v a r i o u s l o c a t i o n s a r e a l l o c a t e d among modes; and t r i p assignment, the d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f which r o u t e s a r e used by t r i p s t o and from v a r i o u s l o c a t i o n s . The primary t o o l used f o r performing the t r a v e l demand a n a l y s i s was the TRIMS modeling package, a package of computer models developed by the M e t r o p o l i t a n Washington C o u n c i l of Governments (MWCOG) f o r t r a v e l demand f o r e c a s t i n g i n the Metrop o l i t a n Washington r e g i o n . Based upon c e r t a i n i n p u t d a t a , the TRIMS modeling package performs the four s t e p s o f the modeling c h a i n d e s c r i b e d above. For the purposes of t h i s study t h e Washington m e t r o p o l i t a n a r e a was d i v i d e d i n t o 181 t r a f f i c a n a l y s i s zones. The s m a l l e s t zones were w i t h i n the Georgetown cordon where t h e r e were s i x t e e n zones as shown i n F i g u r e 33. Zones i n the a r e a immediately s u r rounding Georgetown were s l i g h t l y l a r g e r and i n c r e a s e d i n s i z e w i t h d i s t a n c e from Georgetown. For each t r a f f i c a n a l y s i s zone l a n d use d a t a were compiled f o r 1979 and 1985 u s i n g MWCOG's C o o p e r a t i v e Round I f o r e c a s t s . W i t h i n Georgetown 1979 z o n a l l a n d use data were compared w i t h MWCOG Cooperative Round I I l a n d use d a t a , w i t h l a n d use d a t a p r o v i d e d by the D.C. M e t r o p o l i t a n P l a n n i n g O r g a n i z a t i o n , w i t h d a t a provided by Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y , and w i t h knowledge of l a n d uses w i t h i n Georgetown zones, and were a p p r o p r i a t e l y a d j u s t e d . To o b t a i n 1985 l a n d use d a t a w i t h i n Georgetown, d a t a f o r developments which a r e i n the f i n a l p l a n n i n g s t a g e s or beyond as provided by the D.C. M e t r o p o l i t a n P l a n n i n g Organiz a t i o n , were added t o 1979 l a n d use numbers. A summary of 1979 and 1985 l a n d use p r o j e c t i o n s as i n p u t t o the t r a v e l demand modeling p r o c e s s i s shown i n T a b l e 3. A more d e t a i l e d d i s c u s s i o n o f changes i n l a n d use expected t o r e s u l t from new developments i n Georgetown i s p r e s e n t e d i n Chapter 2 of T e c h n i c a l Memorandum 3. T a b l e 3 shows t h a t s i g n i f i c a n t growth i s p r o j e c t e d f o r Georgetown i n t h e n e x t s e v e r a l y e a r s w i t h the number of households i n c r e a s i n g 28 p e r c e n t and n o n - u n i v e r s i t y employment i n c r e a s i n g 53 p e r c e n t . The number of n o n - u n i v e r s i t y p a r k i n g spaces i s a l s o �TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ZONES WITHIN GEORGETOWN CORDON �TABLE 3 GEORGETOWN LAND U S E P R O J E C T I O N S % 1979 1985 6,900 8,800 +28% 15,100 23,600 +53% 9.607 13.563 +H1X 8,400 8,400 -0- GEORGETOWN U N I V E R S I T Y EMPLOYMENT 4,700 4,800 + 2% GEORGETOWN U N I V E R S I T Y 3,708 3,708 -0- T O T A L GEORGETOWN EMPLOYMENT 20,000 28,400 +41% T O T A L GEORGETOWN P A R K I N G 13,315 17,271 +30% GEORGETOWN - NON-UNIVERSITY GEORGETOWN HOUSEHOLDS GEORGETOWN N O N - U N I V E R S I T Y EMPLOYMENT GEORGETOWN N O N - U N I V E R S I T Y PARKING GEORGETOWN CHANGE SPACES UNIVERSITY GEORGETOWN U N I V E R S I T Y STUDENTS PARKING SPACES T O T A L GEORGETOWN SPACES �p r o j e c t e d t o i n c r e a s e s i g n i f i c a n t l y , by 41 p e r c e n t . L i t t l e change i s expected i n the s i z e of Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y w i t h the student p o p u l a t i o n remaining c o n s t a n t and t o t a l employment i n c r e a s i n g o n l y s l i g h t l y . However, the l a r g e i n c r e a s e s i n n o n - u n i v e r s i t y r e s i d e n t s and employees a r e expected t o r e s u l t i n over a 40 p e r c e n t i n c r e a s e i n t o t a l Georgetown t r i p g e n e r a t i o n between 1979 and 1985. Almost as s i g n i f i c a n t as the a b s o l u t e i n c r e a s e i n number of r e s i d e n t s and employees i s the p r o j e c t e d d i s t r i b u t i o n of the new development. The v a s t m a j o r i t y of the new development i s t o be c o n c e n t r a t e d i n the area' south o f M S t r e e t , i n an a r e a p r e s e n t l y s e r v e d by narrow congested s t r e e t s . Other development i s scheduled or p r e s e n t l y underway i n the a r e a immediately n o r t h o f M S t r e e t and i n the a r e a n o r t h o f Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y where a new F r e n c h Chancery and a number of r e s i d e n c e s a r e to be b u i l t . B e s i d e l a n d use d a t a , t h e o t h e r c r i t i c a l i n p u t t o the TRIMS modeling p r o c e s s i s a highway and t r a n s i t network d e s c r i p t i o n . Each l i n k of the highway and t r a n s i t system i s d e s c r i b e d by c e r t a i n c r i t i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n such as d i s t a n c e , speed, c a p a c i t y , and whether the l i n k i s one-way or two-way. T h i s network data i s then used t o determine zone-to-zone t r a v e l times by auto and transit. These t r a v e l times get i n p u t t o the t r i p d i s t r i b u t i o n and mode c h o i c e s t e p s of the t r a v e l demand modeling c h a i n . The network data i s a l s o used i n d e t e r m i n i n g t r a v e l paths f o r a s s i g n i n g i n t e r z o n a l t r a f f i c volumes d u r i n g t r i p assignment. The highway and t r a n s i t networks used i n t h i s study were q u i t e d e t a i l e d i n the Georgetown a r e a and became l e s s d e t a i l e d i n a r e a s f a r t h e r from Georgetown. C e r t a i n c r i t i c a l assumptions r e g a r d i n g the networks used should be noted. The M e t r o r a i l system used f o r the 1979 base c a s e a n a l y s i s i n c l u d e d t h e Red L i n e between Dupont C i r c l e and S i l v e r S p r i n g and the Blue-Orange L i n e between New C a r r o l l t o n and N a t i o n a l A i r p o r t . I t d i d not i n c l u d e t h e s e c t i o n o f the Orange L i n e between R o s s l y n and B a l l s t o n which �d i d n o t open u n t i l December 1979. I n 1985 i t was assumed t h a t the f o l l o w i n g a d d i t i o n a l s e c t i o n s of M e t r o r a i l would be open: the Red L i n e between Dupont C i r c l e and Shady Grove, t h e Orange L i n e from R o s s l y n t o V i e n n a , t h e Blue L i n e from N a t i o n a l A i r p o r t t o Huntington and from RFK Stadium t o Addison Road, t h e Green L i n e from G a l l e r y P l a c e t o A n a c o s t i a , and t h e Y e l l o w L i n e from G a l l e r y P l a c e t o King S t r e e t . I n a d d i t i o n i t was assumed t h a t I n t e r s t a t e 66 from the C a p i t a l B e l t w a y t o R o s s l y n would be open w i t h peak p e r i o d , peak d i r e c t i o n f l o w s being r e s t r i c t e d t o buses and c a r p o o l s w i t h f o u r o r more p e r s o n s . I t was a l s o assumed t h a t t h e D u l l e s T o l l Road and t h e D u l l e s A i r p o r t A c c e s s Road Connector between t h e C a p i t a l B e l t w a y and I n t e r s t a t e 66 would be open. G a s o l i n e and p a r k i n g c o s t s were assumed t o remain constant i n r e a l d o l l a r s . I t i s important t o note t h a t s i g n i f i c a n t increases i n gasoline or parking costs or s i g n i f i c a n t d e c r e a s e s i n g a s o l i n e a v a i l a b i l i t y would tend t o decrease auto t r a f f i c volumes f o r e c a s t i n t h i s s t u d y . The TRIMS modeling p r o c e s s produces a number o f d a t a which were used d i r e c t l y o r i n d i r e c t l y i n t h e e v a l u a t i o n of t r a v e l demand impacts o f t h e f o u r packages o f a l t e r n a t i v e s , i n c l u d i n g t o t a l number o f z o n a l p r o d u c t i o n s and a t t r a c t i o n s f o r home-based work t r i p auto d r i v e r s , auto p a s s e n g e r s , and t r a n s i t r i d e r s ; home-based shop auto d r i v e r s ; home-based o t h e r purpose auto d r i v e r t r i p s , and non-home based auto d r i v e r t r i p s . TRIMS does not d i r e c t l y perform a modal c h o i c e a n a l y s i s f o r non-work trips. To perform a mode c h o i c e a n a l y s i s f o r non-work t r i p s , the procedures o u t l i n e d i n NCHRP Report 187 —^ were used f o r non-work mode c h o i c e e s t i m a t i o n . I n t h i s way non-work t r a n s i t r i d e r s h i p c o u l d be e s t i m a t e d f o r each a l t e r n a t i v e t e s t e d and a p p r o p r i a t e changes t o non-work auto d r i v e r t r i p g e n e r a t i o n r a t e s made. 1/ N a t i o n a l C o o p e r a t i v e Highway R e s e a r c h Program Report 187. Quick-Response Urban T r a v e l E s t i m a t i o n Techniques and T r a n s f e r a b l e P a r a m e t e r s , T r a n s p o r t a t i o n R e s e a r c h Board, Washington, D.C, 1978. �TRIMS a l s o produces t r a f f i c volume e s t i m a t e s f o r each highway l i n k i n t h e coded highway network. These l i n k volumes were a d j u s t e d t o account f o r HOV r e s t r i c t i o n s on I n t e r s t a t e 66 and t o d i s t r i b u t e volumes on immediately a d j a c e n t s t r e e t s more e v e n l y among t h e s t r e e t s . The a d j u s t e d volumes were then r e p o r t e d f o r c e r t a i n c r i t i c a l highway l i n k s i n t h e Georgetown area. Through t r i p p e r c e n t a g e s were determined by d i v i d i n g t o t a l Georgetown v e h i c u l a r p r o d u c t i o n s and a t t r a c t i o n s by t o t a l Georgetown cordon l i n e v e h i c u l a r c r o s s i n g s . I n order to o b t a i n t r a n s i t usage by mode an a n a l y s i s was performed of t r a n s i t o r i g i n s and d e s t i n a t i o n s f o r t r i p s d e s t i n e d t o or o r i g i n a t i n g from s e c t i o n s of Georgetown. T r i p s f o r each t r a v e l movement were manually a l l o c a t e d among t r a n s i t modes, depending upon modal a v a i l a b i l i t y and t r a v e l t i m e s by mode. TRIMS produces VMT summary i n f o r m a t i o n by speed range f o r p r e s p e c i f i e d g e o g r a p h i c a l a r e a s f o r use i n a i r q u a l i t y a n a l y s e s . These d a t a were used i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h the U. S. E n v i r o n m e n t a l P r o t e c t i o n Agency's l a t e s t mobile source emiss i o n s f a c t o r s t o determine the impacts of t h e v a r i o u s packages on carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon e m i s s i o n s . The procedures d e s c r i b e d above were used t o a n a l y z e f i v e c o n d i t i o n s or s e t s of a l t e r n a t i v e s . The f i r s t was a 1979 base c a s e a n a l y s i s . T h i s was performed f o r two r e a s o n s , i n o r d e r t o c a l i b r a t e the highway and t r a n s i t networks so the modeling p r o c e s s f o r e c a s t 1979 l i n k t r a f f i c volumes s i m i l a r to those measured and r e p o r t e d i n T e c h n i c a l Memorandum No. 3, and so e x i s t i n g c o n d i t i o n s c o u l d be compared w i t h t h o s e f o r e c a s t f o r 1985. Once a s a t i s f a c t o r y 1979 model run was completed, t r a v e l demand a n a l y s e s were performed f o r each of the 19 85 packages of a l t e r n a t i v e s . The r e s u l t s of t h e s e a n a l y s e s follow. �TRAVEL DEMAND ANALYSIS RESULTS The r e s u l t s of the t r a v e l demand a n a l y s i s f o r the 1979 base case and f o r the four 1985 packages of c a n d i d a t e a c c e s s improvement a l t e r n a t i v e s a r e shown i n T a b l e s 4 t o 9. The i n f o r m a t i o n shown i n t h e s e t a b l e s i n c l u d e the r e s u l t s of a mode c h o i c e a n a l y s i s f o r both non-Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y and Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y t r i p s t o and from Georgetown, an a n a l y s i s of modal s h a r e s f o r t r a n s i t t r i p s , an a n a l y s i s of 24 hour t r a f f i c l i n k volume e s t i m a t e s f o r a number o f key s t r e e t s i n the Georgetown a r e a , a through t r i p a n a l y s i s , and an a n a l y s i s of changes which could be expected i n v e h i c l e m i l e s of t r a v e l and a i r p o l l u t i o n e m i s s i o n s . A d i s c u s s i o n of the r e s u l t s of t h e s e a n a l y s e s f o l l o w s . Mode Choice A n a l y s i s The r e s u l t s of the mode c h o i c e a n a l y s i s f o r t r i p s t o and from Georgetown f o r the 1979 base case and f o r each of the four 1985 a l t e r n a t i v e s i s shown i n T a b l e 4 . The d i s c u s s i o n of the r e s u l t s of t h i s a n a l y s i s w i l l be d i v i d e d i n t o t h r e e s e c t i o n s : t h e 1979 base case a n a l y s i s , an a n a l y s i s of changes between the 1979 base case and the 1985 base ( n u l l ) a l t e r n a t i v e , and an a n a l y s i s of the impacts of each of t h e o t h e r t h r e e 1985 a l t e r n a t i v e s v i s a v i s the n u l l a l t e r n a t i v e . I n 1979, i t i s e s t i m a t e d t h a t on an average weekday c l o s e to 200,000 t r i p s a r e made t o and from p o i n t s i n Georgetown. Of t h e s e a p p r o x i m a t e l y 12 p e r c e n t , or 23,300 a r e t r i p s t o and from the Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y Main Campus and the Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y M e d i c a l C e n t e r . Of a l l t r i p s made t o and from p o i n t s i n Georgetown, 87 p e r c e n t a r e by auto and 13 p e r c e n t by t r a n s i t . The 24 hour average auto occupancy i s 1.44, w i t h the average n o n - U n i v e r s i t y auto occupancy being 1.47 and the average U n i v e r s i t y auto occupancy being 1.25. The lower U n i v e r s i t y auto occupancy i s e x p l a i n e d by the much h i g h e r p r o p o r t i o n of commuter �TABLE 4 MODE CHOICE OF T R I P S TO AND FROM ALTERNATIVE 1979 B A S E MODE % GEORGETOWN AUTO 1985 B A S E AUTO PASSENGER AUTO OCCUPANCY TRANSIT TOTAL GEORGETOWN 103,100 48,500 1.47 22,700 59 28 13 174,300 100 TRANSIT G. U. TOTAL 23,300 100 DRIVER AUTO PASSENGER AUTO OCCUPANCY TOTAL AUTO % n % 1985 T R A F F I C RESTRAINT n 1985 T R O L L E Y I % 147,500 71,000 1.48 35,600 58 28 14 254,100 100 143,200 68,900 1.48 42,000 57 28 17 145,700 70,300 1.48 38,100 254,100 100 254,100 100 70 18 15 16,400 4,300 1.26 2,900 23,b00 100 23,600 100 58 27 17 162,100 74,600 1.46 41,000 277,700 100 277,700 100 56 27 15 146,700 70,600 1.48 38,000 57 28 15 255,300 100 UNIVERSITY 16,400 4,100 1.25 2,800 AUTO 1985 T R A N S I T - - NON-UNIVERSITY DRIVER NON-UNIV. ft GEORGETOWN 70 18 12 16,500 4,300 1.26 2,800 70 18 12 23,600 100 15,700 4,300 1.27 3,600 67 18 12 16,500 4,300 1.26 2,800 70 18 12 23,600 100 GEORGETOWN DRIVER AUTO PASSENGER AUTO OCCUPANCY TRANSIT GEORGETOWN TOTAL 119,500 52,600 1.44 25,500 60 27 13 197,600 100 164,000 75,300 1.46 38,400 59 27 14 277,700 100 158,900 73,200 1.46 45,600 57 26 15 163,200 74,900 1.46 40,800 58 27 15 278,900 100 �t r i p s going t o and from t h e U n i v e r s i t y , w h i c h tend t o have s i g n i f i c a n t l y lower occupancies than shopping or s o c i a l - r e c r e a t i o n t r i p s , and by t h e h i g h e r v a r i a n c e i n work s c h e d u l e s among U n i v e r s i t y f a c u l t y , s t a f f , and s t u d e n t s which makes c a r p o o l s d i f f i c u l t to maintain. A breakdown of t h e d a t a shown i n T a b l e 4 by t r i p purpose shows t h a t o f a l l t h e t r i p s t o and from p o i n t s i n Georgetown approxi m a t e l y 20 p e r c e n t a r e home-based work t r i p s . Of t h e work t r i p s t h a t a r e produced i n Georgetown (i.e.,made by Georgetown r e s i d e n t s ) a p p r o x i m a t e l y 30 p e r c e n t a r e by t r a n s i t ; o f those t h a t a r e a t t r a c t e d t o Georgetown ( i . e . , made by Georgetown employees), a p p r o x i m a t e l y 20 p e r c e n t a r e made by t r a n s i t . Of a l l non-work t r i p s t o and from Georgetown, a p p r o x i m a t e l y 10 p e r c e n t a r e made by t r a n s i t . Although work t r a n s i t percentages a r e s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r than non-work t r a n s i t p e r c e n t a g e s , work auto occupancies a r e s i g n i f i c a n t l y lower. I t i s e s t i m a t e d t h a t 1979 work t r i p auto occupancies average 1.30 w h i l e non-wOrk auto occupancies average 1.51. Peak hour t r a n s i t percentages and auto occupancies tend t o c l o s e l y t r a c k work t r i p numbers because t h e v a s t m a j o r i t y o f t r i p s d u r i n g t h e peak hour a r e home-based work t r i p s . Between 1979 and 1985 some s i g n i f i c a n t changes i n t r a v e l to and from Georgetown a r e f o r e c a s t . The t o t a l number o f person t r i p s generated i n Georgetown i s f o r e c a s t t o i n c r e a s e by 41 p e r c e n t , from 197,600 t o 277,700. The m a j o r i t y o f t h i s i n c r e a s e i s p r o j e c t e d t o occur as a r e s u l t o f t h e development scheduled t o occur south o f M S t r e e t . Other i n c r e a s e s r e s u l t from s e v e r a l developments going i n j u s t n o r t h o f M S t r e e t , t h e b u i l d i n g o f t h e F r e n c h Chancery o f f R e s e r v o i r Road, and t h e r e s i d e n t i a l development s l a t e d t o go i n immediately a d j a c e n t t o t h e F r e n c h Chancery. I t should be noted t h a t l i t t l e change i s f o r e c a s t i n Georgetown University t r i p generation. �jhk. & associates 164 T o t a l Georqetown t r a n s i t p r o d u c t i o n s and a t t r a c t i o n s a r e f o r e c a s t t o i n c r e a s e by 51 p e r c e n t , w i t h the o v e r a l l t r a n s i t share i n c r e a s i n g from 13 t o 14 p e r c e n t . T h i s i n c r e a s e i n t r a n s i t ' s share i s e x p l a i n e d by the scheduled opening of s e v e r a l new M e t r o r a i l l i n e s , i n c l u d i n g l i n e s t o Vienna and Shady Grove and by the i n c r e a s e d d i f f i c u l t y of p a r k i n g which i s expected f o r Georgetown commuters. Average auto occupancies a r e a l s o p r o j e c t e d t o i n c r e a s e from 1.44 t o 1.46,with the auto passenger s h a r e of t r i p s i n c r e a s i n g by 4 p e r c e n t . Most of t h i s i n c r e a s e w i l l be due t o t h e opening of I n t e r s t a t e 66 and t h e r e s u l t a n t d i v e r s i o n of t r i p s t o 4-or-more person c a r p o o l s d u r i n g peak p e r i o d s . During t h e peak hour average Georgetown auto o c c u p a n c i e s a r e expected t o jump from t h e 1979 average of 1.30 t o a 1985 average of 1.47. The t o t a l number of auto d r i v e r t r i p ends i n Georgetown w i l l i n c r e a s e by 37 p e r c e n t from 119,500 t o 164,000. Although the auto d r i v e r s h a r e of t r i p s drops by 3 p e r c e n t due t o t h e i n c r e a s e s i n both t r a n s i t and auto passenger s h a r e s , a 37 p e r c e n t i n c r e a s e i n auto d r i v e r t r i p ends i n Georgetown poses s e r i o u s problems both i n terms of p a r k i n g and t r a f f i c f l o w . I t i s e s s e n t i a l t h a t measures be t a k e n both t o d i v e r t more t r i p s t o h i g h occupancy v e h i c l e s and t o improve t r a f f i c c i r c u l a t i o n w i t h i n Georgetown, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t h e a r e a o f h i g h e s t growth, south o f M S t r e e t . A comparison of t h e r e m a i n i n g packages of c a n d i d a t e a l t e r n a t i v e s w i t h the 1985 base c a s e shows t h a t t h e r e i s p o t e n t i a l f o r s i g n i f i c a n t change i n t r a v e l p a t t e r n s i n Georgetown i f a number of t h e c a n d i d a t e a l t e r n a t i v e s a r e implemented. Implementation of the t r a n s i t a l t e r n a t i v e would r e s u l t i n a 19 p e r c e n t i n c r e a s e i n t r a n s i t t r i p ends i n Georgetown, from 3 8,400 t o 45,600. T r a n s i t ' s s h a r e would i n c r e a s e from 14 p e r c e n t t o 17 p e r c e n t of a l l t r i p s . S i g n i f i c a n t increases are forecast both f o r n o n - U n i v e r s i t y and U n i v e r s i t y t r i p s . Auto d r i v e r t r i p s �would d e c r e a s e by 3.2 p e r c e n t , from 164,000 t o 158,900, and the auto d r i v e r share would decrease from 59 p e r c e n t t o 57 p e r c e n t . The p r i m a r y u n d e r l y i n g cause f o r t h e s e modal s h i f t s i s g r e a t l y improved t r a n s i t a c c e s s t o and from M e t r o r a i l and s i g n i f i c a n t l y lower f a r e s f o r t h e r e l a t i v e l y s h o r t bus t r i p s t o and from M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n s ( s m a l l bus f a r e s were assumed to be 2 5 c e n t s , as opposed t o Metrobus f a r e s of 50 c e n t s t o Dupont C i r c l e and Foggy Bottom, and 80 c e n t s t o R o s s l y n , and t r a n s f e r s were assumed t o be a l l o w e d beteween GUTS and Metrorail). The p r i m a r y impact of t h e t r a f f i c r e s t r a i n t alternative i s on t r i p s p a s s i n g through Georgetown and on t r a v e l paths w i t h i n Georgetown, and t h e r e f o r e t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e has somewhat l e s s o f an impact on Georgetown t r i p ends than t h e t r a n s i t a l t e r n a t i v e . Auto d r i v e r t r i p ends a r e f o r e c a s t t o decrease by 1.2 p e r c e n t , from 164,000 t o 162,000, and t r a n s i t t r i p ends a r e f o r e c a s t t o i n c r e a s e by 7 p e r c e n t from 38,400 t o 41,000. The p r i m a r y cause f o r t h e s e s h i f t s i s t h e i n c r e a s e d d i f f i c u l t y of commuting t o and from Georgetown by auto as a r e s u l t of t h e t r a f f i c r e s t r a i n t measures. The t r o l l e y a l t e r n a t i v e i s a combination t r a n s i t improvement and t r a f f i c r e s t r a i n t a l t e r n a t i v e as a r e s u l t of t h e two c e n t e r l a n e s o f M S t r e e t and P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue being d e d i c a t e d t o t r o l l e y o p e r a t i o n s , t h e r e f o r e i t s impact on t r a v e l demand i s both an i n c r e a s e i n t r a n s i t r i d e r s h i p and a change i n t r a f f i c p a t t e r n s w i t h i n Georgetown. T o t a l Georgetown t r a n s i t t r i p ends are p r o j e c t e d t o i n c r e a s e by 6 p e r c e n t w i t h the r e i n s t i t u t i o n of t r o l l e y s e r v i c e between the Foggy Bottom M e t r o r a i l S t a t i o n and t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n o f W i s c o n s i n Avenue and M S t r e e t . A p p r o x i mately h a l f o f t h e p r o j e c t e d i n c r e a s e of 2,400 t r a n s i t t r i p s w i l l be due t o induced t r i p s , i . e . , t r i p s which would not have been made t o Georgetown i f t h e t r o l l e y d i d not e x i s t . The i n c r e a s e d d i f f i c u l t y o f d r i v i n g through Georgetown as a r e s u l t of t h e �r e s t r a i n t aspects of the t r o l l e y a l s o contributes t o increased transit ridership. Mode o f Georgetown T r a n s i t T r i p s A breakdown o f Georgetown t r a n s i t t r i p ends by t r a n s i t mode i s shown i n T a b l e s 5 and 6 f o r n o n - U n i v e r s i t y and U n i v e r s i t y t r i p s . The f o l l o w i n g d i s c u s s i o n of t h i s modal breakdown w i l l be d i v i d e d i n t o non-Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y t r a n s i t t r i p s and Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y t r a n s i t t r i p s . I n 1979 i t i s e s t i m a t e d t h e r e a r e a t o t a l o f 22,700 nonU n i v e r s i t y t r a n s i t t r i p ends i n Georgetown on an average weekday. Of t h e s e t r i p s 43 p e r c e n t , or 9,800, use M e t r o r a i l f o r p a r t or a l l o f t h e i r t r i p . The remaining 57 percent o f t h e t r a n s i t t r i p s a r e made by Metrobus. Of t h e t r a n s i t t r i p s t o and from Georgetown which use M e t r o r a i l , a p p r o x i m a t e l y o n e - t h i r d i n v o l v e a walk between t h e Georgetown end o f t h e t r i p and a M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n , a s m a l l number, 500, i n v o l v e a d r o p o f f o r p i c k u p by automobile ( k i s s and r i d e ) a t a M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n , a n d t h e remainder i n v o l v e a bus t r i p between Georgetown and a M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n . The p r i m a r y r e a s o n s more t r i p s a r e not made v i a Metrorail are the increased cost involved with a Metrorail t r a n s f e r v e r s u s a bus-only t r i p w i t h i n t h e D i s t r i c t o f Columbia and t h e high l e v e l o f d i r e c t Metrobus s e r v i c e between Georgetown and downtown Washington. Between 1979 and 1985 a number o f s i g n i f i c a n t changes a r e f o r e c a s t t o occur i n t r a n s i t r i d e r s h i p t o and from Georgetown. The number of n o n - U n i v e r s i t y t r a n s i t t r i p ends i n Georgetown w i l l i n c r e a s e by an e s t i m a t e d 57 p e r c e n t , from 22,700 t o 35,600. T h i s i n c r e a s e i s due both t o t h e new development s l a t e d t o t a k e p l a c e i n Georgetown and an i n c r e a s e i n t r a n s i t ' s modal s h a r e . The p r o p o r t i o n o f Georgetown n o n - U n i v e r s i t y t r a n s i t t r i p ends which i n v o l v e t h e use o f M e t r o r a i l f o r p a r t o r a l l o f t h e t r i p �TABLE 5 — — — — MODE O F GEORGETOWN N O N - U N I V E R S I T Y T R A N S I T ALTERNATIVE 1979 BASE ft MODE 1985 BASE % n 1985 % n TRANSIT I TRIPS 1985 TRAFFIC RESTRAINT # 1985 TROLLEY % I 2,700 12 7,000 20 5,700 13 7,800 20 6,900 18 & RIDE/ METRORAIL 500 2 800 2 700 2 800 2 800 2 METROBUS/ METRORAIL 6,600 29 36 8,100 19 14,000 37 12,500 33 SMALL B U S / METRORAIL - - - - 11,300 27 TROLLEY/ METRORAIL - - - - WALK/METRORAIL KISS TOTAL METRORAIL METROBUS ONLY SMALL B U S TROLLEY TOTAL TRANSIT 12,700 - - - - - - - - 1,400 4 9,800 43 20,500 58 25,800 61 22,600 59 21,600 57 12,900 57 15,100 42 12,900 31 15,500 41 15,300 40 3,300 8 22,700 100 35,600 100 42,000 100 38,100 - - - - 1,100 3 100 38,000 100 i �TABLE 6 -— MODE O F GEORGETOWN U N 1 V E R S I I Y T R A N S I T ALTERNATIVE MODE 1979 METROBUS/METRORAIL SMALL B U S / M E T R O R A I L 1985 BASE TRANSIT % n % # 30 1 100 3 800 22 570 20 1,000 36 800 22 500 14 TRIPS 1985 TRAFFIC RESTRAINT I # GUTS/METRORAIL 1985 BASE - - ==-=—-= 1985 TROLLEY % ft % 100 3 100 3 1,050 36 1,000 36 - - 600 21 1,100 39 2,100 58 1,150 40 1,100 39 ONLY 1,390 50 1,100 39 1,000 28 1,150 40 1,100 39 GUTS/METROBUS 70 3 50 2 50 1 50 2 50 2 740 26 550 20 400 11 550 19 550 20 840 30 700 25 1,250 35 700 24 700 25 50 1 - 3,600 100 TOTAL METRORAIL METROBUS GUTS ONLY T O T A L GUTS SMALL B U S ONLY TOTAL TRANSIT - 2,800 100 2,800 100 2,900 100 2,800 100 00 �w i l l i n c r e a s e from 43 to 58 p e r c e n t . T h i s i s due to the opening of a number of new M e t r o r a i l l i n e s i n c l u d i n g the Red L i n e to Shady Grove and the Orange L i n e t o Vienna and the higher p r o p o r t i o n of t r a n s i t t r i p ends w i t h i n w a l k i n g d i s t a n c e of a M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n . M e t r o r a i l t r i p s which i n v o l v e a walk between a M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n and a Georgetown o r i g i n or d e s t i n a t i o n are p r o j e c t e d to i n c r e a s e i n number from 2,700 t o 7,000, and o v e r a l l M e t r o r a i l r i d e r s h i p f o r Georgetown t r a n s i t t r i p s i s expected t o more than double between 1979 and 1985. Although the percentage of t r a n s i t t r i p s which use Metrobus only w i l l drop from 57 p e r c e n t to 42 p e r c e n t , the number of t h e s e t r i p s w i l l n o n e t h e l e s s i n c r e a s e by 2,2 00 due to the l a r g e o v e r a l l i n c r e a s e i n t r a n s i t r i d e r s h i p . A comparison of the 1985 t r a n s i t a l t e r n a t i v e w i t h the 1985 base case shows t h a t t o t a l n o n - U n i v e r s i t y t r a n s i t t r i p s a r e e s t i m a t e d to be 18 p e r c e n t h i g h e r under the t r a n s i t a l t e r n a t i v e . The v a s t m a j o r i t y of the i n c r e a s e d r i d e r s h i p would use M e t r o r a i l , r e f l e c t i n g the o r i e n t a t i o n of the new bus r o u t e s to M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n s . The t h r e e s m a l l bus r o u t e s (Rosslyn-Foggy Bottom, R o s s l y n - W i s c o n s i n Avenue/Massachusetts Avenue, Foggy BottomDupont C i r c l e ) would c a r r y a t o t a l of 14,600 p a s s e n g e r s . Of t h e s e , 77 p e r c e n t , or 11,300, would be M e t r o r a i l a c c e s s or egress trips. R i d e r s h i p on Metrobuses would be 6,800 l e s s than i n the n u l l a l t e r n a t i v e but s t i l l h i g h e r than 1979 l e v e l s . I n the t r a f f i c r e s t r a i n t a l t e r n a t i v e n o n - U n i v e r s i t y t r a n s i t t r i p ends i n c r e a s e by 7 p e r c e n t over the base c o n d i t i o n . E i g h t y - f o u r p e r c e n t of the i n c r e a s e of 2,500 t r i p s i s v i a Metror a i l , r e f l e c t i n g the f a c t t h a t Metrobuses w i l l a l s o s u f f e r from i n c r e a s e s i n c o n g e s t i o n which would r e s u l t from a t r a f f i c r e s t r a i n t alternative. I n the t r o l l e y a l t e r n a t i v e , n o n - U n i v e r s i t y t r a n s i t t r i p ends a l s o i n c r e a s e by 7 p e r c e n t over the base c a s e , although i n t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e a s i g n i f i c a n t p o r t i o n of the i n c r e a s e i s due t o induced t r i p s r a t h e r than t r i p s d i v e r t e d from a u t o . I t i s �e s t i m a t e d t h a t t o t a l average weekday r i d e r s h i p on t h e t r o l l e y l i n e between Foggy Bottom and t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n o f M S t r e e t and W i s c o n s i n Avenue i s 2,500. T h i s number was d e r i v e d through a c o n s e r v a t i v e a n a l y s i s and could w e l l be s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r , p a r t i c u l a r l y d u r i n g summer months and on weekends. Of t h e 2,500 t r i p s v i a t r o l l e y , 56 p e r c e n t a c c e s s or e g r e s s from Metrorail. I t i s estimated that approximately one-half of the r i d e r s h i p on t h e t r o l l e y would be induced t r i p s , i . e . , t r i p s which would n o t have been made i f t h e t r o l l e y d i d not r u n . Although some t r i p s made on t h e t r o l l e y would be d i v e r t e d from Metrobus, t h e s e d i v e r t e d t r i p s would be o f f s e t by t h e i n c r e a s e d t r a n s i t usage r e s u l t i n g from t h e t r a f f i c r e s t r a i n t f e a t u r e s o f the t r o l l e y . T a b l e 6 shows t h e modal breakdown o f Georgetown University transit trips. I t should be noted t h a t t r i p s both t o t h e Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y Main Campus and t h e Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y Medical Center a r e i n c l u d e d i n t h i s t a b l e . I n 1979 i t i s e s t i m a t e d t h e r e a r e a t o t a l of 2,800 t r a n s i t t r i p ends a t Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y on an average weekday. Of t h e s e 840, or 30 p e r c e n t use t h e U n i v e r s i t y ' s GUTS buses. F i f t y o f t h e remaining 70 p e r c e n t use Metrobus a l o n e , and 20 p e r c e n t use a combination o f Metrobus and M e t r o r a i l . A f u r t h e r breakdown of e x i s t i n g Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y t r a n s i t usage by r o u t e i s p r o v i d e d i n " T e c h n i c a l Memorandum No. 4: Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Survey." Between 1979 and 1985 t h e number of average weekday Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y t r a n s i t t r i p ends i s p r o j e c t e d t o remain unchanged. However, t o t a l GUTS r i d e r s h i p i s expected t o drop by 17 p e r c e n t , from 840 t o 700 w i t h t h e c l o s i n g o f Alban Towers as a d o r m i t o r y . Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y M e t r o r a i l r i d e r s h i p w i l l i n c r e a s e from 600 t o 1,100 a s new l i n e s t o V i e n n a , Shady Grove, Huntington, and A n a c o s t i a a r e opened. The o n l y a l t e r n a t i v e which has a s i g n i f i c a n t impact on Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y t r a n s i t r i d e r s h i p i s t h e t r a n s i t a l t e r n a t i v e . �I n t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e , i t was assumed t h a t t h e Southern E n t r a n c e t o t h e U n i v e r s i t y i s opened t o a l l o w a l l t u r n i n g movements and t h a t a t r a n s i t t e r m i n a l i s b u i l t a t t h e Southern E n t r a n c e . I t was assumed t h a t a l l GUTS r o u t e s would end a t t h e Southern Entrance terminal. I n a d d i t i o n i t was assumed t h a t t h e V i r g i n i a GUTS r o u t e s would be d i s c o n t i n u e d and r e p l a c e d by a f r e q u e n t s h u t t l e s e r v i c e between t h e R o s s l y n M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n and t h e Southern E n t r a n c e t e r m i n a l . I n a d d i t i o n i t was assumed t h a t a d i s c o u n t would be a l l o w e d f o r t r a n s f e r s between GUTS and M e t r o r a i l . The e f f e c t o f t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e would be t o i n c r e a s e t o t a l Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y t r a n s i t t r i p ends by 20 p e r c e n t , from 2,800 t o 3,600. The p o r t i o n o f t r i p s u s i n g M e t r o r a i l would i n c r e a s e from 39 p e r c e n t t o 58 p e r c e n t . GUTS r i d e r s h i p would i n c r e a s e from 700 t o 1250, b u t t h e v a s t m a j o r i t y of t h e s e t r i p s w i l l be s h o r t t r i p s between t h e U n i v e r s i t y and Metrorail with a discount f a r e . T r a f f i c Volume Estimates Twenty-four hour weekday t r a f f i c volume e s t i m a t e s a t each of t h e e l e v e n cordon c r o s s i n g s i n t o and out o f Georgetown and a t t h r e e o t h e r key l o c a t i o n s a r e r e p o r t e d f o r each o f t h e a l t e r n a t i v e s tested i n Table . A l l t r a f f i c volume e s t i m a t e s were c a l i b r a t e d t o a c t u a l 1979 weekday volumes as r e p o r t e d i n T e c h n i c a l Memorandum No. 3. A d e t a i l e d d i s c u s s i o n of 1979 t r a f f i c volumes can be found i n t h a t r e p o r t . Between 1979 and 1985 t o t a l cordon c r o s s i n g s a r e f o r e c a s t t o i n c r e a s e by 16 p e r c e n t , from 298,900 t o 345,900. T o t a l c r o s s i n g s grow c o n s i d e r a b l y l e s s than Georgetown auto t r i p g e n e r a t i o n because l i t t l e growth i s f o r e c a s t i n v e h i c l e t r i p s p a s s i n g through Georgetown. The most s i g n i f i c a n t s i n g l e l i n k volume i n c r e a s e s a r e on those s t r e e t s which d i r e c t l y s e r v e t h e h i g h growth a r e a south o f M S t r e e t , K S t r e e t i n c r e a s i n g from 18,500 t o 28,600 and P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue/M S t r e e t t o g e t h e r 7 �24 HOUR TRAFFIC LINK VOLUME ESTIMATES 1979 BASE 1985 BASE 1985 TRANSIT 1985 T R A F F I C RESTRAINT 1985 TROLLEY GEORGETOWN CORDON POINTS •- KEY BRIDGE 61,200 72,400 70.400 63.100 70.600 49,400 57,300 57.100 58.400 iso.4nn K STREET 18,500 28.600 27.son 77.800 ?8.4nn PENN. AVF./M S T . 36,900 44.900 43.qnn 35.800 39.300 P ST. 12.300 12.9U0 12.800 H.qnn n.fiim Q ST. 10.600 lhlOO . . . 11,000 12,000 11.700 WISCONSIN AVE. 34,000 37,100 36,700 36,40U 36.900 37TH S T . 10,300 10,500 10.500 10.500 10.500 16,500 19.200 18.200 21.700 20.100 49,200 51,900 52,100 50,000 50,800 ?98,900 345,900 340,200 329,b00 342,300 52,700 60,400 60,100 68,500 62,600 76,900 62,600 62,100 63,100 62,700 1,300 1,300 5,900 1,300 1,300 .WHITEHURST FREEWAY RFSFRVOIR CANAL RD. RD. TOTAL CORDON CROSSINGS OTHER L O C A T I O N S ROOSEVELT BRIDGE GEORGE WASHINGTON PARKWAY SOUTHERN ENTRANCE TO G. U. �i n c r e a s i n g from 36,900 t o 44,900. Key B r i d g e and W h i t e h u r s t Freeway show i n c r e a s e s of 18 and 16 p e r c e n t r e s p e c t i v e l y a s a r e s u l t of a combination of Georgetown's h i g h growth and -he opening of I n t e r s t a t e 66. R o o s e v e l t B r i d g e shows a c o n s i d e r a b l e jump i n t r a f f i c w h i l e t h e George Washington Parkway shows a c o n s i d e r a b l e drop i n t r a f f i c volume, both changes being a r e s u l t of the opening of I n t e r s t a t e 66. 4 Under the t r a n s i t a l t e r n a t i v e t o t a l cordon v e h i c u l a r c r o s s i n g s drop by 2 p e r c e n t from the n u l l a l t e r n a t i v e , w i t h the l a r g e s t drops o c c u r i n g on the s t r e e t s d i r e c t l y a f f e c t e d by t r i p s being d i v e r t e d t o M e t r o r a i l , i . e . , Key B r i d g e , M S t r e e t / P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue, and K S t r e e t . C a n a l Road volumes a r e p r o j e c t e d t o i n c r e a s e s l i g h t l y w h i l e R e s e r v o i r Road volumes d e c r e a s e s l i g h t l y , as a r e s u l t o f t h e opening of t h e Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y Southern E n t r a n c e t o a l l t r a f f i c movements. Under t h e t r a f f i c r e s t r a i n t a l t e r n a t i v e , t o t a l cordon c r o s s i n g s d e c r e a s e by 5 p e r c e n t from the n u l l a l t e r n a t i v e . The bulk of t h e d e c r e a s e o c c u r s on Key B r i d g e and M S t r e e t / P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue. Twenty-four hour t r a f f i c volumes on Key B r i d g e a r e proj e c t e d t o drop by 9,300 a s a r e s u l t of c a p a c i t y r e s t r i c t i o n s on Key B r i d g e . T h i s drop i s o f f s e t by an i n c r e a s e of 8,100 on the R o o s e v e l t B r i d g e . M S t r e e t / P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue t r a f f i c volumes d e c r e a s e by 9,100 as a r e s u l t of decreased c a p a c i t y on M S t r e e t and the opening of the ramps a t the e a s t end of W h i t e h u r s t Freeway. I n s p i t e o f t h e l a r g e drop i n volume on Key B r i d g e , W h i t e h u r s t Freeway volumes do not d e c r e a s e because of t h e i n c r e a s e d t r a f f i c from the W h i t e h u r s t ramps which c a r r y a two-way t w e n t y - f o u r hour volume of 6,400. P S t r e e t , Q S t r e e t , and R e s e r v o i r Road a l l show s l i g h t i n c r e a s e s i n t r a f f i c volumes as a r e s u l t of i n c r e a s e d d i f f i c u l t y i n p a s s i n g through South Georgetown. The impacts of t h e t r o l l e y a l t e r n a t i v e on t r a f f i c volumes are s i m i l a r , although s m a l l e r , than those of t h e t r a f f i c r e s t r a i n t a l t e r n a t i v e because of the r e d u c t i o n i n c a p a c i t y on �M S t r e e t r e s u l t i n g from the i n s t a l l a t i o n of the t r o l l e y and the c o n s t r u c t i o n of the W h i t e h u r s t Freeway ramps. Volumes on M S t r e e t / P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue drop from 44,900 t o 39,300. T h i s decrease i s somewhat o f f s e t by an i n c r e a s e i n W h i t e h u r s t Freeway t r a f f i c of 3,100, s l i g h t i n c r e a s e s i n P S t r e e t , Q S t r e e t , and R e s e r v o i r Road t r a f f i c , and a d i v e r s i o n of some Georgetown through t r a f f i c t o the R o o s e v e l t B r i d g e . Through T r i p A n a l y s i s The r e s u l t s of the a n a l y s i s of t h e impact of each of t h e a l t e r n a t i v e s on Georgetown through t r a f f i c i s shown i n T a b l e 8 . Based upon t h e through t r i p p e r c e n t a g e s c a l c u l a t e d f o r peak and o f f - p e a k p e r i o d s i n T e c h n i c a l Memoranda 3 and 7, i t i s e s t i m a t e d t h a t 60 p e r c e n t of the v e h i c l e t r i p s e n t e r i n g Georgetown on an average weekday a r e t r i p s p a s s i n g through Georgetown. The p r o p o r t i o n of through t r i p s r e a c h e s a peak of 72 p e r c e n t d u r i n g the PM peak hour and a low of 52 p e r c e n t d u r i n g the midday and evening p e r i o d s . For a d e t a i l e d a n a l y s i s of through t r i p p a t t e r n s , see T e c h n i c a l Memorandum No. 3. Between 1979 and 1985, s i g n i f i c a n t changes i n through t r i p p e r c e n t a g e s a r e f o r e c a s t f o r Georgetown, the o v e r a l l 24 hour percentage dropping from 60 t o 53 p e r c e n t . The t o t a l number of through t r i p s shows almost no change between 197 9 and 1985 i n s p i t e of growth f o r e c a s t f o r the Northwest b u s i n e s s d i s t r i c t of the Washington CBD. V e h i c l e t r i p s t o and from p o i n t s i n Georgetown i s f o r e c a s t t o grow by 37 p e r c e n t , however, r e s u l t i n g i n the drop of the percentage of through t r i p s . There are s e v e r a l r e a s o n s the number of through t r i p s i s expected to remain s t a b l e between 1979 and 1985. The opening of a number of new M e t r o r a i l l i n e s , i n c l u d i n g l i n e s t o Vienna and Shady Grove, i s expected t o d i v e r t some through t r i p s t o M e t r o r a i l . The opening of I n t e r s t a t e 66 w i l l d i v e r t some CBD-oriented �TABLE 8 GEORGE 1 OWN 1979 BASE tt I THROUGH T R I P 1985 1985 BASE V ANALYSIS % TRANSIT tt 1985 TRAFFIC RESTRAINT 1985 tt % I TROLLEY tt I V E H I C L E T R I P S TO AND FROM P O I N T S I N GEORGETOWN 119,500 40 164,000 47 158,900 47 162,100 49 163,200 48 THROUGH T R I P CORDON CROSSINGS-' 179,400 60 181,900 53 181,300 53 167,500 51 179,100 52 TOTAL V E H I C L E T R I P S ENTERING & L E A V I N G GEORGETOWN 298,900 100 345,900 100 340,200 100 329,600 100 342,300 100 1/ Through t r i p s a r e counted both e n t e r i n g and l e a v i n g Georgetown. �t r a f f i c t o h i g h e r occupancy autos and o t h e r t r a f f i c t o t h e R o o s e v e l t B r i d g e . A l s o w i t h t h e completion of the development f o r e c a s t f o r South Georgetown and the r e s u l t a n t t r a f f i c cong e s t i o n , Georgetown w i l l become l e s s a t t r a c t i v e as an a l t e r n a t i v e r o u t e f o r through t r i p s . I n comparing the through t r i p percentage f o r the t r a n s i t a l t e r n a t i v e w i t h the n u l l a l t e r n a t i v e , i t i s seen t h a t v e h i c l e t r i p s t o and from p o i n t s i n Georgetown d e c r e a s e by a g r e a t e r percentage than through t r i p s , but the d e c r e a s e i s not enough t o s i g n i f i c a n t l y change the through t r i p percentage. I n the t r a f f i c r e s t r a i n t a l t e r n a t i v e , the number of through t r i p cordon c r o s s i n g s d e c r e a s e s by 8 p e r c e n t . The number o f Georgetown v e h i c l e t r i p ends a l s o drops s l i g h t l y , r e s u l t i n g i n an o v e r a l l drop o f through t r i p percentage from 53 p e r c e n t to 51 p e r c e n t . The t r o l l e y a l t e r n a t i v e has a s i m i l a r type impact on through t r i p s as t h e t r a f f i c r e s t r a i n t a l t e r n a t i v e , but to a l e s s e r e x t e n t , through t r i p s d e c r e a s i n g by 2 p e r c e n t , and the through t r i p percentage d e c r e a s i n g from 53 t o 52 p e r c e n t . VMT and A i r P o l l u t i o n E m i s s i o n s E s t i m a t e s of t o t a l v e h i c l e m i l e s of t r a v e l (VMT) and t o t a l hydrocarbon (HC) and carbon monoxide (CO) e m i s s i o n s w i t h i n t h e Georgetown cordon f o r the 1979 base case and each of the f o u r 1985 a l t e r n a t i v e s i s shown i n T a b l e 9 . Between 1979 and 1985 VMT i s p r o j e c t e d t o i n c r e a s e by 16 p e r c e n t . T h i s i s a much l e s s d r a m a t i c i n c r e a s e than the i n c r e a s e i n Georgetown t r i p ends because of the r e l a t i v e l a c k o f growth i n through t r i p s which account f o r h i g h e r VMT w i t h i n Georgetown per t r i p . Between 1979 and 1985 t o t a l HC and CO e m i s s i o n s a r e f o r e c a s t t o drop almost i n h a l f due t o t h e much h i g h e r percentage of autos on t h e road w i t h F e d e r a l Motor V e h i c l e C o n t r o l s ( c a t a l y t i c c o n v e r t e r s ) . �TABLE 9 VMT AND A I R P O L L U T I O N E M I S S I O N S 1 > 1 W f\ 1 at f— 11 a— 1 a» , , . . . , , 1/ >— a a « A V E R A G E WEEKDAY V E H I C L E M I L E S OF T R A V E L ( V M T ) a »- % CHANGE FROM 1 9 8 5 BASE CASE WIT A V E R A G E WEEKDAY M O R I L E SOURCE HYDROCARBON ( H C ) EMISSIONS ( L B S ) % CHANGE FROM 1 9 8 5 B A S F C A S E HC E M I S S I O N S A V E R A G E WEEKDAY M O B I L E SOURCE CARBON MONOXIDE ( C O ) [MISSIONS ( L B S ) % CHANGE FROM 1 9 8 5 B A S E C A S E CO E M I S S I O N S 1979 BASE 1985 ANALYSIS BASE 1985 WIIIIIN TRANSIT GEORGETOWN 1985 TRAFFIC RESTRAINT 1985 TROLLEY 239/100 276,700 272,200 263,700 273,800 - - -1.6% -4.7% -1.0% 2,210 1,250 27,50U - 1,230 1,210 -1.6% M,50U -2.8% 14,300 14,200 -1.6% -2.4% 1,250 -014,500 -0- �I n the t r a n s i t a l t e r n a t i v e , t o t a l VMT and e m i s s i o n s a r e both f o r e c a s t t o drop by 1.6 p e r c e n t as a r e s u l t of d i v e r s i o n of t r i p s to t r a n s i t . I n the t r a f f i c r e s t r a i n t a l t e r n a t i v e VMT drops by 4.7 p e r c e n t , l a r g e l y as a r e s u l t of d i v e r s i o n of through t r i p s to the R o o s e v e l t B r i d g e and o t h e r r o u t e s o u t s i d e Georgetown. However, e m i s s i o n s do not d e c r e a s e p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y w i t h VMT because of lower v e h i c u l a r speeds r e s u l t i n g from i n c r e a s e d cong e s t i o n . The t r o l l e y a l t e r n a t i v e r e s u l t s i n a 1.0 p e r c e n t reduct i o n i n VMT, but no r e d u c t i o n i n e m i s s i o n s because as i n the t r a f f i c r e s t r a i n t a l t e r n a t i v e , average v e h i c u l a r speeds a r e lower. �CHAPTER 9. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS During the course of the Georgetown Area Access A l t e r n a t i v e s Study a wide range of c a n d i d a t e a c c e s s improvement a l t e r n a t i v e s were i d e n t i f i e d and a n a l y z e d . The p r e v i o u s c h a p t e r s of t h i s r e p o r t documented the a n a l y s i s of each of t h e s e candidate a c t i o n s , l i s t e d the advantages and d i s a d v a n t a g e s of each a l t e r n a t i v e , and provided a r a t i o n a l e f o r e i t h e r dropping c a n d i date a c t i o n s from f u r t h e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n or recommending t h a t a c t i o n s be implemented as a Georgetown a r e a a c c e s s improvement. I n t h e p r e v i o u s c h a p t e r t h e r e s u l t s of a t r a v e l demand a n a l y s i s of f o u r packages of a l t e r n a t i v e s were p r e s e n t e d i n order t o p r o v i d e i n f o r m a t i o n r e g a r d i n g what e f f e c t combinations of a l t e r n a t i v e s of v a r i o u s p h i l o s o p h i e s could be expected t o have on t r a v e l i n Georgetown. The major c o n c l u s i o n t o be drawn both from the a n a l y s i s o f i n d i v i d u a l a c c e s s improvement a l t e r n a t i v e s and from the a n a l y s i s of packages of a l t e r n a t i v e s i s t h a t no one s i n g l e a c t i o n or type of a c t i o n by i t s e l f can be expected t o s o l v e Georgetown's a c c e s s problems, but t h a t the f i n a l s e t of adopted a c t i o n s should c o n s i s t of many d i f f e r e n t k i n d s of complementary a c t i o n s working i n c o n c e r t t o meet the o b j e c t i v e s f o r Georgetown a r e a access as o u t l i n e d i n Chapter One. The f i n a l s e t of a c t i o n s should c o n s i s t of p h y s i c a l roadway improvements, t r a f f i c opera t i o n s improvements, p a r k i n g improvements, t r a n s i t improvements, and a c c e s s improvements s p e c i f i c a l l y t a r g e t t e d f o r Georgetown University. Georgetown i s an a r e a which i s undergoing r a p i d change. T r i p g e n e r a t i o n w i t h i n Georgetown i s p r o j e c t e d t o grow by 4 0 p e r c e n t between 1979 and 1985. Most of t h i s growth w i l l be c o n c e n t r a t e d i n t h e a l r e a d y congested southern p a r t of Georgetown. F u t u r e e x t e n s i o n s of M e t r o r a i l and the opening of I n t e r s t a t e 66 between the C a p i t a l Beltway and R o s s l y n w i l l r e s u l t i n s i g n i f i c a n t �. & associates 180 changes i n t r a v e l t o , from, and through Georgetown. I t i s imp o r t a n t t h a t a c t i o n s be adopted which w i l l ensure adequate l e v e l s of t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s e r v i c e i n t h e Georgetown a r e a w i t h o u t s e r i o u s l y impacting r e s i d e n c e s and b u s i n e s s e s i n t h e a r e a . I t i s c r i t i c a l t h a t a l l r e s p o n s i b l e government agencies r e c o g n i z e t h e r a p i d l y changing t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c o n d i t i o n s and needs of Georgetown and t h a t t i m e l y implementation o f a c c e s s improvements t a k e p l a c e i n order t h a t t h e o b j e c t i v e s o u t l i n e d i n Chapter One may be r e a l i z e d . Based upon t h e c o n c l u s i o n s drawn i n the p r e v i o u s c h a p t e r s of t h i s r e p o r t JHK and A s s o c i a t e s recommends t h a t t h e f o l l o w i n g s e t o f a c c e s s improvement a c t i o n s be implemented i n t h e Georgetown area: PHYSICAL ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS Begin e n v i r o n m e n t a l impact a n a l y s i s f o r t h e f o l l o w i n g elements o f an a l t e r n a t i v e t o connect W h i t e h u r s t Freeway w i t h L and M S t r e e t s : T i e e x i s t i n g ramps a t t h e e a s t end o f Whiteh u r s t Freeway t o t e r m i n i on L S t r e e t ( s e e Figure 2 ) . Convert 26th S t r e e t between L and M S t r e e t s t o two-way o p e r a t i o n , removing p a r k i n g i n t h i s s e c t i o n o f 26th S t r e e t , and making t h e c e n t e r lane r e v e r s i b l e . Remove p a r k i n g on L S t r e e t between t h e W h i t e h u r s t Freeway ramps and 26th S t r e e t , r e d e s i g n i n g t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n o f 26th and L S t r e e t s t o accommodate double l e f t t u r n s . Make L S t r e e t one-way eastbound between 26th S t r e e t and P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue. I n c o o r d i n a t i o n w i t h design f o r t h e r e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f W h i t e h u r s t Freeway, r e d e s i g n both eastbound and westbound ramps a t t h e west end o f W h i t e h u r s t Freeway i n o r d e r t o improve t r a f f i c f l o w . Repave K S t r e e t between 29th S t r e e t and Key B r i d g e , moving the r a i l r o a d t r a c k s t o t h e south s i d e o f K S t r e e t . C o n s t r u c t a double l e f t t u r n l a n e a t t h e Canal RoadF o x h a l l Road i n t e r s e c t i o n f o r use by westbound Canal Road t r a f f i c d u r i n g t h e PM peak. I n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h t h e r e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f Whitehurst Freeway p r o v i d e p e d e s t r i a n a c c e s s along K S t r e e t between Georgetown and t h e West End. �TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ALTERNATIVES Convert 29th and Thomas J e f f e r s o n S t r e e t s t o one-way northbound and 31st S t r e e t t o one-way southbound between K and M S t r e e t s . ( T h i r t i e t h S t r e e t between K and M S t r e e t s i s c u r r e n t l y one-way southbound.) I n s t a l l a new t r a f f i c s i g n a l a t the Southern E n t r a n c e t o Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y a t the time of i t s upgrading. C a r e f u l l y monitor t r a f f i c volumes d u r i n g the n e x t 5 to 6 y e a r s a t a l l i n t e r s e c t i o n s along K and M S t r e e t s between 29th S t r e e t and W i s c o n s i n Avenues i n o r d e r t o determine i f u n s i g n a l i z e d i n t e r s e c t i o n s w a r r a n t t r a f f i c s i g n a l s or s i g n a l i z e d i n t e r s e c t i o n s r e q u i r e r e t i m i n g . Implementation of one-way s t r e e t o p e r a t i o n s w i l l l i k e l y r e q u i r e new s i g n a l s along K and M S t r e e t s . Make r i g h t l a n e of Key B r i d g e northbound, r i g h t t u r n o n l y a t W h i t e h u r s t Freeway ramp. Develop implementation p l a n s t o c o n v e r t the r i g h t l a n e o f C a n a l Road between the D.C.-Maryland s t a t e l i n e and F o x h a l l Road and the r i g h t l a n e of Chain B r i d g e t o HOV l a n e s d u r i n g the AM peak p e r i o d , so such an a c t i o n c o u l d be q u i c k l y implemented a t an a p p r o p r i a t e time (such as the n e x t g a s o l i n e s h o r t a g e ) . Coordinate w i t h the ongoing I n t e r s t a t e 66 Management Study i n developing t r a f f i c management measures f o r Key B r i d g e . Monitor d i r e c t i o n a l d i s t r i b u t i o n on M S t r e e t . As through t r i p percentage d e c r e a s e s d i r e c t i o n a l unbalance w i l l l i k e l y decrease and c o n s i d e r a t i o n should be g i v e n to removal of r e v e r s i b l e l a n e s . PARKING IMPROVEMENTS Convert t h r e e p a r k i n g spaces per block along M S t r e e t , W i s c o n s i n Avenue, 2 9th S t r e e t , 30th S t r e e t , Thomas J e f f e r s o n S t r e e t , and 31st S t r e e t t o t r u c k l o a d i n g zones. Support long term g o a l of implementing a park and r i d e f a c i l i t y i n the Potomac R i v e r c o r r i d o r . I n c o o r d i n a t i o n w i t h the c o n v e r s i o n of n o r t h - s o u t h s t r e e t s south of M S t r e e t t o one-way o p e r a t i o n and the opening of a d d i t i o n a l o f f - s t r e e t p a r k i n g f a c i l i t i e s south o f M S t r e e t , remove o n - s t r e e t p a r k i n g �on one s i d e o f n o r t h - s o u t h s t r e e t s south o f M S t r e e t d u r i n g peak p e r i o d s . As development c o n t i n u e s t o occur i n t h i s a r e a , t r a f f i c f l o w s on t h e s e s t r e e t s should be c a r e f u l l y monitored t o determine whether p a r k i n g p r o h i b i t i o n s should be extended t o both s i d e s o f t h e s t r e e t o r t o o t h e r p e r i o d s o f t h e day. Encourage p a r k i n g garage owners and l o c a l merchants to expand p a r k i n g v a l i d a t i o n programs d u r i n g eveni n g s and on weekends. P o s t p a r k i n g i n f o r m a t i o n i n prominent l o c a t i o n s i n s t o r e s , r e s t a u r a n t s , and e n t e r t a i n m e n t s p o t s . I n s t a l l s i g n s along K and M S t r e e t s i n d i c a t i n g l o c a t i o n s of o f f - s t r e e t parking. E x t e n d coverage o f p a r k i n g meters and a l l o w p e r m i t h o l d e r s t o park i n s e l e c t e d metered spaces w i t h o u t paying f e e . Support long term goal o f i n c r e a s i n g s h o r t term o f f s t r e e t p a r k i n g i n t h e W i s c o n s i n Avenue commercial area north of M S t r e e t . Ensure adequate s h o r t term o f f - s t r e e t p a r k i n g i s prov i d e d w i t h any new development which i s proposed i n Georgetown. TRANSIT IMPROVEMENTS New Metrobus Route Chevy Chase C i r c l e - F a r r a g u t Square v i a C o n n e c t i c u t Avenue, Nebraska Avenue, New Mexico Avenue, Tunlaw Road, 37th S t r e e t , R e s e r v o i r Road, W i s c o n s i n Avenue, M S t r e e t , P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue, and K S t r e e t (see F i g u r e 1 1 ) . S m a l l Bus Routes R o s s l y n M e t r o r a i l S t a t i o n - Foggy Bottom Metror a i l S t a t i o n v i a Lynn S t r e e t , Key B r i d g e , M S t r e e t , and W i s c o n s i n Avenue (see F i g u r e 20) . R o s s l y n M e t r o r a i l S t a t i o n - W i s c o n s i n and Massachusetts Avenues v i a Lynn S t r e e t , Key B r i d g e , M S t r e e t , and W i s c o n s i n Avenue ( s e e Figure 18). Foggy Bottom - Dupont C i r c l e v i a 23rd S t r e e t H S t r e e t , 24th S t r e e t , K S t r e e t , W i s c o n s i n Avenue, and P S t r e e t (see F i g u r e 2 1 ) . �Give s e r i o u s c o n s i d e r a t i o n t o e x t e n s i o n o f above r o u t e s t o t h e Kennedy Center and o t h e r p o i n t s i n Foggy Bottom o r t o F a r r a g u t Square. Develop a t r a n s i t i n f o r m a t i o n package t o be d i s t r i buted t o Georgetown employees and t o be made a v a i l a b l e t o p a t r o n s o f s t o r e s , r e s t a u r a n t s , and e n t e r tainment s p o t s . Encourage employer s u b s i d i e s o f t r a n s i t f a r e s and/or p a y r o l l deduction p l a n s f o r t r a n s i t p a s s e s . Encourage t r a n s i t f a r e v a l i d a t i o n schemes, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h s m a l l bus system, t r o l l e y , and M e t r o r a i l (e.g., issuance of M e t r o r a i l f a r e c a r d s t o customers). GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS I n s t a l l an a t grade s i g n a l i z e d i n t e r s e c t i o n between Canal Road and t h e Southern E n t r a n c e t o Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y a p p r o x i m a t e l y 200 f e e t t o t h e e a s t o f t h e e x i s t i n g Southern E n t r a n c e w i t h p r o v i s i o n o f a 200f o o t l e f t t u r n bay from eastbound Canal Road and a realignment o f westbound Canal Road t o a maximum o f 12 f e e t n o r t h o f i t s e x i s t i n g alignment (see F i g u r e 27). A l l t u r n s would be a l l o w e d a t t h i s i n t e r s e c t i o n , except l e f t t u r n s out o f t h e U n i v e r s i t y between 7 and 9 AM. Emergency v e h i c l e s and buses would be a l l o w e d t o make a l l t u r n s a t a l l t i m e s . Design an a e s t h e t i c a l l y and e n v i r o n m e n t a l l y a c c e p t a b l e t e r m i n a l f a c i l i t y a t t h e Southern E n t r a n c e t o Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y which would c o n t a i n a ramp system t o o v e r come t h e grade d i f f e r e n t i a l between Canal Road and the main campus, a turnaround f a c i l i t y f o r GUTS and WMATA buses, and a convenient t r a n s f e r t o an i n t r a u n i v e r s i t y t r a n s p o r t a t i o n system, and e n t e r e n v i r o n mental r e v i e w p r o c e s s . M a i n t a i n P r o s p e c t S t r e e t E n t r a n c e t o the U n i v e r s i t y . B u i l d an e n t r a n c e t o Main Campus from R e s e r v o i r Road. P r o v i d e a f r e q u e n t GUTS s h u t t l e s e r v i c e between t h e R o s s l y n M e t r o r a i l S t a t i o n and t h e Southern E n t r a n c e to Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y a t a lower f a r e than f o r l o n g e r GUTS t r i p s . E l i m i n a t e GUTS s e r v i c e along Wilson B o u l e v a r d , and i f a t r a n s f e r arrangement between M e t r o b u s / M e t r o r a i l and GUTS buses can be worked o u t , drop V i r g i n i a GUTS r o u t e s except f o r t h e R o s s l y n Southern E n t r a n c e s h u t t l e . �Accept M e t r o r a i l o r Metrobus t r a n s f e r s i n l i e u o f payment on GUTS buses, o r charge d i s c o u n t e d f a r e s f o r M e t r o r a i l and Metrobus passengers. A d j u s t p a r k i n g c o s t s t o cover a d d i t i o n a l s u b s i d i e s r e q u i r e d i f t r a n s f e r d i s c o u n t s a r e a l l o w e d between GUTS and Metrobus and M e t r o r a i l . Change V i r g i n i a and Law School GUTS r o u t e s so a s t o a c c e s s t h e U n i v e r s i t y a t the Southern E n t r a n c e . E s t a b l i s h a t r a n s i t and c a r p o o l i n f o r m a t i o n c e n t e r a t c e n t r a l l o c a t i o n s both on Main Campus and a t the Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y Medical Center and p r o v i d e i n f o r m a t i o n about the C o u n c i l o f Governments' c a r p o o l matching program. C r e a t e a t r a n s i t i n f o r m a t i o n package t o be d i s t r i b u t e d t o s t u d e n t s a t r e g i s t r a t i o n and f a c u l t y and s t a f f through t h e campus m a i l . Reserve most convenient p a r k i n g spaces f o r c a r p o o l s w i t h t h r e e or more persons. E s t a b l i s h a vanpool s e r v i c e f o r i n t e r e s t e d f a c u l t y and s t a f f members. ALTERNATIVES TO RECEIVE MORE DETAILED STUDY Georgetown T r o l l e y Study. E x t e n s i o n o f hours o f r e s i d e n t i a l p a r k i n g program. permit �� 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 Georgetown area access improvements : an analysis of alternatives Subject The topic of the resource Georgetown (Washington, D.C.) Transportation--Research--United States Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource JHK & Associates Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1980 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource District of Columbia. Department of Transportation United States. Department of Transportation. Urban Mass Transportation Administration 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/4f5445dc14f6b74ef8f04e592f587fea.pdf?Expires=1782345600&Signature=TIcjxbAfJ7Nzfm2hZDgflA4rs7yfNKhnBQq0BRZRgvH0bgvJywM5k8Ofk1cmmU5wdSTJeX-4FaqgfG8ndquGpfTQRaKba0LdG3voC82UeC76uo8caIQQc8Ie5ZreTB-voR79sg63iE5seSi8SsRLKqO753lAGTy2qEfXuGtFNZozyC7iCXQbyPNGpTAO6fUH%7ERti2alGQluDbiXzO5DyfPhhWlzgfRb3TfNDDW-V3dvVsKI3sTT7VZmLHgsKwZ9eqaGzVZ7S0rQxfWbylwhDUoO09AXJStLN4AjsBLktEcziqULnbKm1FprZGVAsFoQei0nw6FgW--fc9uDOOnQ87g__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM b452a5a73d77ae2a928890a330f8ef58 PDF Text Text 4. a AH Georgetown Waterfront Area Study Consultants FINAL REPORT ��NATIONAL CAPITAL PLANNING W A S H I N G T O N , D.C. COMMISSION 2,0576 February TO : I n t e r e s t e d and a f f e c t e d Fedex'al and D i s t r i c t community o r g a n i z a t i o n s , p r o p e r t y FROM : SUBJECT: 7, 1975 agencies owners, and i n d i v i d u a l s C h a r l e s H. Conrad, E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t Area Study The a t t a c h e d r e p o r t on t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t A r e a Study i n c l u d e s t h e F i n a l Development F l a n and Program and a D r a f t S e c t i o n a l Development P l a n recommended by t h e Georgetown P l a n n i n g Group ( a c o n s o r t i u m o f c o n s u l t i n g f i r m s headed by W a l l a c e , M.cHarg, R o b e r t s and T o d d ) . T h i s r e p o r t i s t h e culmination o f a t h r e e - y e a r s t u d y l e a d i n g t o a p l a n and program f o r t h e development a n d / o r r e d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h i s v i t a l p o r t i o n o f the D i s t r i c t o f ColumbiaThe s t u d y was i n i t i a t e d a t t h e r e q u e s t o f t h e P r e s i d e n t w i t h f i n a n c i a l a s s i s t a n c e by t h e U.S, Department o f H o u s i n g and Urban Development, I n t e r i o r a r d T r a n s p o r t a t i o n . The r e p o r t was p r e s e n t e d t o t h e Commission a t i t s F e b r u a r y 6, 1975 m e e t i n g and t h e Commission a u t h o r i z e d i t s d i s t r i b u t i o n f o r r e v i e w and comment. A f t e r r e c e i p t and r e v i e w o f t h e comments, i t i s a n t i c i p a t e d t h a t t h e Comm i s s i o n w i l l c o m p l e t e and c o n s i d e r a D r a f t S e c t i o n a l Development P l a n a t i t s May 1 , 1975 m e e t i n g f o r recommendation t o t h e Zoning Commission o f t h e D i s t r i c t of Columbia. I n a d d i t i o n , a f t e r t h e P l a n h a s been c o n s i d e r e d t h e Commission may make recommendations f o r i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f a o p r o p r i a t e p o r t i o n s o f t h e p l a n and program t o t h e C o u n c i l o f t h e D i s t r i c t o f Columbia and a p p r o p r i a t e F e d e r a l a g e n c i e s . A l l comments on t h e r e p o r t must be r e c e i v e d i n t h e Commission's o f f i c e s by A p r i l 1 1 , 1975. Any q u e s t i o n s on t h e a t t a c h e d m a t e r i a l s s h o u l d be a d d r e s s e d t o M a r t i n J . Rody. (382-1116). Y o u r i n t e r e s t and c o o p e r a t i o n i n t h i s m a t t e r i s appreciated,-, ��Georgetown Waterfront Area Study Recommended Development Plan and Program Prepared for: N A T I O N A L C A P I T A L P L A N N I N G COMMISSION DISTRICT O F COLUMBIA D E P A R T M E N T O F HIGHWAYS AND Prepared b y : THE G E O R G E T O W N PLANNING GROUP Wallace McHarg Roberts and T o d d Keyes, Lethbridge and Condon Hammer, Siler, George Associates Creighton, Hamburg, Inc. R . H . Pratt Associates Mueser, Rutledge, Wentworth and Johnson January 15, 1975 TRAFFIC . �a �Contents I INTRODUCTION II P L A N N I N G 1 O B J E C T I V E S , ASSUMPTIONS AND C O N S T R A I N T S Summary of Past Conclusions Phase I Phase IIA 5 6 6 7 Directives for Preparation of the Final Development Plan and Program 11 Objectives and Policies of the Plan Goals Objectives Design Principles 12 12 13 14 Market Potential and Market Constraints 17 The Movement System as a Constraint on Development The Feasible Development Limit 19 21 III PLAN E L E M E N T S The Recommended Land Use Plan Existing Land Use Existing Uses to Remain Historic Buildings, Sites and Lands Recommended Land Use Amount and Type of Development 23 to be Preserved 24 24 26 27 30 30 The Recommended Circulation Plan Vehicular Circulation The Potomac River Freeway The Arterial and Local Street Element Parking Public Transportation Pedestrian Circulation The Primary Pedestrian System The Secondary Pedestrian System The Illustrative Site Plan IV 38 38 38 40 43 45 46 46 46 48 IMPLEMENTATION 51 The Sectional Development Plan Introduction Description of the Plan Area Zoning Plan Map and Zoning Text Amendments Subarea Design Requirements 52 52 __53 53 55 �The Recommended Development Program Public Improvement Programs Freeway and Local Streets Utilities Public Parks Site Pre para tion/Disposition Historic Preservation and Restoration Private Action Programs Private/Public Private Non-Profit Development Private Developer Actions Historic Foundation/Trust Programs Corporations/Historic Areas Public Action Programs District of Columbia Zoning Commission District Tax Assessor's Office District Highways and Traffic District Department of Environmental Services Washington Metropolitan Area Transportation Authority U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service U.S. Corps of Engineers Waterfront Development Corporation (public) Phasing Programs V ECONOMIC AND M A R K E T A B I L I T Y R E P O R T Overall District Redevelopment The District's Development Strategy Georgetown in the District's Strategy The Productive Sub-Economy The District's Stake in Georgetown Waterfront Development Costs Implications of the Final Development Plan and Program Summary VI P L A N E V A L U A T I O N (Goals and Objectives) APPENDIX A: HISTORIC A R E A S T U D I E S A P P E N D I X B: A D E V E L O P M E N T R I G H T S P R O G R A M �— < UJ CC < z < § z o cc u. cc 111 I LU (5 o 00 ac > LU > cc < a z 03 O Z ac LU h00 LU 5 < LU ac < z < 5 CL O _i LU > LU a < z o o ��Introduction -i- �P l a n n i n g f o r the Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t has proceeded from t h e Y e a r 2000 P o l i c y P l a n a s i n t e r p r e t e d by t h e Comprehens i v e Plan f o r the National C a p i t a l to the d e t a i l e d planning e x p r e s s e d i n t h e recommended p l a n s u b m i t t e d h e r e w i t h by t h e G e o r g e t o w n P l a n n i n g G r o u p (GPG) t o t h e N a t i o n a l C a p i t a l P l a n n i n g Commission and t h e D i s t r i c t o f C o l u m b i a Government. T h e GPG w a s c h a r g e d t o u n d e r t a k e a t h r e e - p h a s e s t u d y o f t h e W a t e r f r o n t s t u d y a r e a (Phase I , I I and I I I ) . T h i s D e v e l o p ment P l a n and P r o g r a m c o m p l e t e s P h a s e I I , and t o g e t h e r w i t h the S e c t i o n a l Development P l a n , Phase I I I , r e p r e s e n t s the c o n c l u s i o n of t h i s study c a r r i e d out under the guidance of t h e G e o r g e t o w n W a t e r f r o n t C o o r d i n a t i n g C o m m i t t e e c h a i r e d by the E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r of 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. A t l e a s t f i v e s e p a r a t e e f f o r t s w e r e made o v e r t h e p a s t d e c a d e to prepare a w o r k a b l e P l a n f o r the development o f the Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t . The P l a n w h i c h d o e s r e c e i v e t h e s u p p o r t r e quired f o r implementation must s u c c e s s f u l l y address the f o l lowing problems: . I t m u s t c o n s i d e r r e g i o n a l t r a v e l demand and i t s imp a c t on K e y B r i d g e , C a n a l R o a d , "M" S t r e e t , t h e Rock C r e e k P a r k w a y , and ( w i t h o r w i t h o u t t h e proposed T h r e e S i s t e r s B r i d g e ) the Potomac R i v e r Freeway. I t must f u n c t i o n a l l y and v i s u a l l y i n t e g r a t e t h e Potomac R i v e r F r e e w a y a n d new p u b l i c a n d p r i v a t e d e v e l o p m e n t p r o posed f o r the Waterfront. . I t must r e s o l v e t h e e x i s t i n g l o c a l t r a f f i c and a c c e s s d i l e m m a b o t h a s a f f e c t e d by t h e s o l u t i o n t o e x i s t i n g and f u t u r e r e g i o n a l t r a v e l demands, t h e Potomac R i v e r F r e e w a y , and a s a r e s u l t o f t h e p r o j e c t e d t r a v e l dem a n d s o f new d e v e l o p m e n t p l a n n e d f o r t h e W a t e r f r o n t and a d j a c e n t a r e a s . . I t must c o n s i d e r a d j a c e n t d e v e l o p m e n t and l a n d use p o l i c i e s i n t h e i r e f f e c t on t h e m a r k e t f o r d e v e l o p ment and i n t h e r e s u l t i n g image, c h a r a c t e r , and environmental q u a l i t y of the area. I t m u s t be e c o n o m i c a l l y f e a s i b l e from b o t h p u b l i c and p r i v a t e v i e w p o i n t s . . I t must c o n s i d e r t h e u s e , s c a l e , and c h a r a c t e r o f l o c a l d e v e l o p m e n t and l a n d u s e s i n p r o v i d i n g f o r t h e p r o t e c t i o n and enhancement o f h i s t o r i c b u i l d i n g s and t h e C & O C a n a l t h a t h a v e b e e n r e c o g n i z e d by t h e "Old G e o r g e t o w n A c t " o f 1950 a n d t h e 1967 d e s i g n a t i o n o f Georgetown a s an H i s t o r i c D i s t r i c t . -2- �I t m u s t be s e n s i t i v e t o a d j a c e n t e x i s t i n g l a n d u s e a n d p o l i c y i n c l u d i n g t h a t p a r t o f Georgetown which l i e s n o r t h o f "M" S t r e e t , i t s s c a l e , c h a r a c t e r , a n d q u a l i t y of l i f e ; i t must r e l a t e t o t h e C i t y a s a whole and i t m u s t be c o m p a t i b l e w i t h t h e image o f t h e N a t i o n ' s Capital. T h e GPG p a s t R e p o r t s " D e v e l o p m e n t C o n c e p t A l t e r n a t i v e s " a n d " P r e l i m i n a r y Development P l a n and Program" a d d r e s s these problems and c o n t a i n t h e b a s i s f o r t h e c o n c l u s i o n s p r e s e n t e d i n t h i s F i n a l Development P l a n and Program R e p o r t . -3- �E X I S T I N G C&O C A N A L - WEST O F WISCONSIN AVENUE �II Planning Objectives, Assumptions and Constraints -5- �SUMMARY O F PAST CONCLUSIONS I n t h a t t h e GPG P h a s e I a n d I I A R e p o r t f i n d i n g s f o r m t h e b a s i s for t h e assumptions and c o n s t r a i n t s o f t h e f i n a l Development P l a n and Program t h e i r c o n c l u s i o n s a r e summarized. Phase I I n P h a s e I o f t h e s t u d y t h e GPG d e v e l o p e d a l t e r n a t i v e c o n c e p t s f o r t h e W a t e r f r o n t b a s e d on a d e t a i l e d a n a l y s i s o f e x i s t i n g conditions, with particular reference to historic structures; an e s t i m a t e o f t h e s u s c e p t i b i l i t y f o r , and l i k e l i h o o d o f change, p r o p e r t y b y p r o p e r t y , o n t h e b a s i s o f t h e M a n d C-M-2 zoning; t h e m a r k e t f o r new s p a c e o f a l l k i n d s i n t h e s t u d y a r e a and t h e g e n e r a l economics o f i t s development; and t h e c a p a c i t y of t h e p r e s e n t s t r e e t systems and c u r r e n t a n t i c i p a t e d t r a f f i c volumes, c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , r e s t r i c t i o n s and b o t t l e n e c k s . Critical concepts identified i n Phase I are that: 1. T h e r e i s d i r e c t q u a n t i f i a b l e r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e movement system c a p a b i l i t y and t h e volume o f t r a f f i c g e n e r a t e d by spaceusing a c t i v i t i e s i n the area. 2. O n l y l i m i t e d i n c r e a s e s a r e p o s s i b l e w i t h o u t m a j o r i n t h e l o c a l movement s y s t e m . changes 3. C o m m e r c i a l u s e s a r e m o r e c o n s t r a i n e d b y t h e a b o v e t h a n r e s i d e n t i a l ones because o f t h e i r h i g h e r t r a f f i c - g e n e r a t i n g characteristics. Phase I conclusions are: 1 . T h e m o v e m e n t s y s t e m i s t h e k e y c o n s t r a i n t t o v i a b l e new development. T o d a y , t h e r e a r e a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1.2 m i l l i o n s q u a r e f e e t o f o c c u p i e d s t r u c t u r e s and 300,000 s q u a r e f e e t o f v a c a n t s p a c e on t h e W a t e r f r o n t . T r a f f i c g e n e r a t e d by t h i s s p a c e , added t o r e g i o n a l , s u b - r e g i o n a l and o t h e r Georgetown t r a f f i c , p r e s e n t l y f i l l s t h e s t r e e t system a t peak hour t o c a p a c i t y . B a s e d on t h e K e y B r i d g e - " M " S t r e e t b o t t l e n e c k , t h e r e i s no e x c e s s c a p a c i t y a t peak hour i n t h e p r e s e n t system. Even w i t h t h i s b o t t l e n e c k improved, t h e r e i s l i t t l e e x c e s s c a p a c i t y . Movement i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by t h e c o n s u l t i n g t r a f f i c e n g i n e e r s as l e v e l " E " . 2. L a n d a l r e a d y c o m m i t t e d , h i g h l y s u s c e p t i b l e , o r s u s c e p t i b l e t o d e v e l o p m e n t u n d e r p r e v i o u s z o n i n g ( b e t w e e n 19 a n d 24 a c r e s ) , would p e r m i t an a d d i t i o n a l f i v e m i l l i o n square f e e t o f s p a c e t o be d e v e l o p e d , b r i n g i n g t h e t o t a l d e v e l o p m e n t ( p r e s e n t a n d n e w ) t o 6.5 m i l l i o n s q u a r e f e e t . A l l t r a f f i c g e n e r a t e d by a d d e d s p a c e w o u l d be on a s t r e e t s y s t e m a l r e a d y a t c a p a c i t y , i f n o m a j o r i m p r o v e m e n t s w e r e made i n t h e s y s t e m . -6- �3. A n a l y s i s o f a l l F r e e w a y a l t e r n a t i v e s a n d t h e i r l o c a l s t r e e t c o n f i g u r a t i o n s showed t h e f o l l o w i n g : two a l t e r n a t i v e s subs t a n t i a l l y r e d u c e t h e l o c a l movement c a p a c i t y ( a l t h o u g h i n c r e a s i n g t h r o u g h movement); the remaining four a l t e r n a t i v e s , i n c l u d i n g GPG I a n d GPG I I , i n c r e a s e t h e p r e s e n t c a p a c i t y t o v a r y i n g d e g r e e s ; t h e a l t e r n a t i v e t h a t i n c r e a s e s i t t h e most w i l l p e r m i t 2.1 m i l l i o n s q u a r e f e e t o f o f f i c e and c o m m e r c i a l s p a c e t o b e a d d e d t o t h e p r e s e n t 1.2 m i l l i o n . T h i s m e a n s a t o t a l o f 3.3 m i l l i o n s q u a r e f e e t o f s p a c e a s t h e o u t s i d e limit o f d e v e l o p m e n t w i t h m a j o r movement s y s t e m c h a n g e s . There i s considerable f l e x i b i l i t y f o r a d d i t i o n a l space i fr e s i d e n t i a l u s e s a r e s u b s t i t u t e d f o r o f f i c e and c o m m e r c i a l . 4 . The 90' ( h e i g h t ) i n t e n s i v e o f f i c e and c o m m e r c i a l d e v e l o p ment p e r m i t t e d u n d e r t h e c u r r e n t z o n i n g e n v e l o p e o f M and C-M-2 i s c l e a r l y i n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h a l l a l t e r n a t i v e development p l a n s t h a t were c o n s i d e r e d under t h e Freeway and l o c a l s t r e e t alternatives. Phase IIA I n P h a s e I I A t h e GPG p r e p a r e d a P r e l i m i n a r y D e v e l o p m e n t and P r o g r a m b a s e d upon t h e f o l l o w i n g g u i d e l i n e s : Plan 1. P r o p o s e d d e v e l o p m e n t s h a l l be l i m i t e d by t h e c a p a c i t y o f the p u b l i c f a c i l i t i e s a v a i l a b l e t o support such development at acceptable environmental standards. To t h e e x t e n t t h a t the " c a p a c i t i e s " and " a c c e p t a b l e e n v i r o n m e n t a l s t a n d a r d s " have been i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e Phase I p o r t i o n o f t h e work program t h e s e w i l l be u s e d t o e s t a b l i s h t h e l i m i t s o f d e v e l o p ment i n t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t A r e a . This implies that t h e o v e r a l l l e v e l o f d e v e l o p m e n t t o be u s e d w i l l be b e t w e e n t h e "minimum a n d m o d e r a t e " d e v e l o p m e n t c o n c e p t s i d e n t i f i e d i n Phase I . The s p e c i f i c recommendations, a s t o development l i m i t s , r e s u l t e d from t h e l a n d use p l a n and development cont r o l s prepared as p a r t of the Phase I I A work. 2. P r o p o s e d d e v e l o p m e n t s h a l l b e b a s e d o n i m p r o v i n g t h e q u a l i t y o f t h e l e v e l o f t r a n s p o r t a t i o n f a c i l i t i e s and s e r v i c e s i n t h e s t u d y a r e a , and proposed p u b l i c improvements i n t h e s t u d y a r e a s h a l l be d e s i g n e d t o a l l e v i a t e c u r r e n t problems t h r o u g h o u t Georgetown i n s o f a r as p o s s i b l e . 3. A P o t o m a c R i v e r F r e e w a y s h a l l b e p a r t o f t h e v e h i c u l a r c i r c u l a t i o n s y s t e m . The Potomac R i v e r F r e e w a y s h a l l be l o c a t e d s o u t h o f t h e Chesapeake and Ohio C a n a l . -7- �T h e G e o r g e t o w n P l a n n i n g G r o u p ' s A l t e r n a t i v e 1 (GPG1) d e v e l o p e d i n Phase I f o r t h e Potomac R i v e r F r e e w a y was u s e d i n Phase I I A to t e s t t h e f e a s i b i l i t y and p a r t i c u l a r i t y o f t h e recommendat i o n s which were proposed i n Phase I I A regarding land use, c i r c u l a t i o n and p a r k i n g and t h e development program. The c o n s u l t a n t s were f u r t h e r i n s t r u c t e d t o p r o c e e d w i t h P h a s e I I A o f t h e s t u d y w i t h t h e a s s u m p t i o n t h a t t h e Dodge C e n t e r and f i r s t phase o f t h e Georgetown I n l a n d C o r p o r a t i o n d e v e l o p m e n t s w o u l d be c o n s t r u c t e d a s p l a n n e d . Since the Court h a d r u l e d t o a l l o w b o t h d e v e l o p m e n t s t o p r o c e e d , t h e NCPC d i r e c t e d t h e GPG t o c o n s i d e r t h e m a s " g i v e n s " . The c o n c l u s i o n s o f t h e Phase I R e p o r t were s t r e n g t h e n e d by t h e f u r t h e r a n a l y s i s , t e s t i n g , a n d s t u d y i n P h a s e I I A . S p e c i f i c a l l y i t was f o u n d : 1. Re: The Movement S y s t e m a s a C o n s t r a i n t on Development. The movement s y s t e m was c o n f i r m e d a s a m a j o r c o n s t r a i n t t o v i a b l e development. The need f o r c o n n e c t i o n o f t h e r e c o n s t r u c t e d K S t r e e t t o b o t h C a n a l Road - M S t r e e t and Key B r i d g e was v e r i f i e d a s a r e q u i r e m e n t t o o b t a i n c a p a c i t y f o r any development. I t was d e t e r m i n e d t o be e s s e n t i a l t o i n c l u d e t h e c o n n e c t i o n from Key B r i d g e t o K S t r e e t e a s t bound i f t h e f u l l b e n e f i t o f K S t r e e t i s t o be r e a l i z e d . Without the K S t r e e t c o n n e c t i o n s and o t h e r l o c a l s t r e e t a c c e s s imp r o v e m e n t s l i t t l e a d d i t i o n a l d e v e l o p m e n t c a n be a c c o m m o d a t e d i n t h e s t u d y a r e a a s a l l t r a f f i c g e n e r a t e d by added s p a c e w o u l d be on a s t r e e t s y s t e m a l r e a d y a t c a p a c i t y . 2. R e : A l t e r n a t i v e Potomac R i v e r Freeway A l t e r n a t i v e s . F u r t h e r a n a l y s i s o f a l l Potomac R i v e r F r e e w a y a l t e r n a t i v e s and t h e i r l o c a l s t r e e t c o n f i g u r a t i o n s c o n f i r m e d t h e Phase I c o n c l u s i o n s t h a t , w i t h t h e e x c e p t i o n o f t h e GPG I I A l t e r n a t i v e , a l l o t h e r a l t e r n a t i v e s p r o v i d e l e s s l o c a l movement c a p a c i t y t h a n d o e s t h e r e c o m m e n d e d GPG I a l t e r n a t i v e . 3. R e : A l l o w a b l e L i m i t s on D e v e l o p m e n t . T h e GPG I F r e e w a y a l t e r n a t i v e and i t s a s s o c i a t e d l o c a l s t r e e t c o n f i g u r a t i o n s , w i t h improvements as mentioned and f u r t h e r d e f i n e d l a t e r i n t h i s R e p o r t , p e r m i t a maximum 2 . 1 m i l l i o n s q u a r e f e e t o f o f f i c e a n d c o m m e r c i a l s p a c e t o b e a d d e d t o t h e 1.2 m i l l i o n s q u a r e f e e t o f e x i s t i n g d e v e l o p m e n t ( i n c l u d i n g .2 t o .3 m i l l i o n square feet a v a i l a b l e f o r replacement). T h i s means a t o t a l o f 3.3 m i l l i o n s q u a r e f e e t o f c o m m e r c i a l d e v e l o p m e n t i s t h e recommended a l l o w a b l e o u t s i d e l i m i t o f d e v e l o p m e n t i n the W a t e r f r o n t a f t e r m a j o r l o c a l movement s y s t e m i m p r o v e m e n t s h a v e b e e n made. -8- �4. R e : P a r k i n g a s a C o n s t r a i n t on D e v e l o p m e n t . P a r k i n g , as an e l e m e n t o f t h e movement s y s t e m , i s e v e n more o f a c o n s t r a i n t on d e v e l o p m e n t t h a n s t r e e t c a p a c i t y . This further r e i n f o r c e s t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e o f t h e movement s y s t e m a s a c o n s t r a i n t to development. Using parking r a t i o s associated elsewhere w i t h development i n the D i s t r i c t of Columbia, even t h e d e v e l o p m e n t t h a t was d e f i n e d i n P h a s e I a s t h e "minimum l e v e l a l t e r n a t i v e " c a n n o t e a s i l y be s u p p l i e d w i t h t h e p a r k i n g i t w i l l demand b e c a u s e o f t h e s c a r c i t y o f s i t e s and c o n s t r i c t e d l o c a l s t r e e t network. D e v e l o p m e n t a s recommended c a n n o t be s u p p l i e d w i t h p a r k i n g a t c u r r e n t D i s t r i c t standards w i t h o u t c o n s i d e r a b l e c o s t premiums f o r underground c o n s t r u c t i o n , and/or t h e d e s t r u c t i o n o f h i s t o r i c and a r c h i t e c t u r a l l y significant structures. 5. R e : The W a t e r f r o n t a s P a r t o f A Georgetown and C i t y - W i d e S t r a t e g y of Renewal. From the s t a n d p o i n t o f economics the P r e l i m i n a r y P l a n and P r o g r a m f o r t h e G e o r g e t o w n Waterfront s e e k s optimum development. The P l a n p r o p o s e s t i g h t c o n t r o l s t o r e s t r i c t t h e f o r c e s o f t h e f r e e m a r k e t on t h e p r e m i s e -that f a i l u r e to e x e r c i s e t h e s e c o n t r o l s c o u l d have a s e r i o u s n e g a t i v e i m p a c t upon t h e economy o f G e o r g e t o w n , i n d e e d upon t h e economy o f t h e D i s t r i c t o f C o l u m b i a a s a w h o l e . Overbuilding, t r a f f i c overloads, pedestrian congestion, i n c o m p a t i b l e h i g h d e n s i t y , v i s u a l b l i g h t , and n o i s e and a i r p o l l u t i o n on t h e W a t e r f r o n t w i l l u n d e r m i n e c o m m u n i t y v i a b i l i t y . The e f f o r t t o t a k e maximum m a r k e t i n g a d v a n t a g e o f t h e G e o r g e t o w n W a t e r f r o n t , one o f t h e f e w o p p o r t u n i t i e s a v a i l a b l e t o t h e c e n t r a l c i t y i n i t s search for municipal revenues, a l s o r i s k s undermining other competitive p r o j e c t s i n the D i s t r i c t ' s s t r a t e g y of s u r v i v a l . I t i s a shortsighted policy that f a i l s to put a l l of the r e l e v a n t f a c t o r s i n t o the c o s t - b e n e f i t equation. 6. R e : I m p a c t o f D e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e W a t e r f r o n t on G e o r g e t o w n . The P h a s e I I A P r e l i m i n a r y P l a n d i d n o t c a l l f o r a "no-growth" or non-development p o l i c y f o r the Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t . Quite the opposite: i t c a l l e d f o r a d i v e r s i f i e d r e s i d e n t i a l complex w i t h c o m m e r c i a l t o r e p l a c e outmoded i n d u s t r i a l u s e s . I t a l l o w e d a n e x p a n s i o n f r o m a n e x i s t i n g 1 , 5 0 0 , 0 00 s q u a r e f e e t o f b u i l d i n g space t o n e a r l y 5,000,000 s q u a r e f e e t , r e p r e s e n t i n g $150,000,000 i n t a x a b l e improvements o v e r and above t a x a b l e land values. E v e n s o , t h i s l e v e l o f d e v e l o p m e n t w o u l d be f a r l e s s than t h a t allowed under e x i s t i n g zoning i n response to commercial market pressures. The P h a s e I I A P l a n was t h e m a x i mum t h a t t h e a r e a c o u l d accommodate w i t h o u t p r o d u c i n g s e r i o u s c o u n t e r e f f e c t s f o r t h e h i g h l y - p r o d u c t i v e Georgetown subeconomy. -9- �7. R e : T y p e s o f W a t e r f r o n t D e v e l o p m e n t . The P r e l i m i n a r y P l a n a n d P r o g r a m c a l l e d f o r 1.6 m i l l i o n s q u a r e f e e t o f o f f i c e a n d r e t a i l c o m m e r c i a l d e v e l o p m e n t ( i n c l u d i n g .3 m i l l i o n s q u a r e f e e t o f r e u s e ) , a n d a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1 , 0 0 0 new r e s i d e n t i a l d w e l l ing u n i t s . T h i s was c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e moderate l e v e l o f development defined i n t h e Phase I Report. The t o t a l nonr e s i d e n t i a l e q u i v a l e n t o f t h e a b o v e c o m m e r c i a l ( i n c l u d i n g 1.0 m i l l i o n s q u a r e f e e t o f e x i s t i n g d e v e l o p m e n t t o r e m a i n ) i s 2.8 m i l l i o n square f e e t . T h i s c o m p a r e s w i t h 3.3 m i l l i o n s q u a r e f e e t o f a l l o w a b l e n o n - r e s i d e n t i a l e q u i v a l e n t development under t h e recommended s t r e e t c a p a c i t y c o n s t r a i n t s o f t h e movement system. 8. R e : H e i g h t s a n d F l o o r A r e a R a t i o s ( F A R ) . * The recommended P r e l i m i n a r y Plan and Program proposed t h a t a major p o r t i o n o f t h e W a t e r f r o n t b e z o n e d f o r 4,0 f o o t h i g h r e s i d e n t i a l d e v e l o p ment, w i t h t h r e e s t o r i e s and a l o tc o v e r a g e o f 60-75%. Comm e r c i a l ( i n c l u d i n g h o t e l ) d e v e l o p m e n t was t o be zoned i n s e l e c t e d a r e a s f o r a 60 f o o t h e i g h t w i t h a n F A R o f 4. A b o n u s was p r o p o s e d f o r d e v e l o p m e n t on d e s i g n a t e d m i x - u s e p a r c e l s i n r e s i d e n t i a l u s e s and/or t h o s e i n conformance w i t h S p e c i a l Use D i s t r i c t d e s i g n a t i o n s a s recommended i n A r t i c l e 7 5 , S e c t i o n 7501 S e c t i o n a l Development P l a n r e g u l a t i o n s . 9. R e : I m p a c t o f Dodge C e n t e r a n d G e o r g e t o w n I n l a n d . The P r e l i m i n a r y P l a n and Program space (2.8 m i l l i o n square f e e t ) a d d e d t o t h e now u n d e r c o n s t r u c t i o n Dodge C e n t e r (225,000 square f e e t ) and Phase A o f t h e Georgetown I n l a n d C o r p o r a t i o n development (300,000 square f e e t o f n o n - r e s i d e n t i a l developm e n t ) r e s u l t i n a t o t a l o f 3.3 m i l l i o n s q u a r e f e e t o f n o n r e s i d e n t i a l development. With t h e addition o f t h e remainder of t h e planned Georgetown I n l a n d development t h e r e s u l t a n t t o t a l n o n - r e s i d e n t i a l d e v e l o p m e n t i s p u s h e d t o 3.4 m i l l i o n p l u s s q u a r e f e e t o r s l i g h t l y o v e r t h e 3.3 m i l l i o n s q u a r e f e e t determined as t h e a l l o w a b l e o u t e r l i m i t o f t h e improved r e s i d u a l street capacity. I n a d d i t i o n , t h i s l e v e l o f development would r e q u i r e a t a v e r a g e D i s t r i c t s t a n d a r d s o v e r t w o t i m e s t h e numb e r o f p a r k i n g s p a c e s t h a t c a n be s u p p l i e d (8200 s p a c e s demand v s 4000 s p a c e s s u p p l y ) . W i t h t h e c o m p l e t i o n o f Dodge a n d I n l a n d , t h e f u l l c a p a c i t y o f t h e f u t u r e movement s y s t e m i s more than u t i l i z e d . W i t h Dodge a n d I n l a n d s e t t i n g p r e c e d e n t , t h e r e i s a r e a l d a n g e r that other future p r o j e c t s , l i k e w i s e not i n accordance with the P r e l i m i n a r y Plan and Program, w i l l tend e i t h e r t o r e p l a c e e x i s t i n g h i s t o r i c s p a c e o r b e d e v e l o p e d i n a d d i t i o n t o t h e maximum * F l o o r Area R a t i o (FAR) i s t h e r a t i o o f square f e e t o f s i t e area t o t o t a l b u i l d i n g space expressed as a s i n g l e f i g u r e , e.g., FAR 4 i s 4 s q u a r e f e e t o f g r o s s b u i l d i n g s p a c e t o e a c h square foot of s i t e area. -10- �recommended d e v e l o p m e n t l a n d , t h u s v o i d i n g t h e t o t a l d e s i g n and development c o n c e p t a n d p r o h i b i t i n g t h e a c h i e v e m e n t o f the goals and o b j e c t i v e s which t h e Plan i s designed t o b r i n g about. 10. R e : R e z o n i n g t h e W a t e r f r o n t . I ti s c l e a r t h a t t h e above c o m p r o m i s i n g o f t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f c a r r y i n g o u t many o f t h e d e s i g n and development concepts developed by t h e study - conc e p t s t h a t a r e c o m p a t i b l e w i t h t h e p r a c t i c a l l i m i t s s e t by t r a f f i c g e n e r a t i o n , and w i t h g o a l s o f t h e community a s e x p r e s s e d b y t h e NCPC C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n f o r t h e D i s t r i c t o f Columbia s t u d i e s - i s t h e i n e v i t a b l e consequence o f t h edev e l o p m e n t p r e s s u r e s now e v i d e n t i n t h e G e o r g e t o w n W a t e r f r o n t study area. F u r t h e r development w i l l take p l a c e n o t i n conformity w i t h t h e goals expressed i n t h e present study a s long as t h e c u r r e n t obsolete zoning i s allowed t o remain. T h e GPG r e c o m m e n d e d t h a t t h e NCPC i n i t i a t e i m m e d i a t e a c t i o n t o e f f e c t the proposed rezoning o f t h e Waterfront study a r e a , e i t h e r i n an a p p r o p r i a t e permanent zoning o r i n an i n t e r i m zoning pending t h e formal completion o f Phases I I B and I I I o f t h i s study. D I R E C T I V E S FOR PREPARATION O F T H E FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND PROGRAM The P h a s e I I A P r e l i m i n a r y Development P l a n a n d P r o g r a m , a s a p p r o v e d a n d m o d i f i e d b y t h e N a t i o n a l C a p i t a l P l a n n i n g Comm i s s i o n and D i s t r i c t o f Columbia Government, forms t h e b a s i s for t h i s Report ( t h e Development P l a n and Program) and t h e S e c t i o n a l Development P l a n . NCPC d i r e c t i v e s w e r e t h a t t h e f o l l o w i n g m o d i f i c a t i o n s t o t h e Phase I I A P r e l i m i n a r y P l a n be i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t h e S e c t i o n a l Development P l a n and Program. 1 . T h e ramp c o n n e c t i o n f r o m K e y B r i d g e t o t h e new K S t r e e t is eliminated. The F i n a l Development P l a n s h a l l i n d i c a t e any n e c e s s a r y m o d i f i c a t i o n o f t h e i n t e r c h a n g e a t M a n d K S t r e e t s w i t h Key Bridge. 2 . T h e "Recommended D e v e l o p m e n t L i m i t s map i s m o d i f i e d a s f o l l o w s : (Use, Bulk, a. A l l l a n d south o f K S t r e e t a n d w e s t o f Avenue s h a l l be shown a s " p u b l i c p a r k " . Height)" Wisconsin b. A l l l a n d b e t w e e n K e y B r i d g e a n d 3 4 t h S t r e e t f r o m M S t r e e t t o t h e Potomac R i v e r s h a l l be shown a s " p u b l i c p a r k " . c. The s i t e o f t h e " F o r e s t - M a r b u r y House" and a d j a c e n t p r o p e r t i e s on t h e s o u t h e a s t c o r n e r o f 3 4 t h a n d M S t r e e t s s h a l l be shown a s " p u b l i c p a r k " a n d t h e F i n a l D e v e l o p m e n t Program s h a l l provide f o r p u b l i c a l l y r e s t o r i n g t h i s important landmark. -11- �d. T h e l a n d b e t w e e n R o c k C r e e k a n d t h e r i g h t o f w a y 3 0 t h S t r e e t f r o m K S t r e e t t o t h e P o t o m a c R i v e r s h a l l be shown a s " p u b l i c p a r k " . e. shifted t i o n of of T h e n o r t h r i g h t o f way l i n e o f K S t r e e t s h a l l be 50 f e e t s o u t h a n d t h e l a n d w i t h i n t h e v a c a t e d p o r t h e r i g h t o f way s h a l l be shown a s " p u b l i c p a r k " . 3. T h e t o t a l p e r m i t t e d d e v e l o p m e n t i n t h e G e o r g e t o w n W a t e r f r o n t A r e a s h a l l be a d j u s t e d t o r e f l e c t ( 1 ) t h e e l i m i n a t i o n o f t h e r a m p c o n n e c t i o n f r o m K e y B r i d g e t o t h e new K S t r e e t and ( 2 ) t h e a d d i t i o n a l l a n d s t o be shown a s " p u b l i c p a r k " . I n the p r e p a r a t i o n of the S e c t i o n a l Development P l a n cons i d e r a t i o n s h a l l be g i v e n t o t h e c o n c e p t o f " T r a n s f e r o f Development R i g h t s " i n m e e t i n g t h e v a r i o u s "Goals and Obj e c t i v e s " e s t a b l i s h e d i n Phase I . T h i s concept i s o u t l i n e d i n the paper e n t i t l e d "The G e o r g e t o w n W a t e r f r o n t D e v e l o p ment D i s t r i c t - a T e c h n i q u e f o r Managing t h e Redevelopment o f the Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t Area i n the D i s t r i c t of Columbia" d a t e d J a n u a r y 19, 1974. The S e c t i o n a l D e v e l o p m e n t P l a n s h a l l be d e v e l o p e d w i t h i n t h e framework of e x i s t i n g Zoning R e g u l a t i o n s of the D i s t r i c t of C o l u m b i a and e x i s t i n g e n a b l i n g l e g i s l a t i o n . Proposals for amendments t o t h e z o n i n g e n a b l i n g l e g i s l a t i o n o r t o t h e Z o n i n g R e g u l a t i o n s s h a l l be made o n l y i f d e e m e d n e c e s s a r y t o c a r r y o u t t h e p l a n n i n g g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s w i t h i n the s t u d y area. O B J E C T I V E S AND POLICIES OF THE PLAN The b a s i c g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s t h a t u n d e r l i e t h e p r o p o s a l s o u t l i n e d i n t h e P l a n a r e t h o s e d e v e l o p e d i n P h a s e I and a d o p t e d by t h e G e o r g e t o w n W a t e r f r o n t C o o r d i n a t i n g C o m m i t t e e . Goals 1 . To p r e s e r v e a n d s t r e n g t h e n G e o r g e t o w n a s munity w i t h i n the C i t y of Washington. 2. T o p r o v i d e f o r t h e e f f i c i e n t through the study area. a viable movement o f goods and com- people 3. T o p r e s e r v e a n d e n h a n c e t h o s e q u a l i t i e s o f G e o r g e t o w n t h a t j u s t i f y i t s d e s i g n a t i o n as a R e g i s t e r e d N a t i o n a l Landmark. 4. T o e n h a n c e t h e G e o r g e t o w n W a t e r f r o n t a s v i e w e d f r o m t h e R i v e r , p a r k s and monuments o f t h e N a t i o n a l C a p i t a l and t o p r e s e r v e Georgetown's open v i s t a s o f t h e Potomac R i v e r . -12- �Objectives 1. To m i n i m i z e a n y a d v e r s e e n v i r o n m e n t a l e f f e c t s o f t h e movement o f goods a n d p e o p l e t h r o u g h t h e s t u d y a r e a . 2. T o f u n c t i o n a l l y a n d a e s t h e t i c a l l y i n t e g r a t e a n y p r o p o s a l s f o r t h e movement o f t r a f f i c i n a n d t h r o u g h t h e s t u d y a r e a w i t h p r o p o s a l s f o r p u b l i c and p r i v a t e development. 3. T o i n s u r e a t r a f f i c a n d p e d e s t r i a n c i r c u l a t i o n s y s t e m and p a r k i n g a d e q u a t e t o t h e f u t u r e d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e a r e a w h i l e m i n i m i z i n g i m p a c t on a d j a c e n t a r e a s s u r r o u n d i n g t h e study area. 4. T o e s t a b l i s h d e v e l o p m e n t r e q u i r e m e n t s a n d c o n t r o l s f o r f u t u r e d e v e l o p m e n t b y s e t t i n g l i m i t a t i o n s on b u l k , h e i g h t and l a n d c o v e r a g e w h i c h p r o v i d e f o r : Optimum o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r c o m m e r c i a l u s e s a n d m i x , a n d Optimum o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r r e s i d e n t i a l u s e s w i t h a n a p p r o p r i a t e economic and s o c i a l m i x . 5. T o p r e s e r v e , r e s t o r e a n d e n h a n c e t h e c u l t u r a l , and s c e n i c a t t r i b u t e s o f t h e s t u d y a r e a . historic 6. T o d e v e l o p w i t h i n t h e s t u d y a r e a a n i n t e r r e l a t e d s y s t e m of p u b l i c p a r k s , walkways, bikeways and r e c r e a t i o n a l f a c i l i t i e s related to adjacent areas. 7. T o d e v e l o p a W a t e r f r o n t P a r k a l o n g t h e P o t o m a c R i v e r p r o v i d i n g an o p p o r t u n i t y f o r a c t i v i t i e s t h a t a r e s u i t a b l y r e l a t e d t o t h e adjacent development. 8. T o r e f l e c t i n t h e d e s i g n c h a r a c t e r o f a W a t e r f r o n t P a r k t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h t h e needs o f a r e s i d e n t i a l community. 9. T o p r o v i d e f o r a d e v e l o p m e n t p r o g r a m w h i c h m i n i m i z e s t h e adverse e n v i r o n m e n t a l impact d u r i n g t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n and development phases. 10. To d e v e l o p g u i d e l i n e s f o r d e s i g n c o n c e r n i n g : scale, tex t u r e , use o f m a t e r i a l s and landscape treatment compatible with this historic district. 11. To e x t e n d t h e g e n e r a l s c a l e , v a r i e t y , and c h a r a c t e r o f the Georgetown a r e a n o r t h o f M S t r e e t i n t o t h e W a t e r f r o n t Area i n order t o c r e a t e a c o n s i s t e n t and u n i f i e d d e s i g n f o r the e n t i r e community. -13- �Design Principles * The l a n d u s e a n d d e v e l o p m e n t o b j e c t i v e s a n d p o l i c i e s developed i n t h e study form t h e b a s i s f o r s p e c i f i c d e s i g n p r i n c i p l e s which u n d e r l i e t h e Development P l a n and Program f o r t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t . These design p r i n c i p l e s a r e intended as guides t o development d e s i g n e d t o c r e a t e t h e l e a s t n e g a t i v e i m p a c t a n d m a x i mum p o s i t i v e b e n e f i t o n b o t h t h e n a t u r a l a n d man-made e n vironment. Socio-economic and c u l t u r a l p r i n c i p l e s a r e m a i n l y concerned w i t h s i t e u n i t y and w i t h the e x t e n s i o n o f t h e s c a l e and c h a r a c t e r o f Georgetown i n t o t h e W a t e r f r o n t s t u d y a r e a . C u l t u r a l p r i n c i p l e s c o n c e n t r a t e on t h e p r e s e r v a t i o n , r e s t o r a t i o n and enhancement o f t h e c u l t u r a l and h i s t o r i c a t t r i b u t e s of the s i t e . V i s u a l / p h y s i c a l p r i n c i p l e s v a r y from g u i d i n g development h e i g h t , b u l k , use and l o c a t i o n i n a v o i d i n g t r a f f i c c o n g e s t i o n , non-conforming uses and o t h e r d i s r u p t i o n to t h e environment, t o p r e s e r v i n g and r e s t o r i n g p o t e n t i a l v i s u a l / p h y s i c a l o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r l i n k a g e and c o n n e c t i v i t y . E c o l o g i c a l p r i n c i p l e s a r e concerned mainly w i t h r e s p e c t f o r f l o o d i n g s and t h e enhancement o f n a t u r a l f e a t u r e s and s c e n i c resources. The f o l l o w i n g a r e s p e c i f i c preparation of the Plan. design 1. The m a j o r i t y o f development o f 40 f e e t . principles used i s t o be l i m i t e d i n the to a height 2. No a r e a i s t o e x c e e d a 60 f o o t h e i g h t l i m i t w i t h t h e e x c e p t i o n o f p r e d e s i g n a t e d p a r c e l s where a g r e a t e r f o o t h e i g h t has been determined a c c e p t a b l e . 3. T h e h e i g h t - b u l k " e n v e l o p e " i s t o b e d i s t r i b u t e d o v e r t h e n a t u r a l t o p o g r a p h y i n a way s o a s t o m a i n t a i n t h e i n t e g r i t y of t h e h i s t o r i c l a n d forms. 4. O f f i c e , r e t a i l - c o m m e r c i a l a n d o t h e r l a r g e t r a f f i c generat i n g u s e s a r e t o b e l o c a t e d o n a n i m p r o v e d "K" S t r e e t w h e r e access i s a v a i l a b l e , i n order to avoid l o c a l north-south s t r e e t congestion and environmental d i s r u p t i o n . * " S p e c i f i c Design P r i n c i p l e s a r e used as t h e b a s i s f o r t h e Plan. They a r e a l s o intended a s g u i d e l i n e s t o a s s i s t developers i n the preparation of design proposals f o r the W a t e r f r o n t and t o a s s i s t any o f f i c i a l d e s i g n r e v i e w board i n i t s determination of the a c c e p t a b i l i t y of a planned u n i t development p r o p o s a l . " -14- �5. A l l h a b i t a b l e d e v e l o p m e n t i s t o b e k e p t a b o u t t h e e l e v a t i o n o f t h e 50 y e a r c o m b i n e d P o t o m a c R i v e r a n d t i d a l f l o o d . * 6. A m a x i m u m h e i g h t l i m i t o f 40 f e e t o n t h e h i l l n o r t h o f "K" S t r e e t , from W i s c o n s i n Avenue e a s t t o 3 1 s t S t r e e t i s t o be m a i n t a i n e d t o p r e s e r v e t h e v i s t a s from W i s c o n s i n Avenue a s f a r n o r t h a s C a l v e r t S t r e e t and t h e Grace Churchyard t o t h e Potomac, and from t h e R i v e r n o r t h t o t h e Church. 7. A m a x i m u m h e i g h t t e r and use f o r a l l S t r e e t f r o m t h e C&O be m a i n t a i n e d a s a r to t h e R i v e r . o f 40 f e e t a n d a r e s i d e n t i a l s c a l e , c h a r a c development i s t o be m a i n t a i n e d w e s t o f 3 3 r d C a n a l t o t h e Potomac. The r i d g e l i n e i s t o s i g h t l i n e s from t h e n o r t h s i d e o f t h e Canal 8. A m a x i m u m h e i g h t o f 40 f e e t , a n d r e s i d e n t i a l d e v e l o p m e n t , on b o t h s i d e s o f t h e C a n a l f r o m 2 9 t h S t r e e t w e s t t o 3 1 s t S t r e e t a r e t o be m a i n t a i n e d i n an e f f o r t t o e x t e n d t h e s c a l e and g e n e r a l c h a r a c t e r o f Georgetown i n t o t h i s a r e a . Existing structures along t h i s s t r e t c h o f the Canal together w i t h the proposed Georgetown I n l a n d development i n t h i s a r e a a r e accepted as non-conforming development both i n h e i g h t and b u l k . 9. I n a l l a r e a s n o t z o n e d 6 0 ' , t h e " t o w n h o u s e " c h a r a c t e r o f G e o r g e t o w n i s t o be e x t e n d e d w i t h s i m i l a r c o m p a t i b l e development. 1 0 . T h e s c a l e a n d c h a r a c t e r o f "M" S t r e e t d e v e l o p m e n t i s t o b e p r e s e r v e d , r e s t o r e d and enhanced f o r i t s e n t i r e l e n g t h throughout t h e study area. 1 1 . T h e C&O C a n a l i s t o b e p r e s e r v e d a n d e n h a n c e d w i t h v i e w s maintained along i t s length. The a r e a s along t h e Canal t h a t h a v e a t i g h t " u r b a n " q u a l i t y e a s t o f K e y B r i d g e a r e t o be p r e s e r v e d , and t h e v i s u a l e f f e c t o f t h e v a r i e d openness o f low development from 29th and 3 1 s t S t r e e t s t o t h e e n c l o s u r e o f t h e r e t a i n i n g w a l l s and high warehouse s t r u c t u r e s from 3 1 s t and W i s c o n s i n Avenue t o 33rd S t r e e t i s t o be enhanced. The above warehouse s t r u c t u r e s a r e t o be p r e s e r v e d f o r t h e a r c h i t e c t u r a l m e r i t o f t h e i r facades along t h e Canal and renovated for appropriate reuse. 1 2 . Open s p a c e a n d p e d e s t r i a n c o r r i d o r s , b i c y c l e p a t h s a n d r o u t e s t o t h e Potomac R i v e r a r e t o be d e v e l o p e d . * S p e c i f i c d e s i g n p r i n c i p l e s s o i n d i c a t e d a r e recommended a s mandatory f o r any development i n t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t . -15- �ENTRANCE ESTABUSH VISUAL LfHES URBAN DESIGN PRINCIPLES �1 3 . V i s t a s o f t h e P o t o m a c R i v e r down t h e n o r t h - s o u t h s t r e e t s o f Thomas J e f f e r s o n , 3 1 s t , 3 3 r d , and 3 4 t h and W i s c o n s i n A v e n u e a r e t o be i m p r o v e d a n d m a i n t a i n e d . * 1 4 . An " u r b a n " w a t e r ' s e d g e p a r k Potomac R i v e r w i t h a minimum o f i s t o be d e v e l o p e d a l o n g t h e a 50 f o o t w i d e p r o m e n a d e . * 15. A m a j o r f o c a l p o i n t i s t o be c r e a t e d a t t h e j u n c t i o n o f "K" S t r e e t a n d W i s c o n s i n A v e n u e b y h a v i n g a p u b l i c p l a z a a n d a c t i v e m a r i n a b e t w e e n "K" S t r e e t a n d t h e P o t o m a c w i t h t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f r e t a i l f r o n t a g e on t h e e a s t s i d e . M A R K E T P O T E N T I A L AND MARKET CONSTRAINTS S o c i o l o g i c a l and e c o n o m i c c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s f o r b o t h t h e R e g i o n and Georgetown were d e t a i l e d u n d e r t h e " B a s i s f o r Change" i n the Phase I Report. The d e t a i l s o f t h e e c o n o m i c s o f t h e P r e l i m i n a r y P l a n and Program a r e p r e s e n t e d i n t h e "Economics and M a r k e t a b i l i t y " c h a p t e r o f t h e Phase I I A R e p o r t . They a r e summarized i n Chapter V of t h i s Report. The W a t e r f r o n t s t u d y a r e a , a d j a c e n t t o Georgetown and s e p a r a t ing i t from t h e R i v e r , has l o n g been an anomaly. Rooted i n i t s e a r l y h i s t o r y as a s e a p o r t and warehousing c e n t e r , t h e W a t e r f r o n t has continued to harbor a melange of r e s i d e n t i a l , s e r v i c e , i n d u s t r i a l and w a t e r - s e r v e d a c t i v i t i e s . Long i n the b a c k - w a t e r o f d e v e l o p m e n t , t h e W a t e r f r o n t a r e a i s one o f t h e few r e m a i n i n g i n - t o w n l o c a t i o n s s u s c e p t i b l e t o h i g h - i n t e n s i t y redevelopment. I n terms of i t s p r o x i m i t y to the c e n t r a l employment a r e a , a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h the p r e s t i g i o u s Georgetown a b o v e "M" S t r e e t and i t s Potomac R i v e r f r o n t a g e , the Waterf r o n t study a r e a has a l o c a t i o n p o t e n t i a l f o r a wide v a r i e t y o f more i n t e n s i v e u s e s i n t h e y e a r s a h e a d and an o p p o r t u n i t y to c a p t u r e a m o r e - t h a n - p r o p o r t i o n a t e (to land area) share of metropolitan growth. I n no o t h e r p a r t o f t h e C i t y o f W a s h i n g t o n d o e s s u c h a p o s s i b i l i t y f o r new d e v e l o p m e n t e x i s t t o e n r i c h a n d e x p a n d t h e area's p o t e n t i a l w i t h a comprehensive program of p r e s e r v a t i o n , r e s t o r a t i o n and i m a g i n a t i v e a d a p t i v e u s e . From the s t a n d p o i n t o f economics, the P l a n f o r t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t s e e k s t h e optimum development o f t h e unique Georgetown community. With t h i s o b j e c t i v e , i t suggests t i g h t cont r o l s t h a t would r e s t r i c t the f o r c e s of the f r e e market. I t s b a s i c premise i s that f a i l u r e to e x e r c i s e these c o n t r o l s could h a v e a s e r i o u s l y n e g a t i v e i m p a c t upon t h e economy o f t h i s v i t a l community and a c o n s e q u e n t l y a d v e r s e e f f e c t upon t h e economy o f t h e D i s t r i c t o f C o l u m b i a . * S p e c i f i c d e s i g n p r i n c i p l e s so m a n d a t o r y f o r any development i n d i c a t e d a r e recommended a s i n the Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t . -17- �The P l a n t h e r e f o r e t a k e s i s s u e w i t h t h e p r o p o s i t i o n t h a t t h e G e o r g e t o w n W a t e r f r o n t s h o u l d be a l l o w e d t o grow a t a d e n s i t y s o l e l y d i c t a t e d by t h e r e a l e s t a t e m a r k e t . I t maintains that such a p o l i c y would n o t produce n e t economic b e n e f i t s t o t h e D i s t r i c t , despite the short-run ballooning of real estate ratables. T h i s p o l i c y could have t h e opposite e f f e c t . I t could not only s e t i n t o motion forces t h a t could adversely a f f e c t t h e w e a l t h a n d p r o d u c t i v i t y o f t h e G e o r g e t o w n comm u n i t y , b u t i t could a l s o weaken t h e D i s t r i c t ' s e f f o r t s t o a t t r a c t new p r i v a t e i n v e s t m e n t s t o o t h e r p a r t s o f t h e c e n t r a l a r e a t h a t need redevelopment. The f a c t s a r e c l e a r a n d s i m p l e . The Georgetown community i s one o f t h e D i s t r i c t ' s m o s t p r o d u c t i v e e c o n o m i c e n c l a v e s , p r o ducing municipal revenues f a ri n excess of municipal service requirements. The s t r e n g t h o f i t s t a x b a s e depends d i r e c t l y upon t h e m a i n t e n a n c e o f i t s u n i q u e e n v i r o n m e n t a l q u a l i t i e s and c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . I t i s one o f t h e D i s t r i c t ' s f e w s u b economies t h a t i s v i a b l e and competitive w i t h i n t h e metrop o l i t a n economic framework, g e n e r a t i n g both p r i v a t e i n v e s t ments and consumer p a t r o n a g e . Y e t i t i s a l r e a d y c l o s e t o a tipping point i n i t scapacity to maintain i t s comparative advantages. The h i s t o r y o f c e n t r a l c i t y d e c l i n e t h r o u g h o u t t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s i s r e p l e t e with examples of attempts t o o f f s e t the e f f e c t s o f suburban c a p i t a l f l o w by m i l k i n g t h e few " h o t " r e a l estate sub-areas i n the c e n t r a l c i t y . This has r e s u l t e d i n many c a s e s i n d e s t r o y i n g t h e v e r y a m e n i t i e s that gave those s u b - a r e a s t h e i r unique q u a l i t y . This i s the issue t h a t t h e D i s t r i c t Government f a c e s i n t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t . The economic development c a v e a t s o f t h e P l a n f o r t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t a r e n o t a p o s t - r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n o f recommendat i o n s b a s e d on " n o n - e c o n o m i c " c o n s i d e r a t i o n s s u c h a s a e s thetics or design. They a r e f a c t o r s t h a t have d e c i s i v e l y i n f l u e n c e d t h e land use and zoning c o n t r o l s t h a t a r e being proposed. They r e p r e s e n t t h e k i n d s o f c o n s i d e r a t i o n s that j u s t i f y p l a n n i n g a s a b a s i s f o r sound p u b l i c p o l i c y . They p u t a l t e r n a t i v e p o l i c i e s w i t h i n t h e framework o f c o s t - b e n e f i t a n a l y s i s , a d i s c i p l i n e t h a t i s p a r t i c u l a r l y c r i t i c a l t o decision-making i n the D i s t r i c t with i t slimited t a x supporting economic s t r u c t u r e . The o v e r a l l c o n c l u s i o n i s t h a t t o o v e r l o a d t h e W a t e r f r o n t w o u l d be a t t h e c o s t o f damaging t h e W a t e r f r o n t i t s e l f , o f undercutting Georgetown's o v e r a l l c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e C i t y ' s economic w e l l - b e i n g , and u n d e r c u t t i n g investment f o r the C i t y ' s other c e n t r a l area programs. When t h e s e f a c t o r s a r e t a k e n i n t o account, the cost-benefit r a t i o swings decidedly i n favor of -18- �l i m i t i n g d e v e l o p m e n t on t h e W a t e r f r o n t t o t h a t w h i c h sistent with the o v e r a l l goals of the Plan. i s con- T H E M O V E M E N T S Y S T E M A S A C O N S T R A I N T ON D E V E L O P M E N T C o n c l u s i o n s a s summarized from Phase I i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e movement s y s t e m i s most c r i t i c a l i n t e r m s o f t h e W a t e r f r o n t ' s p o t e n t i a l a n d c a p a c i t y f o r d e v e l o p m e n t a n d i t s f u t u r e f o r m -b o t h i n t h e w a y i t w i l l w o r k a n d how i t w i l l function. L o c a l a n d a r t e r i a l t r a f f i c movement a n d a c c e s s i s a l i m i t i n g c o n s t r a i n t t o f u t u r e development o f t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t . The P h a s e I S t u d y R e p o r t d e s c r i b e s t h e b a s i s f o r s e t t i n g t h e l i m i t on W a t e r f r o n t f l o o r a r e a p o t e n t i a l i n c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f traffic capacity. The r e a l i s t i c l i m i t o f a d d i t i o n a l n o n - r e s i d e n t i a l f l o o r a r e a , assuming p r e s e n t day t r a f f i c l o a d s and a d d i t i o n o f a w e s t e r l y "K" S t r e e t c o n n e c t i o n t o K e y B r i d g e a n d C a n a l R o a d , i s a b o u t 2,056,000 a d d i t i o n a l s q u a r e f e e t o f development. T h i s would amount t o a t o t a l d e v e l o p m e n t i n t h e G e o r g e t o w n W a t e r f r o n t o f 3.3 m i l l i o n s q u a r e f e e t , e x c l u d i n g new r e s i d e n t i a l d e velopment. W i t h t h i s 3.3 m i l l i o n s q u a r e f e e t o f d e v e l o p m e n t , a t r a f f i c l e v e l o f s e r v i c e " E " w o u l d be f e a s i b l e , b u t c e r t a i n l y not desirable. S e r v i c e l e v e l " E " i s a b o u t t h a t now o p e r a t i n g o n "M" S t r e e t a t p e a k h o u r . I n t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f t h e f i n a l Development P l a n and Program, t h e GPG w a s d i r e c t e d t o m o d i f y t h e P h a s e I I A P r e l i m i n a r y Plan and P r o g r a m by t h e e l i m i n a t i o n o f t h e ramp c o n n e c t i o n f r o m Key B r i d g e t o t h e recommended r e c o n s t r u c t e d local K Street. I t was a l s o d i r e c t e d t o a d j u s t t h e t o t a l p e r m i t t e d d e v e l o p ment i n t h e W a t e r f r o n t a r e a t o r e f l e c t t h i s e l i m i n a t i o n . U s i n g h i g h w a y s y s t e m a s s u m p t i o n s common t o P h a s e I a n d I I A i t was d e t e r m i n e d t h a t r e m o v a l o f t h e Key B r i d g e - t o - K S t r e e t r i g h t - t u r n ramp w o u l d n o t s u b s t a n t i a l l y a f f e c t s y s t e m - w i d e t r a f f i c c a p a c i t i e s p e r s e . However, e l i m i n a t i o n o f t h e r i g h t - t u r n ramp w i l l i n c r e a s e t h e amount o f t r a f f i c crossi n g through t h e c r i t i c a l W i s c o n s i n Avenue i n t e r s e c t i o n s f o r any g i v e n amount o f d e v e l o p m e n t . I n p a r t i c u l a r development w e s t o f W i s c o n s i n a n d s o u t h o f t h e C&O C a n a l c o u l d n o t b e s e r v i c e d from Key B r i d g e v i a a d i r e c t K S t r e e t r o u t e . Traff i c from Key B r i d g e t o t h i s development a r e a would have t o use M S t r e e t , W i s c o n s i n Avenue, and then K S t r e e t t o r e a c h i t s Waterfront destination. -19- �T h e r e s u l t a n t i n c r e a s e i n e a s t b o u n d A.M. peak t r a f f i c u s i n g t h e c r i t i c a l W i s c o n s i n A v e n u e i n t e r s e c t i o n s w o u l d b e on t h e o r d e r o f 13 p e r c e n t . I f t h e same a p p r o p r i a t e l e v e l o f t r a f f i c s e r v i c e a s i n t h e p r i o r c a l c u l a t i o n s i s t o be r e t a i n e d , t h e t o t a l A.M. peak M S t r e e t and K S t r e e t e a s t b o u n d t r a f f i c m u s t be k e p t a t t h e l e v e l i t w o u l d be w i t h a K e y B r i d g e t o K S t r e e t r i g h t - t u r n ramp. Thus the a l l o w a b l e new d e v e l o p m e n t i n t h e G e o r g e t o w n W a t e r f r o n t m u s t b e reduced to 88% o f t h e i n t e n s i t y p r e v i o u s l y d e t e r m i n e d . The s i t u a t i o n becomes q u i t e d i f f e r e n t i f t h e T h r e e S i s t e r s B r i d g e i s n o t t o be i n c l u d e d i n t h e f r e e w a y s y s t e m . The T h r e e S i s t e r s B r i d g e ( v i a t h e Potomac F r e e w a y ) and t h e Key B r i d g e - t o - K S t r e e t r i g h t - t u r n ramp w o u l d p e r f o r m a s i m i l a r f u n c t i o n i n regard to eastbound through t r a f f i c and t h e r e f o r e i f e i t h e r i s b u i l t w i t h o u t the o t h e r , the above figures obtain. I f b o t h a r e d e l e t e d o n l y M S t r e e t w o u l d be l e f t f o r eastbound t r a f f i c i n the Rosslyn - K S t r e e t c o r r i d o r . D e l e t i o n o f t h e Key B r i d g e - t o - K S t r e e t r i g h t - t u r n ramp i n t h e c o n t e x t o f no T h r e e S i s t e r s B r i d g e e n t a i l s c o n s e q u e n c e s beyond the scope of the s t u d y , r e q u i r i n g a s e p a r a t e f u l l scale travel-demand a n a l y s i s and s t u d y o f a l t e r n a t i v e r o a d way c o n f i g u r a t i o n s a n d t r a f f i c o p e r a t i n g p a t t e r n s . Assumi n g no T h r e e S i s t e r s B r i d g e , i f t h e r i g h t - t u r n r a m p i s r e moved w i t h o u t s u b s t i t u t i o n o f c o m p a r a b l e t r a f f i c c a p a c i t y , i t i s e v i d e n t t h a t new d e v e l o p m e n t i n t h e W a t e r f r o n t m u s t be e v e n m o r e s e v e r e l y c u r t a i l e d t h a n a b o v e . S u b s t i t u t i o n of comparable t r a f f i c c a p a c i t y w i l l a s s u r e d l y i n v o l v e s i g n i f i c a n t t r a f f i c m o d i f i c a t i o n s , beyond the c o n f i n e s of the Waterfront. P e r h a p s t h e o n l y p o s s i b l e w a y o f p a r t i a l l y m a k i n g up f o r t h e a b o v e r e d u c t i o n i n c a p a c i t y and a l l o w i n g more d e v e l o p ment i n t h e W a t e r f r o n t , f r o m a movement s t a n d p o i n t , i s t o i m p r o v e s t r e e t u t i l i z a t i o n by a d o p t i o n o f a s t r e e t t r a f f i c c o n t r o l s y s t e m w h e r e b y c e r t a i n m a j o r t r a f f i c f l o w s on M and K S t r e e t s w o u l d work as a one-way s t r e e t c o u p l e t d u r i n g t h e time o f peak e a s t b o u n d t r a f f i c f l o w and c o n f l i c t i n g t r a f f i c movements a t M S t r e e t and Key B r i d g e w o u l d be a t a l l t i m e r e d u c e d t o t h e p o i n t o f r e q u i r i n g o n l y two p h a s e signalization. The s t r e e t s i n v o l v e d w o u l d n o t have t o o p e r a t e s o l e l y a s o n e - w a y s t r e e t s t o do t h i s , a s a s y s t e m o f u n b a l a n c e d t r a f f i c f l o w on M and K S t r e e t s a l o n g w i t h t u r n p r o h i b i t i o n s c o u l d a c c o m p l i s h t h e same o b j e c t i v e s . -20- �The Feasible Development Limit I n l i g h t o f t h e above c o n s i d e r a t i o n s t h e f e a s i b l e l i m i t o f t o t a l commercial and/or t h e r e s i d e n t i a l e q u i v a l e n t development i n t h e W a t e r f r o n t ( a s s u m i n g p r e s e n t day t r a f f i c l o a d s and t h e a d d i t i o n o f a w e s t e r l y K S t r e e t c o n n e c t i o n t o Key B r i d g e a n d C a n a l R o a d ) i s 3.0 m i l l i o n s q u a r e f e e t . This r e p r e s e n t s a m o d i f i c a t i o n o f t h e 3.3 m i l l i o n s q u a r e f e e t used as t h e l i m i t i n t h e Phase I and I I A Study R e p o r t s . T h i s m o d i f i c a t i o n i s t h a t r e q u i r e d by t h e e l i m i n a t i o n o f t h e right-hand-turn ramp f r o m K e y B r i d g e t o K S t r e e t e a s t b o u n d . As was n o t e d i n t h e p r e v i o u s d i s c u s s i o n , t h i s l i m i t i s an absolute i n that i t maintains that t h e Three S i s t e r s Bridge and Potomac R i v e r F r e e w a y a r e " g i v e n s " . I f e i t h e r or both a r e n o t t o become r e a l i t i e s , c o n s i d e r a b l y l e s s l o c a l s t r e e t c a p a c i t y w i l l be a v a i l a b l e f o r a d d i t i o n a l W a t e r f r o n t d e v e l o p ment, a s t h e i r through-movement f u n c t i o n w i l l n e c e s s a r i l y be i n c r e a s e d . E v e n w i t h t h e s e two f a c i l i t i e s a s p l a n n e d t h e 3.0 m i l l i o n f i g u r e i m p l i e s a l o c a l t r a f f i c l e v e l o f s e r vice "E" l e v e l , f e a s i b l e but not desirable. Thus, the r e a l i s t i c l i m i t of t o t a l commercial or non-residential equival e n t d e v e l o p m e n t i s s o m e w h a t l e s s t h a n t h e 3.0 m i l l i o n s q u a r e foot f i g u r e . The P l a n h e r e i n i s d e s i g n e d f o r a l i m i t o f t o t a l d e v e l o p m e n t a t a p p r o x i m a t e l y 2.7 m i l l i o n s q u a r e f e e t o f c o m m e r c i a l a n d / o r r e s i d e n t i a l e q u i v a l e n t Waterfront development, t h a t l e v e l of development estimated as implying a l o c a l t r a f f i c l e v e l of service "D". -21- ��Ill Plan Elements -23- �THE RECOMMENDED LAND USE PLAN The L a n d Use P l a n i s d e s i g n e d t o a c h i e v e t h e g o a l s a n d obj e c t i v e s e s t a b l i s h e d f o r t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t . The P l a n incorporates the s p e c i f i c design p r i n c i p l e s developed f o r the Waterfront Study Area. The f o l l o w i n g d e s c r i b e s e x i s t i n g l a n d u s e s t o p r o v i d e a c o n t e x t f o r t h e d e s c r i p t i o n o f e x i s t i n g u s e s t o r e m a i n , recommended l a n d u s e s a n d t h e a m o u n t a n d t y p e o f d e v e l o p m e n t . H i s t o r i c and a r c h i t e c t u r a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t b u i l d i n g s t h a t a r e to be p r e s e r v e d a n d / o r r e s t o r e d a r e l i s t e d . Existing Land Use Georgetown's p r i n c i p a l a r t e r i a l s t r e e t s - W i s c o n s i n Avenue a n d "M" S t r e e t - s e r v e a s i m p o r t a n t s p e c i a l t y r e t a i l a n d entertainment corridors catering to metropolitan-wide markets. The G e o r g e t o w n W a t e r f r o n t i s a m i x e d - u s e e n c l a v e c o m b i n i n g o b s o l e s c e n t uses o f r e l a t i v e l y low i n t e n s i t y w i t h h i s t o r i c s t r u c t u r e s a n d s i g n i f i c a n t e x a m p l e s o f new d e v e l o p m e n t . I t i s on t h e t h r e s h o l d o f m a j o r p r i v a t e l y - i n d u c e d r e d e v e l o p m e n t . Summary of Building Uses in the Georgetown Waterfront Study A r e a , March 1972 Use Floor Area ( S q . F t . ) Residential Townhouses Multi-Family 102,000 6 12,000 Residential 1 37.000 _2_ (151,000) (9) 181,000 12 80.000 _5_ Residential Mixed w i t h Other Uses Subtotal Retail Trade Eating, Drinking, % of Total Entertainment (261,000) Subtotal (17) Personal & Business Services 14,000 1 Other Services 54.000 _4 (68,000) (5) 237,000 15 Subtotal Office and Professional 23,000 2 132,000 8 Hotel Manufacturing, Wholesale & Distribution 54,000 3 Utilities 197,000 13 Government 114,000 7 17,000 1 Building Materials & Contract Construction Religious and Institutional 304,000 TOTAL 20 1,558,000 Vacant 100 Source: Hammer, Siler, George Associates it. -24- ��Existing Uses to Remain A k e y f a c t o r a f f e c t i n g t h e m a r k e t a b i l i t y a n d l o c a t i o n o f new development i n the W a t e r f r o n t study area i s t h e n e t acreage a v a i l a b l e and " s u s c e p t i b l e " t o p r i v a t e redevelopment i n t h e Waterfront. "Susceptible" includes those properties c u r r e n t l y u n d e r u t i l i z i n g t h e i r z o n i n g p o t e n t i a l a n d / o r a v a i l a b l e on t h e market. " S u s c e p t i b l e " does n o t i n c l u d e committed development. The W a t e r f r o n t a r e a ' s c u r r e n t m a j o r f l o o r s p a c e " c o n s u m e r s " i n c l u d e government and u t i l i t i e s (311,000 square f e e t , about 20 p e r c e n t o f t h e t o t a l ) ; o f f i c e s (237,000 square f e e t , approximately 15 p e r c e n t o f t h e t o t a l ) a n d r e t a i l t r a d e (181,000 s q u a r e f e e t , o r a b o u t 12 p e r c e n t o f t h e t o t a l ) . I t s h o u l d be n o t e d t h a t i n 1 9 7 2 a b o u t 20 p e r c e n t o f t h e s t u d y a r e a ' s f l o o r s p a c e ( a s opposed t o l a n d ) , o r about 304,000 s q u a r e f e e t was vacant. Of t h e G e o r g e t o w n W a t e r f r o n t ' s a p p r o x i m a t e 4 2 a c r e s , 15 a c r e s (35 p e r c e n t o f t h e t o t a l ) c a n be c o n s i d e r e d " s u s c e p t i b l e " o r "highly s u s c e p t i b l e " t o future redevelopment. Properties i n these c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s i n c l u d e both s m a l l and l a r g e land a s s e m b l i e s w h i c h may h a v e a n e c o n o m i c a l l y v i a b l e , b u t incompatible, use f o r t h e Georgetown a r e a and W a t e r f r o n t , e.g., a u t o r e p a i r , junk shop, e t c . ; vacant lots; a c t i v i t i e s and occupants i n det e r i o r a t i n g s t r u c t u r e s and l i k e l y t o be c u r t a i l e d o r r e l o c a t e d from t h e a r e a ; and l a r g e l a n d a s s e m b l i e s w i t h s m a l l portions o f p e r m i s s i b l e FAR i n u s e . Opportunities outside the "susceptible/highly susceptible" g r o u p i n g t e n d t o be l i m i t e d b e c a u s e o f t h e c o n s i d e r a b l e expense i n v o l v e d i n land assembly and/or p o t e n t i a l c o n f l i c t w i t h o t h e r development g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s f o r t h e a r e a . This includes a p p r o x i m a t e l y 19 a c r e s . T h u s a b o u t 45 p e r c e n t o f t h e t o t a l l a n d a r e a i n t h e W a t e r f r o n t c a n be c l a s s i f i e d a s " r e s i s t a n t " or " h i g h l y r e s i s t a n t " t o change. These l a t t e r c a t e g o r i e s emb r a c e l a n d o n w h i c h t h e r e i s r e l a t i v e l y new c o n s t r u c t i o n comp a t i b l e w i t h t h e a r e a ( e . g . , Kodak a n d R e c o r d a k ) and where i m p r o v e m e n t s a r e c l o s e t o f u l l u s e o f FAR. H i s t o r i c s t r u c t u r e s must be d e a l t w i t h s e p a r a t e l y a s t h e y a r e "most s u s c e p t i b l e " , e v e n t h o u g h o f m a j o r o r e x c e p t i o n a l hist o r i c a l value. Only i f they a r e i n ownership o r c o n t r o l t h a t has t h e c a p a b i l i t y a n d t h e d e s i r e t o r e t a i n them c a n t h e y be c o n s i d e r e d " r e s i s t a n t t o change". Residences f a l l into the same c a t e g o r y . S u r v e y s r e v e a l t h a t a b o u t 20 p e r c e n t o f t h e G e o r g e t o w n W a t e r f r o n t ' s l a n d a r e a (9 a c r e s ) i s p r e s e n t l y c o m m i t t e d t o e x i s t i n g d e v e l o p m e n t w h i c h i s r e l a t i v e l y i m m o v a b l e ( e . g . , Dodge Center and Phase A Georgetown I n l a n d ) . -26- �The l a n d u s e i n v e n t o r y i n d i c a t e s 19-24 acres ( i n c l u d i n g the c o m m i t t e d d e v e l o p m e n t o f Dodge C e n t e r a n d G e o r g e t o w n I n l a n d ) as the net acreage a v a i l a b l e f o r p r i v a t e "development" i n the study area. I n a d d i t i o n , 8.7 a c r e s now o w n e d b y t h e D.C. Highway Department i n a r e c t a n g u l a r W a t e r f r o n t strip s t r e t c h i n g f r o m t h e Key B r i d g e t o t h e G e o r g e t o w n I n l a n d h o l d i n g , l o c a t e d south of K S t r e e t , has not been committed to f u t u r e use. Historic Buildings, Sites, and Lands to be Preserved A p r i n c i p a l g o a l o f t h e P l a n i s t o p r e s e r v e and enhance t h o s e q u a l i t i e s of the Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t t h a t j u s t i f y Georgetown's d e s i g n a t i o n as a R e g i s t e r e d N a t i o n a l Landmark. Since the p a n y , and tional his Landmarks i n i t i a t i o n o f t h e s t u d y , t h e C o r s o n a n d G r u m a n ComW a r r i n g B a r r e l Company w a r e h o u s e s , b o t h o f e x c e p t o r i c v a l u e ( c a . 1855 and n o t e d a s C a t e g o r y I I I shown i n t h e P h a s e I R e p o r t ) h a v e b e e n t o r n down. T h e J o i n t C o m m i t t e e on L a n d m a r k s , p a r t i a l l y i n r e s p o n s e t o t h e above and t h e r e a l i z a t i o n t h a t o v e r a l l l a n d m a r k d e s i g n a t i o n does not p r o v i d e p r o t e c t i o n t o i n d i v i d u a l s t r u c t u r e s when t h r e a t e n e d u n d e r t h e i n c r e a s i n g p r e s s u r e s f o r d e v e l o p ment i n t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t , i n i t i a t e d a r e e v a l u a t i o n of Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t landmark d e s i g n a t i o n s . The result of t h i s r e e v a l u a t i o n i s summarized i n the f o l l o w i n g l i s t i n g o f " L a n d m a r k s o f t h e N a t i o n a l C a p i t a l " d e s i g n a t e d by t h e J o i n t C o m m i t t e e on L a n d m a r k s o f t h e N a t i o n a l C a p i t a l , a s o f March 27, 1973. Buildings r a t e l y on buildings v a l u e " on and the are the places which are underlined are l i s t e d sepaN a t i o n a l R e g i s t e r of H i s t o r i c P l a c e s . These i n d i c a t e d by t h e d e s i g n a t i o n o f " e x c e p t i o n a l Historic Rating Map. Landmark d e s i g n a t i o n of i n d i v i d u a l s t r u c t u r e s p r o v i d e s sign i f i c a n t a d d i t i o n a l p r o t e c t i o n t o t h e s e s t r u c t u r e s by d e l a y i n g d e m o l i t i o n a s t h e y become t h r e a t e n e d . However, i t i s not enough s i m p l y t o p r o v i d e s h o r t - t e r m p r o t e c t i o n . The P l a n p r o poses programs f o r redevelopment, r e n o v a t i o n and/or recons t r u c t i o n o f s p e c i f i c h i s t o r i c s t r u c t u r e s and s p a c e s . These programs a r e d e s c r i b e d i n C h a p t e r I I I and under " H i s t o r i c A r e a S t u d i e s " i n the Phase I I A Report. -27- �Georgetown Landmarks of the National Capital Category I D.C. Landmarks List No. 1-20 Places, 1-4 Date Forrest-Marbury House, 3350 M Street, N.W. Chesapeake and Ohio Canal Wisconsin Ave. Bridge over Canal & Canal Monument Potomac Aqueduct Bridge Abutment and Pier Ownership 1788-90 1831 1831 1833-43 P U.S. D.C. Category II ll-B-10 11 C 20 1ID 1 II D 2 II D 3 II D 6 II D 8 11-0-15 1IE 3 II E 60 II G-1 ll-G-21 Grace Protestant Episcopal Church, (Mission Church for 1866-67 Canal Boatmen), 1041 Wisconsin Avenue, N.W. Potomac Masonic Lodge No. 5, 1058 Thos. Jefferson St., N.W. 1810 Bank of Columbia (Bureau of Indian Trade; Georgetown 1796, remod. 1833 Town Hall and Mayor's Office; Fire Company No. 5 ) , 3210 M Street, N.W. City Tavern, 3206 M Street, N.W. 1796,remod. 1962 Historic Georgetown Inc.* and adjacent buildings (4) c. 1787-91 and 3001-3011 M Street, N.W. 1810-12 Vigilant Fire House, 1066 Wisconsin Avenue, N.W. 1844 Georgetown Market, 3276 M Street, N.W. 1865, on site of market-1795 Bomford's Mill (Pioneer Flour Mills) 1845-47, behind 3261 K Street, N.W. enlarged c. 1883 Old Stone House*, 3051 M St., N.W. 1765, restored 1956-58 Washington Canoe Club, West end of K St., N.W. c.1890 Georgetown Historic District C&O Canal Historic District through Georgetown P P D.C. P P P D.C. P U.S. P Category III III D-2 III D 4 III D 17 III E 9 II I E 49 III E 50 III E 51 I I l - E 52 lll-G-3 Commercial Buildings** M Street, N.W., Georgetown Nos. 2 8 0 3 * 2919* 3056 3068 3072 3112 3116 3209* 3211* 3232 Col. Glass Co. Duvall Foundry, 1 0 5 0 3 0 t h Street, N.W. District of Columbia Paper Manufacturing Co., 3255-59 K Street, N.W. Junior League of Washington* (LoughboroughPatterson House), 3041 M Street, N.W. Joseph Carlton House, 1052-54 Potomac Street, N.W. Brickyard Hill Houses, 3134-36 South Street, N.W. 1063, 1069 (Nicholas Hedges House) and 1071 Thos. Jefferson Street, N.W. Potomac Boat Club, 3530 K Street, N.W. Key Bridge c. 1780-1820 P 1856 1900-02 P P 1801-06 P c.1794 c.1800 c. 1800-15 P P P c.1870 1923 P D.C. Notes: P: Private ownership * Not technically in the Waterfront Study Area, being on the north side of M Street. * * A more comprehensive reclassification of M Street buildings is under review by the Joint Committee on Landmarks but is not yet completed. 1 Designated by the Joint Committee on Landmarks of the National Capital, March 27, 1973. -28- ��Recommended Land Use The e x i s t i n g L a n d Use P l a n f o r t h e W a t e r f r o n t i n d i c a t e s a l l e x i s t i n g d e v e l o p m e n t a s r e m a i n i n g i n i t s e x i s t i n g u s e , unl e s s shown a s a p r o p o s e d r e u s e . Use c a t e g o r i e s a r e r e s i d e n t i a l , commercial ( e i t h e r low o r medium d e n s i t y ) o r m i x e d use ( r e s i d e n t i a l - c o m m e r c i a l , a g a i n e i t h e r low o r median d e n s i t y ) park use i s a l s o d e s i g n a t e d . A detailed discussion o f t h e amount and t y p e o f d e v e l o p m e n t f o l l o w s . The L a n d Use Plan i s described i n the context of the I l l u s t r a t i v e S i t e P l a n i n t h i s c h a p t e r , and i n t h e more d e t a i l e d " H i s t o r i c A r e a " and " W a t e r f r o n t Zone" s t u d i e s a s m o d i f i e d from t h e Phase I I A R e p o r t and a s p a r t o f t h e g u i d e l i n e s o f t h e P l a n a r e i n c l u d e d a s A p p e n d i x A. Amount and Type of Development The economics o f t h e siderations relating area: P l a n d i r e c t l y i n v o l v e s two b a s i c c o n to p h y s i c a l development w i t h i n the - R e s p o n s e t o t h e demands o f t h e p r i v a t e m a r k e t v a r i e t y o f f u n c t i o n s and l a n d u s e s ; gird for a - P r o t e c t i o n of the unique c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s t h a t undert h e sub-economy o f t h e l a r g e r Georgetown community. The P l a n p e r m i t s a t o t a l d e v e l o p m e n t e n v e l o p e i n t h e Georget o w n W a t e r f r o n t A r e a o f some 3 , 3 3 3 g r o s s s q u a r e f e e t . This l e v e l o f development i n c l u d e s 2,150,000 s q u a r e f e e t o f new c o n s t r u c t i o n f o r b o t h c o m m e r c i a l and r e s i d e n t i a l u s e s , w i t h a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1,000,000 s q u a r e f e e t o f e x i s t i n g b u i l d i n g space remaining i n the a r e a . I t i s also estimated that a p p r o x i m a t e l y 300,000 s q u a r e f e e t o f a d d i t i o n a l e x i s t i n g s p a c e t o r e m a i n c o u l d be r e n o v a t e d t o be c o m p e t i t i v e w i t h new s p a c e . Some o f t h i s r e n o v a t e d s p a c e w o u l d r e p l a c e new construction. I n terms of commercial or commercial e q u i v a l e n t * the P l a n p e r m i t s a t o t a l development o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y 2,400,000 s q u a r e f e e t assuming a t o t a l c l e a r a n c e o f t h e W a t e r f r o n t and r e d e v e l o p ment a t t h e recommended z o n i n g . More r e a l i s t i c d e v e l o p m e n t *For the purpose of equating development to t o t a l s i t e s t r e e t c a p a c i t y e a c h d w e l l i n g u n i t i s e q u a t e d t o 200 s q u a r e f e e t o f commercial development. T h i s i s b a s e d on an e s t i m a t e d p e a k h o u r v e h i c u l a r t r i p g e n e r a t i o n o f .5 v e h i c u l a r t r i p s f o r e a c h d w e l l i n g u n i t a n d 2.5 s u c h t r i p s f o r e v e r y 1 0 0 0 s q u a r e f e e t o f commercial development. -30- �w h i c h i n c l u d e s 1,000,000 s q u a r e f e e t o f e x i s t i n g b u i l d i n g s p a c e t o r e m a i n i n e x i s t i n g u s e a n d up t o 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 s q u a r e f e e t o f a d d i t i o n a l e x i s t i n g s p a c e t o r e m a i n t o be r e n o v a t e d r e p r e s e n t s a p e r m i t t e d t o t a l development o f approximately 2,700,000 s q u a r e f e e t o f c o m m e r c i a l and c o m m e r c i a l e q u i v a l e n t development i n t h e W a t e r f r o n t . Total Development Feasibility and Proposed Levels of Development in the Georgetown Waterfront Millions ofSq.Ft. Commercial or Commercial Equivalent Development 8.2 Current Permissible* Permissible development under current zoning 6.5 Current Possible* Development physically possible under current zoning 5.4 Theoretical Improved Street Capacity Theoretical improved street capacity (requires an unrealistic altering of present travel patterns) 3.8 High Market High 1982 market projection 3.3 Workable Improved Street Capacity M a x i m u m street capacity considered workable at Level " E " (assumes an improved local street system including K S t . - K e y Bridge-Canal Road intersection) 3.3 Maximum Development (Phase I) Proposed m a x i m u m development alternative (includes 0.3-0.4 sq.ft. of commercial equivalent in residential development) 3.0 Workable Improved Street Capacity (Phase II Final Plan) M a x i m u m street capacity considered workable at Level " E " (as modified assuming an improved local street system but no K e y Bridge to K S t . eastbound movement) 2.7 Moderate Development (Phase I and I I A Preliminary Plan) Proposed moderate development alternative (includes 0.2 sq.ft. of commercial equivalent in residential development) 2.7 Recommended Development (Phase II Final Plan) Recommended development (includes 2.0 sq.ft. of commercial equivalent in residential development) 2.5 L o w Market L o w 1982 market projection 2.4 M a x i m u m Redevelopment M a x i m u m development allowed assuming total Waterfront redevelopment (no existing to remain or redevelopment uses) (Phase II Final Plan) 2.1 Minimum Development (Phase I) 1.5 Existing Development ( 1 9 7 2 ) Existing level of development (including 0.3 vacant) Proposed minimum development alternative (includes 0.2 sq.ft. of commercial equivalent in residential development) *Does not take into account recent rezoning of the Waterfront. -31- �C. MMS 3STH RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL-LOW DENSITY COMMERCIAL- MEDIUM DENSITY COMMERCIAL-RESIDENTIAL-LOW DENSITY COMMERCIAL-RESIDENTIAL-MEDIUM DENSITY PARK RECOMMENDED LAND USE PLAN 0 100 200 300 400 500 �I t s h o u l d be n o t e d t h a t t h e r e a s o n i t i s p o s s i b l e , a t a n y given time p r i o r t o t o t a l redevelopment o f t h e Waterfront, to a c h i e v e a t o t a l development h i g h e r t h a n t h a t p e r m i t t e d i n t h e W a t e r f r o n t ( 2 , 7 0 0 , 0 0 0 v s 2 , 4 0 0 , 0 0 0 ) may b e d u e t o any one o r a c o m b i n a t i o n o f t h e f o l l o w i n g : F i r s t , t h e r e i s e x i s t i n g development t o remain i n t h e Waterf r o n t t h a t i s n o n - c o n f o r m i n g u n d e r t h e recommended Z o n i n g P l a n map. T h i s r e p r e s e n t s a development i n excess o f t h a t p e r m i t t e d on t h e s e s i t e s ( a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1,000,000 e x i s t i n g vs 700,000 p e r m i t t e d s q u a r e f e e t o f c o m m e r c i a l ) . With t h i s development r e m a i n i n g and f u l l development o f t h e "suscept i b l e t o development" o r "opportunity area" s i t e s , t o t a l development w i l l exceed t h a t o f p e r m i t t e d t o t a l development (2.7 v s 2.4 m i l l i o n s q u a r e f e e t o f c o m m e r c i a l a n d / o r commercial equivalent development). Second, s e v e r a l e x i s t i n g and h i s t o r i c a l l y c o n t r i b u t i n g s t r u c t u r e s (on o r n e a r Potomac S t r e e t ) i n t h e W a t e r f r o n t a r e n o n - c o n f o r m i n g u n d e r t h e r e c o m m e n d e d Z o n i n g P l a n map i n t h a t they r e p r e s e n t e x i s t i n g development i n excess ( i n b u l k a n d / o r b u l k a n d h e i g h t ) o f t h a t recommended f o r t h e s e sites. Reuse o f t h e f u l l p o t e n t i a l o f these s t r u c t u r e s w i l l p r o v i d e development i n e x c e s s o f t h a t t o t a l p e r m i t t e d by t h e i r r e p l a c e m e n t ( a p p r o x i m a t e l y 265,000 v s 180,000 s q u a r e f e e t o f commercial development) and l i k e w i s e a l l o w t o t a l d e v e l o p m e n t o f a l i k e amount i n a d d i t i o n t o t h a t p e r m i t t e d by t h e Z o n i n g P l a n . T h i r d , t h e P l a n p e r m i t t i n g development o f 3,333,000 g r o s s s q u a r e f e e t o r a p p r o x i m a t e l y 2 , 7 0 0 , 0 0 0 s q u a r e f e e t o f comm e r c i a l o r commercial e q u i v a l e n t development assumes t h a t a l l d e v e l o p m e n t , w h e r e p e r m i t t e d , w i l l be i n c o m m e r c i a l u s e . A l l o f t h e proposed c o m m e r c i a l u s e zoning d i s t r i c t s do, however, p e r m i t / a l l o w r e s i d e n t i a l development and w i t h an i n c e n t i v e i n f a v o r o f r e s i d e n t i a l development a s t h a t provided by t h e S e c t i o n a l Development P l a n and t h e Development R i g h t s Program ( A p p e n d i x B) i t c a n be e x p e c t e d t h a t n o t a l l p e r m i t t e d c o m m e r c i a l d e v e l o p m e n t w i l l b e i n s u c h u s e . I n t h e SDP i t i s p r o p o s e d t h a t r e s i d e n t i a l d e v e l o p m e n t be p e r m i t t e d t o t h a t a l l o w e d by h e i g h t and p e r c e n t a g e o f l o t c o v e r a g e r e s t r i c t i o n s t h u s a l l o w i n g g r e a t e r development t h a n t h a t a l l o w e d on t h e s e s i t e s by t h e f l o o r a r e a r a t i o r e s t r i c t i o n s on t h e i r d e v e l o p ment i n c o m m e r c i a l u s e s o r a s a m a t t e r o f r i g h t . The r e a l i s t i c development l i m i t o f 2,700,000 s q u a r e f e e t o f c o m m e r c i a l o r c o m m e r c i a l e q u i v a l e n t w o u l d n o t be e x c e e d e d b u t t h e t o t a l dev e l o p e d s q u a r e f e e t i n t h e W a t e r f r o n t c o u l d be c o n s i d e r a b l y i n c r e a s e d by t h i s a d d i t i o n a l r e s i d e n t i a l d e v e l o p m e n t . -33- �A m o u n t and T y p e of Development Phase II, Final Development Plan and Program for the Georgetown Waterfront Area M a x i m u m Permitted Development: Category Gross Square Feet S q . F t . of Commercial or Commercial E q u i v a l e n t ! Total Calculated Redevelopment2 Not Calculated 2,400,000 Total Calculated " R e a l i s t i c Development3 3,333,000 2,700,000 Illustrative Site Plan Development4 Without Reuse With Reuse 3,341,000 3,428,000 2,612,000 2,699,500 NOTES: 1. F o r the purpose of equating total site development to total Waterfront local street capacity, each dwelling unit is equated to 2 0 0 square feet of commercial development. (1,000 d.u.'s = 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 square feet commercial equivalent.) T h i s is based on an estimated peak hour vehicular trip generation of .5 vehicular trip for each dwelling unit and 2.5 such trips for every 1,000 square feet of commercial development. Waterfront street capacity is calculated to be at best approximately 2 , 9 5 0 , 0 0 0 square feet of commercial and/or commercial equivalent at level of service " E " . A t level of service " D " this would be approximately 2 , 7 0 0 , 0 0 0 square feet. (Note Section I I F , " T h e Movement S y s t e m as a Constraint to Development", A Plan for the Georgetown Waterfront Area of the District of Columbia — Draft Appendix of the Proposed S D P . 2. T h e total development permitted at recommended S D P zoning assuming total Waterfront clearance and redevelopment (no existing to remain or reuse development). (See the table on page 78 and the map on page 79 of the above-mentioned plan.) 3. T h e total, m a x i m u m development permitted at recommended S D P zoning in areas defined as "development opportunity areas". (See the map on page 56 in the above-mentioned plan.) 4. Development as permitted and illustrated for "development opportunity areas". (See the map on page 57 and the illustrated site plan on page 7 3 of the plan.) T h e following table gives a further breakdown of this illustrated amount and type of development: -34- �Illustrated A m o u n t and T y p e of Development (See Development Opportunity Areas,Permitted Development Map and the Illustrative Site Plan) With No Reuse Gross S a . F t . S q . F t . of Commercial or or Commercial E a u i v a l e n t l Existing Development (to remain) 1,000,000 1,000,000 Dodge Center & Georgetown Inland (Phase 1) 425,000 425,000 Additional New Development (Commercial) 1,030,000 1,030,000 Additional New Development (Residential) 886,000 157,000 TOTALS 3,341,000 2,612,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 With Reuse Existing Development (to remain) Dodge Center & Georgetown Inland (Phase 1) 425,000 425,000 Additional New Development (Commercial) 850,000 850,000 Reuse (Commercial) 267,500 267,000 Additional New Development (Residential) 886,000 157,000 3,428,500 2,699,500 TOTALS 1. For the purpose of equating total site development to total Waterfront local street capacity, each dwelling unit is equated to 2 0 0 square feet of commercial development. (1,000 d.u.'s = 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 square feet commercial equivalent.) T h i s is based on an estimated peak hour vehicular trip generation of .5 vehicular trip for each dwelling unit and 2.5 such trips for every 1,000 square feet of commercial development. Waterfront street capacity is calculated to be at best approximately 2 , 9 5 0 , 0 0 0 square feet of commercial and/or commercial equivalent at level of service " E " . A t level of service " D " this would be approximately 2 , 7 0 0 , 0 0 0 square feet. (Note Section 1 1 F , " T h e Movement S y s t e m as a Constraint to Development", A Plan for the Georgetown Waterfront Area of the District of Columbia — Draft Appendix to the Proposed S D P . -35- �3 DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY AREAS RECOMMENDED ZONING O 100 200 3O0 4O0 SOO �I I _oooooj r^FJT| [m&T] COMMERCIAL S Q U A R E F E E T RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOUSES RESIDENTIAL APARTMENTS DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY A R E A S RECOMMENDED MAXIMUM PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT 0 100 200 I I 300 4O0 500 �T h e p r e c e e d i n g map " D e v e l o p m e n t O p p o r t u n i t y A r e a s , R e c o m m e n d e d Z o n i n g " , shows t h e p r o p o s e d p e r m i t t e d d e v e l o p m e n t on t h o s e s i t e s c o n s i d e r e d as s u s c e p t i b l e t o development or development opportunity areas. T h e map " P e r m i t t e d D e v e l o p m e n t " i n d i c a t e s the square f e e t or d w e l l i n g u n i t s where a p p l i c a b l e a t these p e r m i t t e d l e v e l s o f d e v e l o p m e n t on t h e s e p a r c e l s . This map d i f f e r e n t i a t e s b e t w e e n new d e v e l o p m e n t a n d t h e r e u s e o f s e v e r a l s t r u c t u r e s n e a r Potomac S t r e e t ; i t a l s o assumes o t h e r e x i s t i n g t o r e m a i n d e v e l o p m e n t ( t h a t now s h o w n ) a s 1,000,000 s q u a r e f e e t o f , p r i m a r i l y , c o m m e r c i a l development; and i t assumes t h a t a l l development p e r m i t t e d as commercial w i l l be d e v e l o p e d a s s u c h . T o t a l d e v e l o p m e n t ( g r o s s s q u a r e f e e t ) a s i l l u s t r a t e d on t h i s map v a r i e s f r o m 3 , 3 4 1 , 0 0 0 t o 3 , 4 2 8 , 0 0 0 t o t a l s q u a r e f e e t d e p e n d i n g on r e u s e . T h i s r e p r e s e n t s a t o t a l commercial and r e s i d e n t i a l e q u i v a l e n t development o f from 2,612,000 t o 2,699,500 s q u a r e f e e t . THE RECOMMENDED CIRCULATION PLAN The movement s y s t e m i n c l u d e s r e g i o n a l and l o c a l a c c e s s , t h e l o c a l s t r e e t system, p a r k i n g , p u b l i c t r a n s i t , and t h e pedest r i a n c i r c u l a t i o n system. Vehicular Circulation T h r e e e l e m e n t s make up t h e V e h i c u l a r C i r c u l a t i o n S y s t e m : the Potomac R i v e r Freeway E l e m e n t , t h e A r t e r i a l and L o c a l S t r e e t E l e m e n t and a C a r t w a y , S i d e w a l k and S t r e e t L a n d s c a p e Element (the P e d e s t r i a n C i r c u l a t i o n System). The Potomac River Freeway The Freeway i s p l a n n e d t o p r o v i d e t r a f f i c r e l i e f t h r o u g h t h e b o t t l e n e c k r e p r e s e n t e d by t h e Georgetown a r e a w i t h i t s e x tremely l i m i t e d highway improvement o p t i o n s . T h e GPG w a s d i r e c t e d t o c o n s i d e r a s a " f u n c t i o n a l g i v e n " a n e i g h t - l a n e f r e e w a y c o n s i s t i n g o f two f o u r - l a n e roadways conn e c t i n g t o t h e I n n e r Loop E x p r e s s w a y s y s t e m o f Washington on t h e e a s t , a n d t o t h e P a l i s a d e s P a r k w a y o f M a r y l a n d a n d t h e D i s t r i c t o f C o l u m b i a o n t h e w e s t , a n d w i t h 1-66 i n V i r ginia. The l a t t e r c o n n e c t i o n w o u l d be v i a t h e p r o p o s e d T h r e e S i s t e r s B r i d g e , w h i c h was a l s o a " g i v e n " . Under any f r e e w a y a l t e r n a t i v e t h e Potomac R i v e r F r e e w a y was t o have no l o c a l a c c e s s t h r o u g h t h e G e o r g e t o w n W a t e r f r o n t . -38- ��The P l a n c a l l s f o r t h e e a s t b o u n d Potomac R i v e r F r e e w a y s e c t i o n through the g r e a t e r p a r t of the Georgetown Waterfront t o h a v e t h e s a m e g e n e r a l t u n n e l d e s i g n a s i n t h e 1968 Highway A c t a l t e r n a t i v e . The t u n n e l w i l l , h o w e v e r , e x t e n d s l i g h t l y f u r t h e r e a s t w a r d t o a p o r t a l a t Thomas J e f f e r s o n S t r e e t where i t w i l l r i s e out o f the ground t o a r e c o n s t r u c t e d b r i d g e o v e r Rock C r e e k , and an i n t e r c h a n g e w i t h t h e Rock C r e e k Parkway. T h e R o c k C r e e k i n t e r c h a n g e w i l l be r e c o n s t r u c t e d f o r t h e w e s t bound l a n e s . West of the i n t e r c h a n g e , the westbound Freeway l a n e s c r o s s Rock C r e e k , d e s c e n d i n g p a r a l l e l and a d j a c e n t t o the eastbound lanes to enter a tunnel p o r t a l i d e n t i c a l to t h e e a s t b o u n d p o r t a l a t Thomas J e f f e r s o n S t r e e t . This tunnel w i l l f o l l o w t h e p r e s e n t K S t r e e t a l i g n m e n t u n t i l w e s t o f Key Bridge at which time i t w i l l follow a configuration approxim a t e l y t h e same a s i n t h e 1968 H i g h w a y A c t a l t e r n a t i v e . A key f e a t u r e of t h i s P l a n i s t h a t K S t r e e t , s t i l l s e r v i n g a s a l o c a l a r t e r i a l , w i l l be r e c o n s t r u c t e d o n t h e d e c k o f the westbound Freeway t u n n e l . As i t p r o c e e d s w e s t , t h e r e c o n s t r u c t e d K S t r e e t w i l l r i s e u n d e r Key B r i d g e t o meet t h e e x i s t i n g ramps t o C a n a l Road, M S t r e e t , and Key Bridge. The Arterial and Local Street Element The p r o p o s e d Potomac R i v e r F r e e w a y t h r o u g h t h e W a t e r f r o n t area does n o t c o n n e c t w i t h any l o c a l s t r e e t , i n c l u d i n g Key Bridge a n d C a n a l R o a d , t h u s , some o f t h e t r a f f i c w h i c h p r e s e n t l y u s e s Key B r i d g e v i a the W h i t e h u r s t Freeway w i l l use M S t r e e t . M S t r e e t a n d a r e c o n s t r u c t e d K S t r e e t w i l l be t h e east-west a r t e r i a l s i n the Waterfront. M S t r e e t m u s t be s u p p l e m e n t e d i f l o c a l a c c e s s i s t o be i m p r o v e d ; a means o f a c h i e v i n g t h i s , t h u s a l l o w i n g more p e r m i t t e d d e v e l o p m e n t f r o m a movem e n t s t a n d p o i n t , i s t o go t o a s y s t e m o f " u n b a l a n c e d " t r a f f i c e f l o w s on M a n d K S t r e e t s i n t h e W a t e r f r o n t , i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h m a j o r t u r n p r o h i b i t i o n s a n d A.M. a n d P.M. reversing in d i r e c t i o n of s p e c i f i c t r a f f i c lanes. This modification i s a p a r t o f t h e recommended C i r c u l a t i o n P l a n f o r t h e W a t e r front. A d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e r e c o n s t r u c t e d l o c a l K S t r e e t i s made i n t h e S e c t i o n a l D e v e l o p m e n t P l a n , i n t h e d i s c u s s i o n o f "Recommended S t r e e t A d j u s t m e n t s " . E s t i m a t e s of the c a p a c i t y of the C i r c u l a t i o n P l a n a r e p r o v i d e d i n b o t h t h e P h a s e I and I I A S t u d y R e p o r t s , s p e c i f i c a l l y " A p p e n d i x B, T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Methodology A n a l y s i s " of the Phase I I A Report. -40- �I FREEWAY-TUNNEL MB MAJOR SECONDARY LOCAL RECOMMENDED V E H I C U L A R CIRCULATION PLAN 0 W) 200 300 400 500 ��The p r i n c i p a l n o r t h - s o u t h a r t e r i a l i n t h e W a t e r f r o n t i s W i s c o n s i n Avenue. Secondary a r t e r i a l s a r e 29th and 30th S t r e e t s and Thomas J e f f e r s o n a n d 3 1 s t S t r e e t s p o s s i b l y w o r k i n g a s one-way couples. A l l other s t r e e t s i n t h e W a t e r f r o n t a r e a a r e considered as local streets. To t h e e x t e n t p o s s i b l e t h e P l a n a t t e m p t s t o e l i m i n a t e o r c u r t a i n the use of r e s i d e n t i a l s t r e e t s f o r Waterfront access. A number o f r e s i d e n t i a l s t r e e t s i n t h e P l a n a r e a a r e t o be c l o s e d o r changed i n such a f a s h i o n a s t o l i m i t e x i s t i n g connections; t h i s i s e s p e c i a l l y t r u e t o the west o f Wisconsin Avenue. S t r e e t a d j u s t m e n t s a s shown w i l l be t h e s u b j e c t o f s e p a r a t e p u b l i c h e a r i n g s conducted by a p p r o p r i a t e p u b l i c agencies. Parking A major c o n s i d e r a t i o n underlying d e c i s i o n s regarding development p o t e n t i a l i n Georgetown i s t h e p r o v i s i o n o f t h e p r o p e r amount o f p a r k i n g . For o f f i c e space, t h e d e t a i l e d a n a l y s i s of parking supply/ demand i s p r e s e n t e d i n t h e P h a s e I I A R e p o r t . For the purp o s e s o f e s t i m a t i n g o f f i c e p a r k i n g d e m a n d a f a c t o r o f 2.5 s p a c e s p e r 1000 s q u a r e f e e t o f f l o o r a r e a o r one s p a c e f o r e a c h 400 s q u a r e f e e t was p r e v i o u s l y a d o p t e d . P a r k i n g demand f o r r e t a i l u s e s w a s c a l c u l a t e d a t one p a r k i n g s p a c e f o r e a c h 2 00 s q u a r e f e e t o f r e t a i l f l o o r a r e a p r o p o s e d , or f i v e spaces per thousand square f e e t o f gross r e t a i l floor area. F o r r e s i d e n t i a l u s e s , p a r k i n g was c a l c u l a t e d t o be p r o v i d e d a t one p a r k i n g s p a c e p e r d w e l l i n g u n i t o r a p a r t m e n t , o r room in the case of h o t e l or motel. E s t i m a t e s i n t h e Phase I I AReport i n d i c a t e r e s i d e n t i a l and r e t a i l s u p p l y a n d e s t i m a t e d d e m a n d a r e a b o u t i n b a l a n c e , howe v e r , t o t a l p a r k i n g demand i s i n e x c e s s o f t h a t t o be s u p p l i e d i n t h e r a t i o o f 3 t o 2. I t s h o u l d be n o t e d t h a t o t h e r s t u d y r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s h a v e t a k e n a c o n s i d e r a b l y d i f f e r e n t view o f t h e use o f t h e automobile and the a s s o c i a t e d n e c e s s i t y f o r t h e p r o v i s i o n o f p a r k i n g . F o r example, i n t h e p r e l i m i n a r y p r o p o s a l by t h e Zoning R e v i s i o n a n d P l a n n i n g G r o u p o f t h e D.C. Z o n i n g C o m m i s s i o n o n D e c e m b e r 6, 1 9 7 2 , t i t l e d "A New S p e c i a l P u r p o s e Z o n e D i s t r i c t S P - 2 " , t h e f o l l o w i n g p o l i c y was advocated: -43- �The b a s i c t h e o r y b e h i n d t h e p a r k i n g s t a n d a r d s p r o p o s e d was t h a t because the present s t r e e t system of the Waterfront i s a t n e a r maximum c a p a c i t y a t p e a k h o u r s and M e t r o w i l l n o t s e r v e t h e a r e a , i t i s d e s i r a b l e t o d i s c o u r a g e new workers in the area d r i v i n g to t h e i r jobs. The s t a n d a r d s f o r o f f i c e u s e w e r e t h e r e f o r e k e p t d e l i b e r a t e l y l o w a t a maximum o f one s p a c e p e r 1,800 square f e e t . The r e t a i l p a r k i n g standards, on t h e o t h e r h a n d , w e r e s t r i n g e n t r e q u i r i n g a minimum o f one s p a c e f o r 200 s q u a r e f e e t o f r e t a i l f l o o r a r e a . T h e t r a f f i c c o n g e s t i o n p e a k s i n G e o r g e t o w n a r e t h e A.M. and P.M. c o m m u t i n g h o u r s , m a i n l y c a u s e d by t r a f f i c p a s s i n g through the area. T h e s e a r e a g g r a v a t e d by e x t e n s i v e f r i n g e p a r k i n g on p u b l i c s t r e e t s . T h e Z o n i n g R e v i s i o n a n d P l a n n i n g Group took the p o s i t i o n t h a t f u t u r e workers i n the W a t e r f r o n t area s h o u l d be e n c o u r a g e d t o u s e p u b l i c t r a n s i t b y a c t u a l l y l i m i t i n g p a r k i n g s p a c e s w i t h i n new b u i l d i n g s w h e r e a s s h o p p e r s c o u l d n o t be e x p e c t e d t o u s e p u b l i c t r a n s i t , e s p e c i a l l y d u r i n g the evening hours. Georgetown i s a r e t a i l i n g c e n t e r i n t h a t bes i d e s s e r v i n g l o c a l day-to-day needs f o r the neighborhood, t h e a r e a has a d i s t i n c t r e g i o n a l s p e c i a l t y s h o p p i n g and entertainment r o l e ; a l i m i t i n g of r e t a i l parking spaces would threaten t h i s environment. No e x c e p t i o n s f o r t h e f i r s t 2,000 s q u a r e f e e t o f o f f i c e and r e t a i l u s e s w e r e g i v e n and the B o a r d o f Z o n i n g A d j u s t m e n t i s t o be g i v e n t h e a u t h o r i t y t o s p e c i f y t h e number o f s p a c e s f o r any u s e s n o t l i s t e d . This i s a somewhat r e v o l u t i o n a r y a p p r o a c h , i n t h a t i t g i v e s the Board of Zoning Adjustment c o n s i d e r a b l e d i s c r e t i o n a r y power, w h i c h makes f o r c o n s i d e r a b l e f l e x i b i l i t y t a i l o r e d to i n d i vidual cases. O f f i c e p a r k i n g r e q u i r e m e n t s u n d e r t h i s p o l i c y w o u l d be only 2 0 - 2 5 % o f t h o s e f i g u r e d f o r d e m a n d b y t h e GPG u n d e r t h e g u i d e l i n e s p r e v i o u s l y o u t l i n e d as p r e s e n t standards f o r o f f i c e development i n the o v e r a l l Washington area. The Illustrated S i t e P l a n s u p p l y d o e s n o t m e e t demand c a l c u l a t e d a t a r a t e r e p r e s e n t i n g a p p r o x i m a t e l y one s p a c e p e r t w e l v e thousand s q u a r e f e e t o f o f f i c e development, a r a t e i m p l y i n g 33% transit u t i l i z a t i o n , 20% w a l k i n g t o w o r k , and a l m o s t t h r e e p e o p l e per automobile. T h i s i s c o n s i d e r e d a s t h e minimum r e q u i r e d supply, a t l e a s t i n the short-term future. Therefore, i t i s expected t h a t to develop the Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t , even t o i t s l i m i t e d s t r e e t c a p a c i t y , w i l l demand t h e p r o v i s i o n o f a d d i t i o n a l p a r k i n g s p a c e t h a t c a n a n d w i l l command p r e m i u m prices. -44- �Public Transportation A t p r e s e n t t w o b a s i c b u s s e r v i c e s o p e r a t e on M S t r e e t i n Georgetown. W i s c o n s i n AVenue r o u t e s c o n n e c t Friendship H e i g h t s v i a M S t r e e t w i t h P e n n s y l v a n i a A v e n u e , S.E. V i r g i n i a b u s e s from the George Washington p a r k w a y , Lee Highway, W i l s o n B o u l e v a r d a n d A r l i n g t o n B o u l e v a r d o p e r a t e on M S t r e e t t o a t e r m i n a l a t 1 1 t h a n d E S t r e e t s , N.W. A v a r i e n t of t h i s s e r v i c e connects V i r g i n i a w i t h Union S t a t i o n . The Virg i n i a buses o f f e r l o c a l s e r v i c e to Georgetown d u r i n g o f f p e a k h o u r s a n d on w e e k e n d s , b u t e x c e p t f o r t h e U n i o n S t a t i o n b u s e s , s e r v e o n l y V i r g i n i a p a s s e n g e r s i n the weekday rush hours. T r a n s i t s e r v i c e to the Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t a r e a i n the f o r e s e e a b l e f u t u r e w i l l r e m a i n e n t i r e l y bus s e r v i c e . The n e a r e s t M e t r o s t a t i o n s a r e a t R o s s l y n , Foggy B o t t o m and Dupont C i r c l e , and few w i l l c h o o s e t o w a l k t h e distance. T h e b u s s e r v i c e w i l l be s i g n i f i c a n t l y i m p r o v e d , h o w e v e r , by c o n n e c t i o n s w i t h M e t r o . T r a n s i t s e r v i c e f o r Georgetown i s p a r t of the o v e r a l l Metro bus s e r v i c e r e v i s i o n s c u r r e n t l y u n d e r s t u d y by t h e W a s h i n g ton M e t r o p o l i t a n Area T r a n s i t A u t h o r i t y . The m o s t r e c e n t s t u d i e s f o r bus r o u t i n g s t o mesh w i t h M e t r o s e r v i c e c o n t e m p l a t e an a l i g n m e n t o f bus r o u t e s i n G e o r g e t o w n v e r y s i m i l a r to those of today. The e x c e p t i o n i s r e m o v a l o f the V i r g i n i a buses from M S t r e e t as a r e s u l t of t h e i r d i s p l a c e ment by M e t r o . T h i s P l a n recommends m o d i f i c a t i o n s to the p r o p o s e d WMATA b u s r o u t e s t o m e e t t h e f o l l o w i n g objectives: . Connection of K M e t r o s e r v i c e by bus. and Street along the Waterfront . Connection as above between Georgetown George Washington U n i v e r s i t y . with University . C o n n e c t i o n o f t h e G e o r g e t o w n W a t e r f r o n t by n e a r b y V i r g i n i a and N o r t h w e s t W a s h i n g t o n b u s i n e s s bus with districts. T h i s m o d i f i c a t i o n w o u l d r e v i s e t h e W i s c o n s i n AVenue r o u t e s t o s e r v e K S t r e e t a l o n g t h e W a t e r f r o n t by u s i n g t h e s o u t h end o f W i s c o n s i n Avenue and K S t r e e t i n s t e a d o f M S t r e e t . This a l s o w i l l serve to connect W a t e r f r o n t development w i t h the Foggy Bottom Metro S t a t i o n . M S t r e e t w i l l s t i l l be s e r v e d by o t h e r routes. Other r e v i s i o n options are discussed i n the and a r e i n c l u d e d as p a r t o f the Plan. -45- Phase IIA Report �F o r c o m m e r c i a l t r a v e l t r a n s i t usage i s e x p e c t e d t o r e m a i n below 1 5 % , b u t 20% was a s s u m e d f o r s e t t i n g t h e d e v e l o p m e n t limits. A f t e r Metro and t h e a s s o c i a t e d f e e d e r bus s y s t e m a r e f u l l y o p e r a t i v e t h e modal s p l i t and t r a f f i c p r o j e c t i o n s s h o u l d be r e e v a l u a t e d . Pedestrian Circulation A major element of the P l a n i s a system of i n t e r c o n n e c t i n g p e d e s t r i a n and b i c y c l e p a t h s a r r a n g e d i n a major and minor hierarchy. The Primary Pedestrian System Pedestrian c i r c u l a t i o n i s i n three primary routes: Wisconsin Avenue t o t h e Potomac R i v e r , t h e Promenade a l o n g t h e R i v e r ' s e d g e , a n d t h e Tow P a t h a l o n g t h e C h e s a p e a k e a n d O h i o C a n a l . H i s t o r i c p o i n t s o f i n t e r e s t such as t h e V i g i l a n t F i r e House, G r a c e C h u r c h y a r d , a n d t h e O l d Dodge W a r e h o u s e a r e on W i s c o n s i n Avenue. I m p r o v e d s i d e w a l k s , s t r e e t l a n d s c a p i n g , and app r o p r i a t e l y s c a l e d new b u i l d i n g s w i l l e m p h a s i z e t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f t h i s s t r e e t w i t h i t s t e r m i n a l f o c u s on t h e W a t e r f r o n t i n a Public Plaza. A l o n g t h e Potomac R i v e r ' s edge, a P a r k and P e d e s t r i a n Promenade e x t e n d t h e e n t i r e l e n g t h o f t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t . T h i s P a r k c o n n e c t s a t i t s e a s t e r n end by f o o t b r i d g e t o p a r k a r e a s s o u t h o f Rock Creek. A t t h e w e s t e r n end beyond Key B r i d g e , a p e d e s t r i a n path c o n t i n u e s p a s t the o l d Aqueduct a b u t m e n t t o t h e W a s h i n g t o n C a n o e C l u b a n d up t h e R i v e r . T h e Tow P a t h a l o n g t h e C&O C a n a l e x t e n d s t h e e n t i r e l e n g t h o f t h e s t u d y a r e a from Rock C r e e k t o Key B r i d g e and beyond along the Canal Park as i t continues west of the bridge. Much o f t h i s a r e a h a s a l r e a d y b e e n p a r t i a l l y d e v e l o p e d a s a pedestrian park. P r o p e r l y s c a l e d new d e v e l o p m e n t , a n d r e s t o r a t i o n and i m a g i n a t i v e use o f h i s t o r i c b u i l d i n g s and s i t e s along i t s path i s d i s c u s s e d i n d e t a i l under " H i s t o r i c A r e a S t u d i e s " i n A p p e n d i x B. The Secondary Pedestrian System Major secondary paths follow l o c a l s t r e e t s l i n k i n g M S t r e e t t o the Potomac. A l l o f t h e n o r t h - s o u t h s t r e e t s a r e recommended f o r e n h a n c e m e n t a s s e c o n d a r y p e d e s t r i a n r o u t e s w i t h -46- ��i m p r o v e d s t r e e t - t r e e p l a n t i n g , r e s t o r a t i o n and a p p r o p r i a t e u s e o f h i s t o r i c b u i l d i n g s , a n d p r o p e r l y s c a l e d new c o n s t r u c tion. S c e n i c v i e w s o f t h e C&O C a n a l P a r k a t t h e c r o s s b r i d g e s a r e e m p h a s i z e d , and where p o s s i b l e , s t r e e t s i d e w a l k s connect to the Canal Path system. P e d e s t r i a n and s c e n i c e a s e m e n t s s h o u l d be m a i n t a i n e d a t t h e e n d o f e a c h s t r e e t p r o v i d i n g c o n n e c t i n g w a l k s t o t h e W a t e r f r o n t P a r k and v i s t a s o f t h e R i v e r from M S t r e e t and t o t h e n o r t h . A path system a l o n g t h e west bank o f Rock Creek c o n n e c t s t h e e a s t end o f t h e C&O C a n a l P a r k a n d t h e P o t o m a c R i v e r W a t e r f r o n t P r o m e n a d e . A special pedestrian north-south " h i s t o r i c a l corridor" i s recommended f o r d e v e l o p m e n t a l o n g t h e a l i g n m e n t o f Potomac Street. S t a r t i n g a t t h e G e o r g e t o w n M a r k e t on M S t r e e t , t h e w a l k w a y w o u l d c r o s s t h e C a n a l on t h e e x i s t i n g f o o t b r i d g e t o a new s m a l l p l a z a i m m e d i a t e l y s o u t h o f t h e C a n a l . From t h i s p o i n t p e d e s t r i a n s c o u l d c o n t i n u e south t o Bomford M i l l , between t h e o l d b r i c k w a r e h o u s e s and a c r o s s K S t r e e t t o t h e Waterfront Park. The s e c o n d a r y e a s t - w e s t s t r e e t s h a v e a s p e c i a l c h a r a c t e r a s pedestrian routes. New d e v e l o p m e n t a l o n g S o u t h S t r e e t s h o u l d e m p h a s i z e t h e q u a l i t i e s o f G r a c e C h u r c h and s u r r o u n d i n g open s p a c e , and t h e s c e n i c v i e w s o f t h e W a t e r f r o n t from t h i s prominent high point. G r a c e S t r e e t , l i n e d on t h e n o r t h by o l d b r i c k w a r e h o u s e s t r u c t u r e s between W i s c o n s i n Avenue and Potomac S t r e e t , i s developed a s a p r i m a r i l y p e d e s t r i a n s t r e e t . M S t r e e t i s t o be p r e s e r v e d i n i t s h i s t o r i c c h a r a c t e r a n d i m proved as a r e t a i l shopping s t r e e t . The C a n a l S q u a r e p e d e s t r i a n a r c a d e c o n n e c t i n g M S t r e e t t o 3 1 s t S t r e e t , o f f e r s an a m e n i t y f o r p e d e s t r i a n s t h a t c o u l d be c o p i e d i n o t h e r b l o c k s to provide a t t r a c t i v e , t r a f f i c - f r e e access to buildings facing the Canal. M i n o r s e c o n d a r y p a t h s n o t shown a s p a r t o f t h e P l a n a r e e n couraged i n the Waterfront to provide connections through the i n t e r i o r o f b l o c k s , a c r o s s a r e a s o f o p e n s p a c e a n d down n a r row a l l e y s b e t w e e n e x i s t i n g b u i l d i n g s . These paths would t i e new d e v e l o p m e n t w i t h o l d , t h u s p r o v i d i n g a m e a n i n g f u l a n d e x c i t i n g e x p e r i e n c e a s w e l l a s s e r v i n g an i m p o r t a n t f u n c t i o n i n the Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t . THE I L L U S T R A T I V E SITE PLAN T h e I l l u s t r a t i v e S i t e P l a n s h o w s how t h e u r b a n d e s i g n c o n c e p t s a n d p r o g r a m c a n be c a r r i e d o u t f o r o p t i m u m d e v e l o p m e n t of the Waterfront. W h i l e i t i n d i c a t e s how d e v e l o p m e n t may o c c u r , i t c a n n o t be t a k e n l i t e r a l l y . W i t h i n the proposed z o n i n g and d e s i g n concept framework, t h e r e i s both c o n s i d e r a b l e room and an a b s o l u t e n e e d f o r d e t a i l e d a r c h i t e c t u r a l -48- �design and economic i n p u t a t t h e p r o j e c t level. I t i s assumed t h a t such f u r t h e r d e t a i l i n g o f t h e concepts w i l l take place within the guidelines of the Plan. The W a t e r f r o n t P a r k , r e l a t e d p a r k s and open s p a c e s , a s w e l l a s g e n e r a l l a n d s c a p i n g c o n c e p t s c a n be e a s i l y r e a d . The p r i n c i p l e o f k e e p i n g v i s t a s open t o t h e R i v e r a l o n g n o r t h south s t r e e t s i s c l e a r l y expressed. The a r e a i m m e d i a t e l y t o t h e n o r t h o f M S t r e e t i s s h o w n t o i n d i c a t e how t h e new b u i l d i n g s i n the W a t e r f r o n t a r e a have been kept i n s c a l e a s an e x t e n s i o n o f Georgetown's c h a r a c t e r . The W a t e r f r o n t P a r k and Promenade a l o n g t h e Potomac R i v e r provides the opportunity for a c t i v i t i e s that are suitably r e l a t e d t o t h e a d j a c e n t Georgetown a s w e l l a s t o development w i t h i n t h e W a t e r f r o n t - an i n t e r r e l a t e d s y s t e m o f p u b l i c and p r i v a t e p a r k s , w a l k w a y s , bikeways and r e c r e a tional f a c i l i t i e s related to adjacent areas. -49- ��IV Implementation -51- �The f o l l o w i n g p r o c e d u r e s ment t h e P l a n . THE and actions are necessary to imple- RECOMMENDED SECTIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN Introduction A S e c t i o n a l Development P l a n i s proposed to implement the obj e c t i v e s and e l e m e n t s o f t h e D e v e l o p m e n t P l a n and P r o g r a m f o r the Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t of the D i s t r i c t o f Columbia i n s o f a r a s t h o s e o b j e c t i v e s and e l e m e n t s a r e s u b j e c t t o t h e zoning process. The S e c t i o n a l D e v e l o p m e n t P l a n c o n c e p t i s d e f i n e d i n S e c t i o n 1202 o f t h e Z o n i n g O r d i n a n c e a s f o l l o w s : " S e c t i o n a l Development P l a n : A planned u n i t development prep a r e d by a n a g e n c y o f t h e D i s t r i c t o f C o l u m b i a o r t h e F e d e r a l Government f o r a s p e c i f i c a r e a of the c i t y ; submitted to 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 f o r r e v i e w and r e p o r t ; and a d o p t e d by t h e Z o n i n g C o m m i s s i o n i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e a p p l i c a b l e p r o v i s i o n s o f S e c t i o n 7501 and w h i c h e s t a b l i s h e s for such a r e a s , uses, f l o o r area r a t i o s , height of b u i l d i n g s and s t r u c t u r e s , open s p a c e s and o t h e r d e t a i l s o f d e s i g n . The a r e a may i n c l u d e p r o p e r t y o w n e d b y t h e p u b l i c , p r i v a t e p e r s o n s , o r o r g a n i z a t i o n s , o r a c o m b i n a t i o n o f t h e s e , and f u r t h e r , t h e a r e a may b e d e v e l o p e d i n o n e o r m o r e s e c t i o n s r e g a r d l e s s o f the property ownership." The C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n d e s i g n a t e s G e o r g e t o w n , i n a manner c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the r e g i o n a l o b j e c t i v e s of the N a t i o n a l C a p i t a l P l a n n i n g C o m m i s s i o n ' s "A P o l i c i e s P l a n f o r t h e Y e a r 2 0 0 0 " , ( 1 9 6 1 ) , as a p r e d o m i n a n t l y r e s i d e n t i a l community w i t h w a t e r r e c r e a t i o n o p p o r t u n i t i e s on t h e w a t e r f r o n t a n d w i t h t h e W h i t e h u r s t Freeway removed. The f o r m u l a t i o n o f a S e c t i o n a l D e v e l o p ment P l a n f o r Georgetown r e f l e c t s t h e needed t r a n s i t i o n from e x i s t i n g i n d u s t r i a l uses to proposed r e s i d e n t i a l , r e c r e a t i o n a l and c o m m e r c i a l l a n d u s e s . I t i s a p p r o p r i a t e to adopt a S e c t i o n a l Development P l a n f o r t h e G e o r g e t o w n W a t e r f r o n t b e c a u s e i t i s a l o c a t i o n w h e r e dev e l o p m e n t g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s h a v e n o t been a d e q u a t e l y realized. Large t r a c t s of l a n d are a v a i l a b l e f o r redevelopment, a m a j o r new h i g h w a y i s p r o p o s e d f o r t h e a r e a , a m a j o r e x i s t i n g h i g h w a y i s t o be r e m o v e d and a d j a c e n t r e s i d e n t i a l , c o m m e r c i a l and u n i v e r s i t y c o m m u n i t i e s a r e s e e k i n g s p a c e i n w h i c h t o e x pand. The a r e a i s p a r t o f t h e O l d G e o r g e t o w n H i s t o r i c D i s t r i c t a n d c o n t a i n s many h i s t o r i c s t r u c t u r e s ; i t h a s b e e n designated a R e g i s t e r e d N a t i o n a l Landmark. The a r e a i s o f great v i s u a l importance to the Nation's C a p i t a l C i t y because o f i t s p r o m i n e n c e on t h e P o t o m a c R i v e r b a n k . The a r e a i s s t r a t e g i c a l l y l o c a t e d b e t w e e n d o w n t o w n W a s h i n g t o n , D.C. and r i v e r crossing points to V i r g i n i a ; hence i t must accommodate -52- �heavy rush hour t r a f f i c flows i n a d d i t i o n t o i n t e r n a l l y generated t r a f f i c . This Plan e s t a b l i s h e s o b j e c t i v e s , prosp e c t i v e l a n d uses, zoning d i s t r i c t s and c i r c u l a t i o n p a t t e r n s for the Plan Area. T h e P l a n a m e n d s t h e Z o n i n g Map c o v e r i n g the P l a n A r e a and s e t s f o r t h r e g u l a t i o n s governing t h e app r o v a l o f Planned U n i t Development a p p l i c a t i o n s i n t h e P l a n Area pursuant t o S e c t i o n 7501. The P l a n p r o v i d e s i n c e n t i v e s to encourage Planned U n i t Developments i n t h e P l a n Area. In a d d i t i o n t o t h e S e c t i o n a l Development P l a n t h e Developm e n t P l a n a n d P r o g r a m a l s o r e c o m m e n d s t h e s t u d y o f a "Development R i g h t s Program" a s proposed f o r t h e Waterfront area ( i n A p p e n d i x B o f t h i s P l a n ) a s a t e c h n i q u e f o r management o f the implementation and development o f t h e P l a n . Description of the Plan Area The b o u n d a r i e s o f t h e S t u d y A r e a a r e shown W a t e r f r o n t S t u d y A r e a Map. The b o u n d a r i e s more r e s t r i c t i v e b e i n g t h e s o u t h s i d e o f M w e s t bank o f Rock C r e e k , t h e n o r t h bank o f and t h e e a s t s i d e o f Key B r i d g e . on t h e G e o r g e t o w n o f t h e SDP a r e S t r e e t N.W., the t h e Potomac R i v e r , Zoning Plan Map and Zoning Text Amendments R e c o m m e n d e d A m e n d m e n t s t o t h e e x i s t i n g Z o n i n g Map a n d t e x t are f e l t as necessary to c a r r y out the i n t e n t o f the Plan. T h e Z o n i n g Map, a p a r t o f t h e D i s t r i c t o f C o l u m b i a Z o n i n g R e g u l a t i o n s , i s a m e n d e d a s s h o w n o n t h e Z o n i n g P l a n Map, t o b e made a p a r t o f t h e S D P . T h i s map s h o w s t h e l o c a t i o n and e x t e n t o f z o n i n g d i s t r i c t s p r o p o s e d f o r t h e P l a n A r e a . Recommended Zoning Text amendments include: 1. Change A r t i c l e 7501.24b t o p e r m i t t h e R-5-B D i s t r i c t . a F.A.R. o f 3.0 i n 2. C h a n g e A r t i c l e 7501.24c t o permit any r e s i d e n t i a l b u i l d i n g o r any b u i l d i n g , which has a p o r t i o n t h e r e o f dev o t e d t o r e s i d e n t i a l u s e , t o o c c u p y t h e l o t upon w h i c h i t i s l o c a t e d t o a maximum o f 7 5 % o f l o t o c c u p a n c y , p r o v i d e d said b u i l d i n g i s l o c a t e d i n a planned u n i t development. -53- ��I Recommended Zoning Standards'for the Georgetown Waterfront Sectional Development Plan District Floor Area Ratio R-4 R-5-A R-5-B C-2-A C 3 A 1.0 1.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 % of L o t Occupancy Height 754 754 40 40 60 40 60 3 5 Notes: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Lncli <>l lira throe standards must > > complied with. l< Excupt as specified herein the lot occupancy standards specified in Article 7501.24 c. of the Zoning Regulations shall control. See recommended zoning regulation text changes. This standard applies only to residential development in these districts. Commercial development is still permitted 100% lot occupancy. A n amendment to the zoning text is required to permit 75% lot occupancy by residential development in these districts. (See recommended zoning regulation text changes.) This height limit is less than that allowed as a matter-of-right in the C-2-A district; however, bulk is not restricted because a higher percent of lot occupancy is permitted. See note 4 above. Subarea Design Requirements The P l a n A r e a h a s been d i v i d e d i n t o s e v e r a l s u b a r e a s f o r purposes of s p e c i f y i n g design requirements.* T h i s i s more convenient than providing design requirements a p p l i c a b l e t o t h e e n t i r e P l a n A r e a b e c a u s e many d e s i g n r e q u i r e m e n t s r e l a t e to s p e c i f i c b u i l d i n g s and a r e consequently r e l e v a n t only i n a single subarea. T h e H i s t o r i c A r e a S t u d i e s map fie f i n e s t h e b o u n d a r i e s o f t h e s u b a r e a s a s u s e d f o r p u r p o s e s of d i s c u s s i o n i n t h e Phase I I A Report and Appendix A o f this Plan. H i s t o r i c s u b a r e a b o u n d a r i e s a r e b a s e d on c o n c e n t r a t i o n s o f h i s t o r i c landmarks, property l i n e s , development p r o p o s a l s , v i s u a l r e c i p r o c i t y w i t h i n t h e s u b a r e a , and t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f p u b l i c f a c i l i t i e s , such a s t h e C a n a l and t h e Potomac R i v e r Freeway, t o adjacent a r e a s . The Subarea Design Requirements r e l a t i v e t o h i s t o r i c p r e s e r v a t i o n a r e intended t o provide guidance t o p r i v a t e prop e r t y owners and t o t h e N a t i o n a l Commission o f F i n e A r t s in making recommendations t o t h e C o u n c i l o f t h e D i s t r i c t of C o l u m b i a c o n c e r n i n g p r e s e r v a t i o n o f h i s t o r i c landmarks i n t h e Old Georgetown H i s t o r i c D i s t r i c t ; compliance w i t h t h e h i s t o r i c p r e s e r v a t i o n d e s i g n r e q u i r e m e n t s s h a l l be a mandatory c o n d i t i o n f o r approval o f a Planned U n i t Development a p p l i c a t i o n w i t h i n t h e P l a n A r e a . *Subarea requirements a r e taken from t h e Phase I I A " H i s t o r i c Area S t u d i e s " a s m o d i f i e d f o r t h e F i n a l Development P l a n and Program and c o n t a i n e d i n Appendix A o f t h i s Report. They a r e s p e c i f i e d i n t h e SDP. -55- �THE RECOMMENDED DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Public Improvement Programs The recommended p u b l i c i m p r o v e m e n t s p r o g r a m s a r e f e l t a s necessary f o r the implementation of the Plan. A summary o f public costs i s included. Recommended Public Improvements, Georgetown Waterfront Sectional Development Plan Action Agency Responsible 1. Potomac River Freeway and Reconstruct K Street U.S. D O T ( F H W A ) , District Highways and Traffic 2. Development of the Canal, locks, footbridges, etc. U.S. Dept. of Interior, National Park Service ( N P S ) 3. Acquisition and development of the 5 0 ' Waterfront Park U.S. Dept. of Interior, NPS 4. Public parks, pedestrian w a y s , bikeways, plazas and pedestrian overpasses as shown on the circulation plan District Highways and T r a f f i c , and Recreation 5. Keep the rights-of-way of 33rd and 34th Streets vacant District Highways and T r a f f i c 6. Reconstruct the Francis Scott K e y House U.S. Dept. of Interior, NPS 7. Restore and operate the Georgetown Market District Dept. of General Services, U.S. Dept. of Interior, NPS 8. Preserve the existing Wisconsin Avenue Bridge over the Canal District Highways and T r a f f i c 9. Construct a wall around the Western Heating Plant General Services Administration or District Dept. of Environmental Services 10. Acquire the Service Station Property at Rock Creek Park U.S. Dept. of Interior, NPS Freeway and Local Potomac Streets River Freeway A c o n c l u s i o n o f Phase I and Phase I I A i s t h a t t h e Freeway c o n f i g u r a t i o n k n o w n a s t h e GPG I a l t e r n a t i v e i s t h e b e s t o v e r a l l s o l u t i o n t o r e g i o n a l t r a f f i c movement t h r o u g h t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t . This conclusion holds, even without a c o n n e c t i o n t o a T h r e e S i s t e r s B r i d g e a c r o s s t h e Potomac or c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e P a l i s a d e s Parkway. Whether t h e r e w i l l n e e d t o be t w o , t h r e e o r f o u r l a n e s e a c h way w i l l h a v e t o be s t u d i e d i n d e t a i l . Agencies responsible: U.S. (FHWA) ( p a r t ) , a n d D i s t r i c t ways and T r a f f i c . Sources of funds: U.S. Department of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n of Columbia Department of High- Congress. -56- �I j /' i < Local Street Adjustments R e b u i l d i n g K S t r e e t on t o p o f t h e F r e e w a y t u n n e l , a n d m o d i f y i n g t h e p r e s e n t ramp f r o m K e y B r i d g e t o e x t e n d i t t o K S t r e e t a r e i n t e g r a l elements of the Freeway c o n s t r u c t i o n . The e x t e n s i o n o f 2 9 t h S t r e e t , w h i l e K S t r e e t i s b e i n g r e b u i l t , and t h e openi n g o f a new s t r e e t t o c o n n e c t T h o m a s J e f f e r s o n , 3 0 t h a n d 2 9 t h S t r e e t s a r e t h e o t h e r m a j o r new s t r e e t c h a n g e s . Agencies responsible: U.S. D e p a r t m e n t o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n (FHWA) a n d D i s t r i c t o f C o l u m b i a D e p a r t m e n t o f H i g h w a y s a n d Traffic. Source of funds: Street U.S. Congress. Landscaping The t h i r d e l e m e n t o f t h i s p a t o f t h e program c a l l s f o r s t r e e t l a n d s c a p i n g f o r b o t h e x i s t i n g a s w e l l a s new s t r e e t s . Agencies responsible: D i s t r i c t o f Columbia Department of Highways and T r a f f i c and R e c r e a t i o n . Sources of funds: U.S. Congress. Utilities Georgetown Interceptor Sewer T h e recommended F r e e w a y A l t e r n a t i v e ( a s do a l l F r e e w a y A l t e r n a t i v e s ) r e q u i r e s a t l e a s t p a r t i a l r e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f theI n t e r c e p t o r Sewer. Agency r e s p o n s i b l e : District Environmental Services. Sources of funds: Public U.S. o f Columbia, Department o f Congress. Utilities Water, steam, mechanical and e l e c t r i c a l u t i l i t y systems, a s well as telephone, gas, e t c .are c u r r e n t l y a v a i l a b l e to the a r e a b u t w i l l r e q u i r e some a l t e r a t i o n , a b a n d o n m e n t , a n d / o r replacement. T h e P l a n r e c o m m e n d s c o s t s h a r i n g w i t h d e v e l o p e r s o n new water and sewer connections and n e c e s s a r y r e a l i g n m e n t s . Agencies responsible: D i s t r i c t o f Columbia Department o f E n v i r o n m e n t a l S e r v i c e s , and v a r i o u s p u b l i c u t i l i t y companies, e.g., PEPCO. -57- i �Source o f funds: Public U.S. C o n g r e s s (public, private). Parks C&O Canal T h e P l a n c a l l s f o r t h e a c q u i s i t i o n o f some p r o p e r t y t o b e added t o t h e p r e s e n t C a n a l P a r k . Most o f t h i s p r o p e r t y i s now i n p u b l i c s t r e e t s o r o w n e r s h i p , some i n p r i v a t e o w n e r ship . An o v e r a l l b u d g e t e s t i m a t e f o r C a n a l P a r k d e v e l o p m e n t ( e x c l u d i n g a c q u i s i t i o n ) i s $325,000. T h i s f i g u r e does n o t i n clude t h e c o s t s o f s p e c i f i c h i s t o r i c r e s t o r a t i o n and/or r e c o n s t r u c t i o n programs. Agency r e s p o n s i b l e : U.S. D e p a r t m e n t o f t h e I n t e r i o r , t i o n a l Park S e r v i c e . Source o f funds: Waterfront U.S. Na- Congress. Park A f t e r c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e Freeway t u n n e l , and s i t e preparation of property f o r p r i v a t e development, t h e W a t e r f r o n t Park can be l a n d s c a p e d a n d c o n n e c t e d t o Rock C r e e k P a r k t o i t s e a s t by t h e Promenade. Agency r e s p o n s i b l e : Park Service. Source o f funds: Site Pre para U.S. D e p a r t m e n t o f t h e I n t e r i o r , U.S. National Congress. tion/Disposition Waterfront A l l p r o p e r t y i n t h e W a t e r f r o n t Zone i s i n one o f t h r e e o w n e r ships: G e o r g e t o w n I n l a n d , C&O-B&O R a i l r o a d o r t h e D i s t r i c t of Columbia (Departments o f Highways and P u b l i c Works). The two p r i v a t e p r o p e r t i e s w i l l be m i n i m a l l y a d j u s t e d a s r e q u i r e d , w i t h such a c q u i s i t i o n f o r highway and park purposes a s i s necessary t o carry out the Plan. The r e m a i n d e r o f t h e l a n d s o u t h o f K S t r e e t i s c u r r e n t l y u n d e r j u r i s d i c t i o n o f t h e D i s t r i c t Department o f Highways and T r a f f i c , h a v i n g been a c q u i r e d a s p a r t o f t h e t a k i n g f o r t h e F r e e way. A f t e r c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e F r e e w a y t h e l a n d w i l l be t r a n s f e r r e d t o t h e Department o f t h e I n t e r i o r , N a t i o n a l Park S e r v i c e f o r development i n accordance w i t h the P l a n as parkland and p u b l i c p l a z a . -58- �Incinerator Site T h i s p r o p e r t y on t h e n o r t h s i d e o f K S t r e e t a t 3 0 t h i s under the j u r i s d i c t i o n o f t h e D i s t r i c t Department o f P u b l i c Works. I t i s proposed f o r a combination o f parking garages and townhouse-apartment development. I t i s a case o f p r i v a t e reuse of excess p u b l i c land. In t h i s development, a P u b l i c Development Corporation would be a n a p p r o p r i a t e i n s t r u m e n t , i f t h e D e p a r t m e n t o f E n v i r o n mental S e r v i c e s does n o t have p r o c e d u r e s t o e n s u r e i t sdevelopment compatible w i t h t h e P l a n . The property could a l s o be t r a n s f e r r e d t o R L A w i t h t h e D i s t r i c t a p p r o p r i a t e l y reimbursed from d i s p o s i t i o n proceedings. Agencies responsible: D i s t r i c t o f Columbia Department o f Envinonmental S e r v i c e s and Redevelopment Land Agency, and/or a Development Corporation. Source o f funds: Historic Preservation None required. and Restoration Programs H i s t o r i c p r e s e r v a t i o n and r e s t o r a t i o n c o n s i s t s o f a of i n t e r r e l a t e d program elements. Canal Park Extension complex (Public) P r o p e r t y i s t o be a c q u i r e d f o r p u b l i c p a r k p u r p o s e s . Some i s c u r r e n t l y i n s t r e e t o r a l l e y u s e , some i n p r i v a t e o w n e r s h i p , a n d some a l r e a d y u n d e r N a t i o n a l P a r k S e r v i c e j u r i s d i c tion. Historic Preservation, Restoration and Reconstruction (Public) The p r e s e r v a t i o n o f h i s t o r i c s t r u c t u r e s s u c h a s t h e F o r r e s t Marbury House a n d t h e Georgetown Potomac S t r e e t M a r k e t t h a t a r e t o be r e t a i n e d i n p u b l i c o w n e r s h i p a s a d d i t i o n s t o t h e C&O C a n a l H i s t o r i c P a r k a r e t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f t h e N a t i o n a l Park Service. The r e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f b o t h t h e F r a n c i s S c o t t Key House and p o r t i o n s o f t h e F o r r e s t - M a r b u r y House a r e p a r t o f t h e p r o posed Canal e x t e n s t i o n program. -59- �Agency r e s p o n s i b l e : Park S e r v i c e . Source of funds: Historic U.S. U.S. Department of C o n g r e s s and Preservation the private Interior, National donations. (Private) P r i v a t e h i s t o r i c p r e s e r v a t i o n i s e x p e c t e d t o be a m a j o r e l e ment o f t h e program. A v a r i e t y o f p r o p e r t y and institutional r e l a t i o n s h i p s t h a t w i l l enhance economic i n c e n t i v e s to preservation are envisioned. T h e s e m i g h t i n c l u d e a d d i t i o n a l d e s i g n a t i o n by t h e N a t i o n a l Park S e r v i c e as p a r t of the Park,*with t r a n s f e r of t i t l e t o t h e F e d e r a l Government and t h e r i g h t - t o - u s e ( i . e . , r e n t ) r e t a i n e d by t h e p r e s e n t o w n e r . Another d e v i c e i s the use o f " f a c a d e a c q u i s i t i o n " by t h e N a t i o n a l P a r k S e r v i c e t o ens u r e p r e s e r v a t i o n . Long-term l o w - i n t e r e s t l o a n s a r e env i s i o n e d as a d e s i r a b l e technique to use. Most n e c e s s a r y a s i n s t r u e m e n t s f o r t h e s e k i n d s o f a c t i v i t i e s are the p r i v a t e , n o n - p r o f i t development ( h i s t o r i c area) c o r p o r a t i o n s , w i t h a W a t e r f r o n t ( P u b l i c ) Development Corp o r a t i o n as a back-up " o r g a n i z a t i o n " of " l a s t r e s o r t " . The D e v e l o p m e n t R i g h t s P r o g r a m a l t h o u g h n o t i n t e n d e d a s p a r t and p a r c e l o f t h e P l a n i s p r o p o s e d f o r f u r t h e r s t u d y i n p a r t i n t h a t i t i s designed t o p r o v i d e an economic i n c e n t i v e f o r p r i v a t e p r e s e r v a t i o n and r e n o v a t i o n o f h i s t o r i c s t r u c t u r e s . Agencies responsible: Non-Profit H i s t o r i c Area Corporations s p o n s o r e d by Georgetown C i t i z e n s ' A s s o c i a t i o n , a D e v e l o p m e n t C o r p o r a t i o n , a n d U.S. D e p a r t m e n t o f t h e I n t e r i o r , N a t i o n a l Park S e r v i c e . Source of funds: Various private sources included tions (mostly r e v o l v i n g or working capital). Historic Commission/Fine founda- Arts A c t u a l c o n t r o l o f h i s t o r i c s t r u c t u r e s a s w e l l a s new development i n t h e W a t e r f r o n t a r e a i s s p r e a d d i f f u s e l y . T h e Comm i s s i o n of F i n e A r t s has extended i t s presumed j u r i s d i c t i o n t o i n c l u d e a r c h i t e c t u r a l r e v i e w and a p p r o v a l o v e r such a r e a s w i t h the D i s t r i c t ' s o f f i c e s of L i c e n s e s and P e r m i t s g i v i n g s u p p o r t t o s u c h e x t e n s i o n by r e f u s i n g b u i l d i n g p e r m i t s w h e r e FA h a s n o t g i v e n a p p r o v a l . -60- i �W e l l - m e a n t a s t h i s c o n t r o l i s , i t may n o t p r e v e n t demolition, or i n t e r n a l r e c o n s t r u c t i o n , n o r does i tp r o v i d e t h e k i n d o f "constant tender loving care" necessary f o r h i s t o r i c preservation . S e v e r a l a l t e r n a t i v e s a r e p o s s i b l e t o ensure t h a t t h e Waterf r o n t (and Georgetown) have t h e k i n d o f adequate c o n t r o l and c o n s t r u c t i v e g u i d a n c e t h a t e x i s t s i n t h e V i e u x C a r r e i n New O r l e a n s and i n t h e h i s t o r i c d i s t r i c t o f Savannah, Georgia. One a l t e r n a t i v e i s t o s t r e n g t h e n t h e p o s i t i o n a n d j u r i s d i c t i o n o f t h e C o m m i s s i o n on F i n e A r t s . A second i s t o create a Georgetown H i s t o r i c Commission whose s o l e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y i s H i s t o r i c Georgetown, i n c l u d i n g t h e W a t e r f r o n t . A third i s t o c r e a t e a (perhaps temporary) Commission f o r t h e Waterfront i t s e l f . Funds w o u l d be n e c e s s a r y f o r t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of such a Commission f o r t h e d u r a t i o n o f t h e development process. Agencies responsible: D i s t r i c t o f C o l u m b i a , U.S. and C i t i z e n s ' A s s o c i a t i o n o f Georgetown. Congress, Sources of funds: Possible special t a x d i s t r i c t , G o v e r n m e n t o r U.S. C o n g r e s s . District Historic Foundation/Trust To h e l p i m p l e m e n t p r e s e r v a t i o n a n d r e c o n s t r u c t i o n p l a n s on t h e p r i v a t e s i d e , a n H i s t o r i c F o u n d a t i o n T r u s t s h o u l d be f o r m e d , p a t t e r n e d a f t e r t h o s e i n a number o f c i t i e s . The F o u n d a t i o n ' s f u n c t i o n c o u l d be t o r a i s e money, a c c e p t g i f t s , own p r o p e r t y a n d p r o v i d e f o r n o n - p r o f i t a c t i v i t y w h e r e t h e economics o f t h e p r o j e c t s warrant i t . Agencies responsible: sponsorship. Source of funds: Georgetown Citizens' Association f o r private. The f o l l o w i n g l i s t o f p u b l i c improvements i s c a l l e d the S e c t i o n a l Development P l a n (SDP). -61- f o ri n �Summary of the Public Costs of the Public Improvement Programs Cost estimates for public elements listed above are summarized as follows: Bulkhead: 1,500'@ $2,500/lin.ft. 2 , 5 0 0 ' over expressway = = Basin: 2 5 , 0 0 0 sq.ft. @ $ 4 / c u . y d . - 50,000 Urban Park: (Promenade w/landscaping and brick paving) 3 5 0 , 0 0 0 sq.ft. @ $9/sq.ft. = 3,150,000 Expressway (see Phase I Report page 5 9 ) : = 119,000,000 Relocating ventilating building: = 600,000* Surface Streets (excluding landscaping and lighting): K Street 2,800' @ $200/lin.ft. = 550,000 5 0 0 ' @ $1500/1 in.ft. = 750,000 8 0 0 ' @ $1000/lin.ft. = 800,000 3,000' @ $150/lin.ft. = 450,000 2 5 0 ' @ $125/lin.ft. = 300,000 7,500' @ $150/lin.ft. = 1,125,000 Canal Walkways (gravel) & Landscaping: = 75,000 Park (natural): = 250,000 9 6 " Sewer Relocation: = 600,000** Other Utilities Alteration and/or Replacement: = 500,000 Public preservation, restoration, and/or reconstruction: = 2,000,000 = $133,900,000 K Street-Key Bridge R a m p Other Streets 29th S t . Retaining Wall Street Landscaping & Lighting: 5 0 , 0 0 0 sq.ft. @ $5/sq.ft. Total Public Development Costs: $ 3,750,000 N/A (The above summary does not include architectural and engineering fees.) NOTES: * Does not include cost of additional mechanical equipment. * * F i g u r e is quoted f r o m District Highway's estimate. Source: W M R T Phase I I A Report, Preliminary Development Plan and Program ( 1 9 7 2 ) . -62- �Private Action Programs A c t i o n programs t a k e t h e improvement programs l i s t e d above and suggest a general outline of steps i n t h e i r implementation. Private/Public B&O-C&O Railroad R e m o v a l o f t h e r a i l r o a d now i n K S t r e e t i s p o s s i b l e w i t h a change o f t h e D i s t r i c t S t e a m p l a n t from c o a l t o o i l . Then only the f l o u r m i l l w i l l remain as a customer. Public Utility C o m m i s s i o n a p p r o v a l m u s t be o b t a i n e d a s p a r t o f t h e F r e e w a y construction. Private Utility Changes Engineering of p r i v a t e u t i l i t y changes w i l l precede t h e i r abandonment where a p p r o p r i a t e and t h e establishment o f new easements o r f r a n c h i s e areas. Private Non-Profit Development Corporations/Historic Areas Under t h e s t i m u l a t i o n and/or s p o n s o r s h i p o f t h e Georgetown C i t i z e n s ' A s s o c i a t i o n , one o r s e v e r a l n o n - p r o f i t d e v e l o p m e n t c o r p o r a t i o n s c a n be f o r m e d w i t h p r o p e r t y o w n e r s p o o l i n g equity. A t t h e c o m p l e t i o n o f t h e i r o b j e c t i v e s t h e y c a n be dissolved with redistribution of equity assets. Private Developer Actions T h e Dodge C e n t e r a n d G e o r g e t o w n I n l a n d p r o j e c t s w i l l p r o c e e d , and o t h e r d e v e l o p e r s o f p r o p e r t i e s s u s c e p t i b l e t o d e v e l o p ment s h o u l d be e n c o u r a g e d by t h e e x i s t e n c e o f t h e P l a n - a s u l t i m a t e l y approved - t o c a r r y out v a r i o u s development a c tivities . Historic Foundation/Trust A H i s t o r i c F o u n d a t i o n s h o u l d be formed t o a c t a s q u a s i partner to H i s t o r i c Area Corporations, t h e W a t e r f r o n t Development Corporation ( P u b l i c ) , and p r i v a t e developers i n terested i n historic preservation. -63- �Public A c t i o n Programs B e f o r e t h e P r e l i m i n a r y P l a n a n d D e v e l o p m e n t P r o g r a m c a n be o f f i c i a l l y a d o p t e d by t h e N a t i o n a l C a p i t a l P l a n n i n g C o m m i s s i o n , a d e c i s i o n m u s t be r e a c h e d r e g a r d i n g t h e P o t o m a c R i v e r F r e e way and V e h i c u l a r C i r c u l a t i o n P l a n a s e l e m e n t s o f t h e C i t y ' s o v e r a l l Comprehensive P l a n . I n t u r n b e f o r e t h i s s t e p c a n be t a k e n a p p r o p r i a t e p u b l i c h e a r i n g s m u s t be h e l d , a t i m e - c o n s u m i n g process. I n the meantime a c q u i e s c e n c e t o p r e s s u r e f o r f u r t h e r d e v e l o p m e n t may r e s u l t i n a d d i n g " g i v e n s " w h i c h w i l l m a k e f i n a l i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f t h e P l a n i m p o s s i b l e and t h e P l a n meaningless. Zoning i s a t the c r u x of the matter. District of Columbia Adoption Zoning Commission of the Sectional Development Plan Prepared under S e c t i o n 7501 o f the Zoning O r d i n a n c e , the Sect i o n a l D e v e l o p m e n t P l a n s e t s up a n a d m i n i s t r a t i v e p r o c e s s w h i c h w i l l b o t h e n a b l e and e n c o u r a g e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f t h i s F i n a l Development P l a n and Program. Plan Implementation Development as a Matter-of-Right Pursuant to A r t i c l e 7502.71 of the Zoning R e g u l a t i o n s , any p r o p e r t y may b e d e v e l o p e d t o t h e m a x i m u m e x t e n t a l l o w e d a s a m a t t e r o f r i g h t u n d e r t h e a p p l i c a b l e Zone D i s t r i c t s . No p r o c e s s i n g of property under the Zoning Commission or the Board of Zoning Adjustment i s n e c e s s a r y f o r such development u n l e s s s u c h p r o c e s s i n g i s r e q u i r e d i n t h e Zoning Regulations . Application for Planned Unit Developments A l l of the procedures, requirements and s t a n d a r d s f o r app l i c a t i o n s f o r P l a n n e d U n i t D e v e l o p m e n t s i n a S e c t i o n a l Dev e l o p m e n t P l a n A r e a u n d e r S e c t i o n 7 5 0 1 , a s amended, s h a l l be f o l l o w e d . I n p a r t i c u l a r , the owner or owners o f p r o p e r t y i n t h e P l a n A r e a may, p u r s u a n t t o A r t i c l e 7501.4 o f t h e Zoning R e g u l a t i o n s , f i l e f o r " f u r t h e r p r o c e s s i n g " of a Planned U n i t Development before the Board o f Zoning A d j u s t ment. P u r s u a n t to A r t i c l e 7501.53 o f the Zoning Commission and t h e B o a r d o f Z o n i n g A d j u s t m e n t , i n c l u d i n g t h o s e the performance of which are conditions precedent to the issuance o f any p e r m i t n e c e s s a r y f o r t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f any p a r t o f t h e e n t i r e s i t e , i n c l u d i n g compliance with the requirements of t h i s S e c t i o n a l Development P l a n , s h a l l r u n w i t h t h e l a n d and s h a l l n o t l a p s e o r be w a i v e d a s a r e s u l t o f a n y s u b s e q u e n t -64- �change i n t h e tenancy o r o w n e r s h i p o f any o r a l l o f s a i d a r e a . S u c h c o n d i t i o n s s h a l l be a p a r t o f a n y c e r t i f i c a t e o f o c c u pancy i s s u e d f o r any use o r s t r u c t u r e i n such development. Amendments to Zoning in the SDP P u r s u a n t t o A r t i c l e 7 5 0 2 . 6 1 o f t h e Z o n i n g R e g u l a t i o n s , amendm e n t s t o z o n i n g i n a S e c t i o n a l D e v e l o p m e n t P l a n a r e a may b e proposed by any c i t i z e n , p r o p e r t y owner, group o f c i t i z e n s or group o f p r o p e r t y owners. A p r o p o s e d amendment s h a l l i n clude a d e t a i l e d statement e x p l a i n i n g the impact of the prop o s e d amendment upon t h e S e c t i o n a l D e v e l o p m e n t P l a n . (See recommended z o n i n g t e x t changes.); Fine Arts Approval P u r s u a n t t o P u b l i c L a w 8 0 8 , 8 1 s t C o n g r e s s ; D.C. C o d e 5 - 8 0 1 , 64 S t a t . 9 0 3 , b e f o r e a n y p e r m i t f o r t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n , a l t e r a t i o n , r e c o n s t r u c t i o n , o r r a z i n g o f any b u i l d i n g w i t h i n the Old Georgetown H i s t o r i c D i s t r i c t ( t h e D i s t r i c t i n c l u d e s the e n t i r e Plan Area) i s i s s u e d the Council o f the D i s t r i c t of Columbia s h a l l r e f e r t h e p l a n s t o t h e N a t i o n a l Commission of Fine A r t s f o r a report as t o the e x t e r i o r a r c h i t e c t u r a l f e a t u r e s , h e i g h t , a p p e a r a n c e , c o l o r , a n d t e x t u r e o f t h e mat e r i a l s of e x t e r i o r construction which are subject to public view. The Subarea D e s i g n Requirements a r e a p p r o p r i a t e f o r use by t h e N a t i o n a l Commission o f F i n e A r t s i n t h e r e v i e w of plans submitted i n the Plan Area. District Tax Assessor's Office The D i s t r i c t A s s e s s o r ' s O f f i c e w i l l n e c e s s a r i l y c o n d u c t r e a p p r a i s a l s f o r p r o p e r t y t a x purposes, occasioned by both i n creases or decreases i n value a t t r i b u t a b l e to the adoption and i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f t h e SDP. C o n s i d e r a t i o n may b e g i v e n t o t h e i d e a o f d e s i g n a t i n g a l l o f Georgetown a s S p e c i a l Tax D i s t r i c t . T h e p o i n t h a s b e e n made t h a t i t s e c o n o m i c f u t u r e w i l l be s u p p o r t e d by p r o p e r d e v e l o p ment o f t h e W a t e r f r o n t and h u r t by i m p r o p e r d e v e l o p m e n t . The programs f o r t h e W a t e r f r o n t c o u l d l o g i c a l l y be a s s i s t e d by the temporary l e v y o f a modest m i l l a g e and i t s assignment t o help defray the costs. -65- �District Highways and Traffic The c o m p l i c a t e d and l e n g t h y p r o c e d u r e o f F r e e w a y , h i g h w a y and s t r e e t change i s summarized i n b r i e f below. Many o f t h e s e steps overlap i n time. 1. 2. 3. Potomac R i v e r Freeway P u b l i c H e a r i n g s . F i n a l S e l e c t i o n of Freeway A l t e r n a t i v e s . P r e p a r a t i o n and R e v i e w o f : Draft Environmental Statement. 4. F e d e r a l A p p r o v a l Process. 5. A d o p t i o n b y NCPC a s p a r t o f C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n . 6. F e d e r a l a n d L o c a l F u n d i n g P r o c e s s . 7. F r e e w a y , h i g h w a y a n d s t r e e t , a n d l a n d s c a p e d e s i g n engineering. 8. W h i t e h u r s t F r e e w a y d e t o u r c o n s t r u c t i o n . 9. W h i t e h u r s t F r e e w a y d e m o l i t i o n . 10. F r e e w a y , h i g h w a y and s t r e e t c o n f i r g u a t i o n . 11. S t r e e t landscaping. I t i s l i k e l y to take s i x to eight years l a s t public hearing to completion. District Department of Environmental from the date and of the Services A s i m i l a r although l e s s time consuming schedule f o r p u b l i c and p r i v a t e u t i l i t y c h a n g e s m u s t be c l o s e l y c o o r d i n a t e d w i t h the work of both D i s t r i c t Highways as w e l l as s i t e p r e p a r a t i o n . Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) WMATA's r e s p o n s i b i l i t y w i l l b e t o c a r r y o u t r e v i s i o n o f b u s r o u t e s and s c h e d u l e s , and a c t i v i t y t h e y p u r s u e on c o n t i n u i n g b a s i s throughout the C i t y . A m i n i - b u s s e r v i c e c a n be e s t a b l i s h e d on a t r i a l b a s i s t o i m p r o v e i n t e r n a l c i r c u l a t i o n a n d h e l p m a k e up f o r t h e r e l a t i v e l y l o w p a r k i n g s t a n d a r d s a d o p t e d i n the P r e l i m i n a r y Development P l a n . U.S. Department of the Interior, abbreviated 1. E x a m i n a t i o n o f f e a s i b i l i t y o f C&O C a n a l H i s t o r i c D i s t r i c t extension concept. P r e p a r a t i o n o f C&O C a n a l H i s t o r i c D i s t r i c t E x t e n s i o n l e g i s l a t i o n and i t s i n t r o d u c t i o n i n t o C o n g r e s s . Same a s ( 1 ) a n d ( 2 ) a b o v e f o r W a t e r f r o n t P a r k . 3. o f NPS Service An 2. list National Park actions follows: -66- �4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Upon a p p r o v a l b y U.S. C o n g r e s s , p r e p a r a t i o n o f d e t a i l e d feasibility, d e s i g n and c o s t s t u d i e s . F e d e r a l a p p r o v a l s and p r e p a r a t i o n o f f u n d i n g l e g i s l a t i o n . Upon a p p r o v a l o f f u n d i n g , p r e p a r a t i o n o f f i n a l design and e n g i n e e r i n g p l a n s . Project construction. O p e r a t i o n and m a i n t e n a n c e . U.S. Corps of Engineers T h e e d g e o f t h e W a t e r f r o n t P a r k , t h e new b u l k h e a d , e x t e n d s t h e length of the Waterfront a r e a . M o s t o f t h a t l e n g t h i s now a n a t u r a l bank. T h e F r e e w a y t u n n e l s o u t h w a l l w i l l f o r m a new b u l k h e a d a l i g n m e n t from Key B r i d g e t o W i s c o n s i n Avenue. The b u l k h e a d l i n e comes u n d e r t h e j u r i s d i c t i o n o f t h e U.S. Corps of Engineers. The C o r p s w i l l h a v e t o e s t a b l i s h t o i t s s a t i s f a c t i o n t h a t t h e new b u l k h e a d l o c a t i o n d o e s n o t e x a c e r b a t e f l o o d i n g d o w n s t r e a m b e f o r e t h a t new l i n e c a n d e f i n i t e l y be e s t a b l i s h e d f o r p r o j e c t d e v e l o p m e n t . Waterfront Development Corporation (Public) With support from the Georgetown C i t i z e n s ' A s s o c i a t i o n , l e g i s l a t i o n s h o u l d be i n t r o d u c e d i n t o C o n g r e s s t o p r o v i d e f o r a W a t e r f r o n t ( P u b l i c ) Development C o r p o r a t i o n . A number o f m o d e l s e x i s t w i t h some p a r a l l e l s i n W a s h i n g t o n . Essentially t h i s Corporation would take the form of a l i m i t e d a u t h o r i t y w i t h b o t h p u b l i c and p r i v a t e members t h a t w o u l d be capable of c a r r y i n g out the a c t i o n s o u t l i n e d f o r i t above. The P h i l a d e l p h i a I n d u s t r i a l C o r p o r a t i o n o r t h e P h i l a d e l p h i a Food D i s t r i b u t i o n C e n t e r , I n c . have t h e k i n d o f p u b l i c powers and s u p p o r t t h a t a r e n e c e s s a r y . The C h a r l e s C e n t e r - I n n e r H a r b o r Management, I n c . , i n B a l t i m o r e i s a n o t h e r e f f e c t i v e mode1. I n c l u d e d w o u l d h a v e t o b e p o w e r t o a c q u i r e a n d own property, t o b o r r o w money a n d f l o a t r e v e n u e b o n d s . The Corporation would a c t as agent f o r the C i t y i n p r e p a r i n g d e t a i l e d plans and d e s i g n s , and i n p r o m o t i n g t h e p u r p o s e s o f t h e W a t e r f r o n t . I t w o u l d n o t have t h e power o f condemnation w h i c h would r e main the C i t y ' s under i t s redevelopment or other p u b l i c purpose mandates ( p a r k s , s t r e e t s , e t c . ) . The p u r p o s e s o f t h e C o r p o r a t i o n w o u l d be, a g a i n , t o a c t a s a b r i d g e between p u b l i c and p r i v a t e e n t e r p r i s e and a s a back-up organization to the non-profit H i s t o r i c Area Corporations. -67- �PHASING PROGRAMS T h i s P l a n a d v o c a t e s a p h a s e d d e v e l o p m e n t w h i c h s h o u l d be c a r e f u l l y f o l l o w e d i n o r d e r t h a t d e v e l o p m e n t may proceed i n an o r d e r l y f a s h i o n and so t h a t t h e a d j u s t m e n t r e s i d e n t i a l n e i g h b o r h o o d s may be a f f o r d e d t h e m a x i m u m p o s s i b l e protect i o n from any a d v e r s e i m p a c t s . The f o l l o w i n g o p t i o n s tions are a v a i l a b l e : f o r the development of timing regula- Bluff T i m i n g r e q u i r e m e n t s c o u l d be w r i t t e n i n t o t h e P l a n s p e c i f y i n g w h i c h p a r c e l s a r e t o be d e l a y e d o r r e q u i r i n g t h e C o m m i s s i o n or Board to f i n d , as a p r e - r e q u i s i t e to a p p r o v i n g p r i v a t e development a p p l i c a t i o n s , t h a t p u b l i c improvements needed t o support t h a t p r i v a t e development are under c o n s t r u c t i o n . S u c h r e q u i r e m e n t s w o u l d h a v e no f o r c e o f l a w a n d w o u l d s e r v e no p u r p o s e . Timing Linked to Capital Budgeting T h i s i s t h e t e c h n i q u e e m p l o y e d i n R a m a p o , New Y o r k . D e v e l o p ment p e r m i s s i o n i s d e n i e d u n t i l s u c h t i m e a s a p a r c e l s c o r e s a minimum number o f " p o i n t s " f o r t h e p u b l i c s e r v i c e s a v a i l able to the p a r c e l . T h e New Y o r k C o u r t o f A p p e a l s s u s t a i n e d t h e l e g a l i t y o f t h i s scheme b e c a u s e : ( 1 ) T h e New Y o r k S t a t e P l a n n i n g E n a b l i n g L e g i s l a t i o n c o u l d be i n t e r p r e t e d t o a u t h o r i z e s u c h a scheme; (2) The C i t y had c o m m i t t e d i t s e l f , through i t s c a p i t a l budget, to f u r n i s h p u b l i c s e r v i c e s to e a c h p a r c e l w i t h i n 18 y e a r s . I n the Georgetown a r e a t h i s t e c h n i q u e c o u l d be e m p l o y e d o n l y a f t e r : (1) Comparing the D.C. z o n i n g e n a b l i n g l e g i s l a t i o n w i t h t h a t o f New Y o r k S t a t e ; ( 2 ) A m e n d i n g t h e D.C. zoning regulations to create a point system; ( 3 ) D e s i g n i n g a p o i n t s y s t e m f o r an u r b a n a r e a (one obvious problem i s t h a t p r o p e r t i e s around the periphey of t h e P l a n A r e a w o u l d s c o r e h i g h e r b e c a u s e t h e y c o u l d d r a w on p u b l i c f a c i l i t i e s outside the Plan Area); (4) O b t a i n a b i n d i n g c o m m i t m e n t f r o m e a c h r e l e v a n t p u b l i c a g e n c y t o comp l e t e the r e q u i r e d p u b l i c improvements. S i n c e none o f t h e s e f o u r p r e - r e q u i s i t e s t e p s h a v e been a Ramapo-type a p p r o a c h does not seem f e a s i b l e . Emergency Article zoning by t h e days. to the zoning or Interim taken Rezoning 7502.35 of the R e g u l a t i o n s p r o v i d e s f o r emergency i n a l l or p a r t of a S e c t i o n a l Development P l a n Area Zoning Commission. Emergency zoning l a s t s only 120 D u r i n g t h e 120 d a y p e r i o d a n a p p l i c a t i o n may b e made Zoning Commission f o r i n t e r i m rezoning. Interim rel a s t s f o r n o t more t h a n two y e a r s . Such an a p p l i c a - -68- �t i o n " . . . s h a l l be b a s e d on a S e c t i o n a l Development P l a n i n preparation". T h i s i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e i n t e r i m r e z o n i n g may be t o t h e l e v e l s c a l l e d f o r i n t h e SDP n o t b e l o w t h e l e v e l s i n t h e SDP. Thus emergency and i n t e r i m r e z o n i n g s a r e n o t useful as timing devices. I n c o n c l u s i o n , t h e r e does n o t a p p e a r t o be a s u i t a b l e d e v e l o p ment t i m i n g d e v i c e f o r i n c l u s i o n i n t h e S e c t i o n a l Development Plan. N e v e r t h e l e s s , t h e recommended P l a n a l l o w s f o r d e v e l o p ment b a s e d on t h e a s s u m p t i o n s a n d c o n s t r a i n t s d i s c u s s e d i n Chapter I I o f t h i s Plan. No d e v e l o p m e n t s h o u l d b e a l l o w e d t o v i o l a t e t h e s e a s s u m p t i o n s and c o n s t r a i n t s . The f o l l o w i n g p u b l i c i m p r o v e m e n t s s h o u l d be c a r r i e d o u t a n d be o p e r a t i o n a l b e f o r e a n y new d e v e l o p m e n t i s c o m p l e t e d : to a. The Potomac R i v e r Freeway o r a s i m i l a r replace the Whitehurst Freeway; be b. T h e r e c o m m e n d e d r e c o n s t r u c t e d operational; tunnel by-pass K Street arterial to c. A l l m o d i f i c a t i o n s o f t r a f f i c d i r e c t i o n a l i t y and s i g n a l i z a t i o n d e s i g n e d t o i m p r o v e t r a f f i c f l o w o n M, K a n d other l o c a l s t r e e t s ; d. O n - s t r e e t a n d o f f - s t r e e t p a r k i n g c o n t r o l s w i t h i n t h e P l a n Area and o n - s t r e e t p a r k i n g c o n t r o l s i n t h e low d e n s i t y r e s i d e n t i a l neighborhoods adjacent t o the P l a n Area. Any p l a n s f o r a d d i t i o n a l d e v e l o p m e n t a f t e r t h o s e l e v e l s r e commended i n t h i s P l a n h a v e b e e n a c h i e v e d s h o u l d b e c o n s i d ered only i fd e t a i l e d a n a l y s i s of then e x i s t i n g conditions indicate that additional local street capacity i s available o r c a n be e c o n o m i c a l l y p r o v i d e d w i t h o u t d e t r i m e n t t o t h e land use plan. I n any c a s e , i t w o u l d be f r u i t l e s s t o cons i d e r a d d i t i o n a l development p r i o r t o t h e r e s o l u t i o n o f t h e Potomac R i v e r Freeway d e s i g n , t h e d i s p o s i t i o n o f q u e s t i o n s concerning t h e P a l i s a d e s Parkway and Three S i s t e r s B r i d g e , and a c c r u a l o f a t l e a s t two y e a r s e x p e r i e n c e w i t h a f u l l y implemented r e g i o n a l A i r Q u a l i t y P l a n . When a n d i f f u r t h e r t r a f f i c c a p a c i t y a n a l y s e s a r e c a r r i e d o u t , t h e y s h o u l d be v e r i f i e d on t h e b a s i s o f a d d i t i o n a l D e p a r t m e n t o f Highway and T r a f f i c s t u d i e s . Any p r o p o s e d r e v i s i o n s t o t h e P l a n s h o u l d be e n t e r t a i n e d o n l y i f t h e y a r e c l e a r l y shown t o f u r t h e r s t r e n g t h e n t h e goals and o b j e c t i v e s , and p o l i c i e s o f t h i s P l a n . -69- �F I N A L D E V E L O P M E N T PLAN W A T E R F R O N T K E Y B R I D G E TO WISCONSIN A V E N U E �V Economic and Marketability Report -71- �From t h e s t a n d p o i n t o f e c o n o m i c s , t h e Development P l a n and Program f o r t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t s e e k s t h e optimum development o f t h e unique Georgetown community. With t h i s o b j e c t i v e , i tsuggests c o n t r o l s t h a t would r e s t r i c t t h e f o r c e s of t h e f r e e market. I t s b a s i c premise i s t h a t f a i l u r e to e x e r c i s e these c o n t r o l s could have a s e r i o u s l y n e g a t i v e impact upon t h e economy o f t h i s v i t a l community a n d a c o n s e q u e n t l y a d v e r s e e f f e c t upon t h e economy o f t h e D i s t r i c t o f C o l u m b i a . The P l a n t h e r e f o r e t a k e s i s s u e w i t h t h e p r o p o s i t i o n t h a t t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t s h o u l d be a l l o w e d t o grow a t a d e n s i t y d i c t a t e d by t h e r e a l e s t a t e m a r k e t . I t maintains t h a t such a p o l i c y would n o t produce n e t economic b e n e f i t s t o t h e D i s t r i c t , despite the short-run ballooning of real estate ratables. T h i s p o l i c y could have t h e opposite e f f e c t . I tcould not only s e t i n t o motion f o r c e s t h a t could a d v e r s e l y a f f e c t t h e wealth and p r o d u c t i v i t y o f t h e Georgetown community, b u t i t c o u l d a l s o w e a k e n t h e D i s t r i c t ' s e f f o r t s t o a t t r a c t new p r i v a t e i n v e s t m e n t s t o o t h e r p a r t s o f t h e c e n t r a l a r e a t h a t need r e development . The c o n t e n t i o n t h a t t h e D i s t r i c t w o u l d g a i n b y a l l o w i n g t h e G e o r g e t o w n W a t e r f r o n t t o d e v e l o p t o t h e maximum m a r k e t l e v e l s f l i e s i n t h e face of t h e hard f a c t s o f competitive economics. I t f a i l s t o take i n t o account t h e e f f e c t s o f o v e r b u i l d i n g , t r a f f i c overloads, pedestrian congestion, high density, v i s u a l b l i g h t , and n o i s e a n d a i r p o l l u t i o n on community v i ability. I n a n e f f o r t t o t a k e maximum a d v a n t a g e o f one o f the few o p p o r t u n i t i e s a v a i l a b l e t o t h e c e n t r a l c i t y i n t h e s e a r c h f o r m u n i c i p a l r e v e n u e s , i t r i s k s k i l l i n g t h e goose t h a t l a y s t h e cfolden egg. I t c o u l d be a s h o r t - s " i g h t e d p o l i c y t-hgt- f a i l R _ _ t o p u t ^ 1 1 o f t h e r e l e v a n t f a c t o r s i n t o t h e c o s t benefit equation. The f a c t s a r e c l e a r a n d s i m p l e . The Georgetown community i s one o f t h e D i s t r i c t ' s m o s t p r o d u c t i v e e c o n o m i c e n c l a v e s , p r o ducing m u n i c i p a l revenues f a ri n excess o f m u n i c i p a l s e r v i c e requirements. The s t r e n g t h o f i t s t a x base depends d i r e c t l y upon t h e m a i n t e n a n c e o f i t s u n i q u e e n v i r o n m e n t a l qualities and c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . I t i s one o f t h e D i s t r i c t ' s f e w s u b economies t h a t i s v i a b l e and c o m p e t i t i v e w i t h i n t h e metrop o l i t a n economic framework, g e n e r a t i n g both p r i v a t e i n v e s t ments and consumer patronage. Y e t i ti s a l r e a d y a t a point close to the tipping point i n i t s capacity to maintain i t s comparative advantages. -72- �O n l y h a l f o f t h e D i s t r i c t ' s m u n i c i p a l r e v e n u e s comes f r o m l o c a l sources. The economic base from which those revenues are d e r i v e d - i n employment, p e r s o n a l and c o r p o r a t e income, r e a l e s t a t e v a l u e s , r e t a i l i n g and s e r v i c e s - i s l i m i t e d . T h i s p u t s a h e a v y premium upon m a i n t a i n i n g the v i a b i l i t y of the productive apparatus w i t h i n the D i s t r i c t ' s boundaries. Between 1958 and 1 9 6 7 , t h e D i s t r i c t l o s t a n e t o f n e a r l y 2,000 s e r v i c e b u s i n e s s e s a n d e n t r e p r e n e u r s h i p s representing thousands o f j o b s , t a x d o l l a r s and business opportunities. Beyond t h e g a i n s i n downtown o f f i c e b u i l d i n g construction and h i g h - c o s t r e s i d e n t i a l d e v e l o p m e n t s i n a l i m i t e d number o f k e y s p o t s , t h e D i s t r i c t ' s economy i s i n t h e p r o c e s s o f s t a g n a t i o n under t h e f o r c e s o f d i s i n v e s t m e n t . C e r t a i n l y t h e a n s w e r t o t h e s e a d v e r s e p r e s s u r e s upon t h e D i s t r i c t economy i s n o t t o o v e r l o a d one o f t h e f e w v i a b l e sub-economies w i t h i n t h e D i s t r i c t ' s boundaries. The h i s t o r y of c e n t r a l - c i t y d e c l i n e throughout t h e United S t a t e s i s r e p l e t e with examples o f attempts t o o f f s e t t h e e f f e c t s o f suburban c a p i t a l flow by m i l k i n g t h e few " h o t " r e a l e s t a t e sub-areas i n the c e n t r a l c i t y . T h i s h a s r e s u l t e d i n many cases i n d e s t r o y i n g t h e v e r y a m e n i t i e s t h a t gave those subareas t h e i r unique q u a l i t y . This i s the issue that the D i s t r i c t Government f a c e s i n t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t . T h e GPG P l a n d o e s n o t c a l l f o r a " n o - g r o w t h " o r n o n - d e v e l o p ment p o l i c y f o r t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t . Q u i t e t h e opposite: i t c a l l s f o r a d i v e r s i f i e d r e s i d e n t i a l a n d comm e r c i a l c o m p l e x t o r e p l a c e outmoded i n d u s t r i a l u s e s . I t a l l o w s an e x p a n s i o n from an e x i s t i n g 1,500,000 s q u a r e f e e t o f b u i l d i n g s p a c e t o n e a r l y 3,500,000 s q u a r e f e e t . Even so, t h i s l e v e l o f d e v e l o p m e n t w o u l d be f a r l e s s t h a n w h a t w o u l d be a l l o w e d u n d e r e x i s t i n g z o n i n g i f m o d i f i e d t o a l l o w r e sponses t o d i v e r s e r e s i d e n t i a l and commercial market p r e s s u r e s . T h e P l a n i s t h e m a x i m u m t h a t t h e a r e a c a n a f f o r d t o accommodate without producing serious counter-effects f o r the highlyp r o d u c t i v e Georgetown sub-economy. These economic development c a v e a t s o f t h e P l a n f o r t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t a r e n o t a p o s t - r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n o f recommendat i o n s b a s e d on "non-economic" c o n s i d e r a t i o n s s u c h a s e t h e t i c s or design. They a r e f a c t o r s t h a t have d e c i s i v e l y i n f l u e n c e d the l a n d use and zoning c o n t r o l s t h a t a r e being proposed. They r e p r e s e n t t h e k i n d s o f c o n s i d e r a t i o n s t h a t j u s t i f y p l a n n i n g a s a b a s i s f o r sound p u b l i c p o l i c y . They p u t a l t e r n a t i v e p o l i c i e s w i t h i n t h e framework o f c o s t - b e n e f i t a n a l y s i s , a d i s c i p l i n e that i s p a r t i c u l a r l y c r i t i c a l to decision-making i n t h e D i s t r i c t w i t h i t s l i m i t e d t a x s u p p o r t i n g economic structure. -73- �The Cost-Benefit Approach The c r i t i c a l e l e m e n t i n c o s t - b e n e f i t a n a l y s i s i s p u t t i n g relevant f a c t o r s into the equation. the L i m i t i n g the c o s t - b e n e f i t equation t o the production of add i t i o n a l t a x a b l e v a l u e s on s p e c i f i c p i e c e s o f r e a l e s t a t e o r to t h e p o t e n t i a l employment c r e a t e d by s p e c i f i c p a r c e l developments i s a d i s t o r t i o n of the concept. C e r t a i n l y these p o t e n t i a l t a x v a l u e s and employment o p p o r t u n i t i e s a r e important. T h e y a r e o b v i o u s " b e n e f i t s " . One m u s t l o o k t o t h e " c o s t " s i d e of the equation, however, t o g e t t h e appropriate p e r s p e c t i v e f o r sound p u b l i c p o l i c y . I n t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t , t h e r e a r e two i m p o r t a n t c o s t a s p e c t s i n a d d i t i o n t o t h e immediate tax-and-employment benefits: 1. The c o s t e f f e c t s o f a l t e r n a t i v e development p a t t e r n s and l e v e l s on t h e c o n t i n u e d v i a b i l i t y o f t h e G e o r g e t o w n s u b economy, a l r e a d y c o m m i t t e d ; and 2. T h e c o s t e f f e c t s o f t h e s e d e v e l o p m e n t p a t t e r n s a n d l e v e l s on o t h e r s u b - e c o n o m i e s w i t h i n t h e D i s t r i c t a n d on t h e D i s t r i c t Government's e f f o r t t o d e a l w i t h development and redevelopment p r o b l e m s elsewhere. T h e s e two s u b j e c t s w i l l be e x p l o r e d i n more d e t a i l l a t e r . The c o n t r i b u t i o n s t h a t t h e Georgetown sub-economy makes t o t h e D i s t r i c t - and h e n c e t h e D i s t r i c t ' s v i a b i l i t y - w i l l be spelled out. The c o n t r i b u t i o n s t h a t a p o l i c y o f c o n t r o l l e d W a t e r f r o n t d e v e l o p m e n t c a n make t o d e v e l o p m e n t s e l s e w h e r e w i l l a l s o be more f u l l y e x a m i n e d , w i t h d i r e c t a p p l i c a t i o n s to r e a l i s t i c development s i t u a t i o n s o f importance t o the c i t y ' s economic h e a l t h . F i r s t , an o v e r a l l s e t o f c o s t - b e n e f i t cons i d e r a t i o n s w i l l be s e t f o r t h . T o r e c a s t p o i n t s made e a r l i e r , G e o r g e t o w n i s now o n e o f t h e D i s t r i c t ' s most v i a b l e and p r o d u c t i v e sub-economies. The e s s e n c e o f i t s economic s t r e n g t h i s i t su n i q u e p h y s i c a l and environmental amenities. I t sresidential real estate values are the highest i n the c i t y ; the importance of i t sunique p h y s i c a l a t t r i b u t e s i s such that - u n l i k e other areas i n the metropolitan area - i t sr e s i d e n t i a l land v a l u e s ( a s r e f l e c t e d i n assessments) a r e c o n s i d e r a b l y higher than t h e improvements on t h e l a n d . R e s i d e n t i a l r e a l e s t a t e i n Georgetown i s a t a premium, not because i t shouses a r e b e t t e r b u t because i t s p h y s i c a l and l o c a t i o n a m e n i t i e s - t h e "place u t i l i t y " o f i t s economic a s s e t s - a r e u n i q u e l y d e s i r a b l e . �S i m i l a r l y i t s a t t r a c t i o n as a r e t a i l , entertainment and s p e c i a l i z e d o f f i c e area are environmentally based. Nearly t w o - t h i r d s o f G e o r g e t o w n ' s r e t a i l p a t r o n a g e comes f r o m o u t side the D i s t r i c t . The e s s e n c e o f i t s a p p e a l i s i t s u n i q u e p h y s i c a l q u a l i t i e s making f o r h i g h l y s a t i s f a c t o r y browsing and c o m p a r a t i v e s h o p p i n g i n t h e d a y t i m e and e x c i t i n g entertainment experiences i n the evening. Georgetown i s a b l e t o accommodate b o t h t h e s t r o n g e s t r e s i d e n t i a l m a r k e t i n t h e D i s t r i c t and a b r o a d - b a s e d 24-hour a c t i v i t y s c h e d u l e f o r i t s r e s i d e n t s and o u t s i d e p a t r o n s . T h i s i s a unique accomplishment w i t h i n t h e m e t r o p o l i t a n a r e a and r e p r e s e n t s a c o m p l e x o f p r o d u c t i v e u r b a n a c t i v i t i e s s o u g h t by c i t i e s a l l o v e r the county. The m a i n t e n a n c e o f t h i s p r o d u c t i v e m i x o f u s e s , a c t i v i t i e s and economic v a l u e s i s i m p o r t a n t t o t h e D i s t r i c t . With i t s l i m i t e d economic base o u t s i d e the F e d e r a l Government, the City i s locked into limited sources of l o c a l l y generated municipal revenue. I t has the s m a l l e s t r e l a t i v e s e c t o r of m a n u f a c t u r i n g o f a n y m a j o r U.S. city; i t s role as the s h o p p e r s - g o o d s r e t a i l i n g c e n t e r h a s b e e n t a k e n o v e r by massive r e g i o n a l developments a t suburban l o c a t i o n s ; i t i s a t t r a c t i n g o n l y a s m a l l p a r t o f t h e new p r i v a t e investment t h a t i s b e i n g made i n t h e m e t r o p o l i t a n r e g i o n . I t i s t r u e , of c o u r s e , t h a t t h e D i s t r i c t ' s employment base i s h e a v i l y u n d e r g i r d e d by t h e F e d e r a l e s t a b l i s h m e n t , and i t s d o w n t o w n o f f i c e c o r e i s one o f t h e l a r g e s t a n d f a s t e s t g r o w ing i n the n a t i o n . Most o f t h e D i s t r i c t ' s l a b o r f o r c e l i v e s and spends i n t h e s u b u r b a n a r e a s , h o w e v e r . The number o f v i a b l e and p r o d u c t i v e p h y s i c a l e n c l a v e s w i t h i n t h e c i t y i s limited. The s t e a d y d r a i n o f e n t r e p r e n e u r s h i p s and b u s i n e s s e s to the suburbs i n face of the growth of the c e n t r a l o f f i c e c o r e i s s y m b o l i c o f t h e w e a k n e s s o f t h e b a s i c economy, a w e a k n e s s t h a t h a s p l a c e d s h a r p r e s t r i c t i o n s on t h e f i s c a l c a p a c i t i e s of the D i s t r i c t Government. T h i s i s why t h e p o t e n t i a l o v e r l o a d i n g a n d o v e r c r o w d i n g of Georgetown, which can t h r e a t e n the v i a b i l i t y of t h i s unique sub-economy, i s a t h r e a t t o t h e D i s t r i c t as a w h o l e . Most o f t h e e x i s t i n g s t r e e t s o f G e o r g e t o w n a r e now o p e r a t i n g a t or near c a p a c i t y . Under t h e P l a n , a d d i t i o n a l c a p a c i t i e s w i l l be a d d e d , b u t t h e r e a r e c l e a r l y l i m i t s t o t h e t r a f f i c t h a t c a n be e f f i c i e n t l y a c c o m m o d a t e d . As p r o p o s e d , t h e P l a n pushes these l i m i t s . The p r o p o s e d c e i l i n g s on Waterfront d e v e l o p m e n t a r e r e g a r d e d a s e s s e n t i a l i f t h e p r e s s u r e s upon the Georgetown environment a r e not to j e o p a r d i z e the amenit i e s which a r e a t the base of the community's economic strength. -75- �T h e r e i s no w a y o f d e t e r m i n i n g t h e " t i p p i n g p o i n t " b e y o n d w h i c h a d v e r s e o v e r d e v e l o p m e n t p r e s s u r e s w i l l s h o w up i n a d e c l i n e i n t h e Georgetown economy. The P l a n i s an a t t e m p t t o a c c o m m o d a t e a c o m p r e h e n s i v e r a n g e o f new u s e s w i t h i n t h e f r a m e w o r k o f some r e a s o n a b l e l i m i t s . The d e v e l o p m e n t f o r c e s i n the Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t are l e g i t i m a t e market f o r c e s r e f l e c t i n g c l e a r demands f o r o c c u p a n c y and p a t r o n a g e ; the D i s t r i c t needs t h i s d e v e l o p m e n t , and p a r t i c u l a r l y t h e new mix of uses t h a t i t w i l l r e p r e s e n t . The o b v i o u s b e n e f i t s t o t h e D i s t r i c t , h o w e v e r , m u s t be b a l a n c e d a g a i n s t t h e c o s t s i n h e r e n t i n the t h r e a t t h a t overdevelopment poses. A l t h o u g h no " t i p p i n g p o i n t " c a n b e d e f i n e d a n d no d e f i n i t i v e c a s e made f o r t h e s p e c i f i c c e i l i n g s s e t b y t h e P l a n , t h e ways i n which overdevelopment can undermine the " p l a c e u t i l i t y " o f t h e G e o r g e t o w n s u b - e c o n o m y c a n be i d e n t i f i e d . Collector and i n t e r n a l s t r e e t s on b o t h s i d e s o f M S t r e e t , a l r e a d y c r o w d e d , c a n become i n c r e a s i n g l y c o n g e s t e d , n o i s y and d a n gerous. I t w i l l be i n c r e a s i n g l y d i f f i c u l t t o p r o v i d e a d e quate parking except a t the expense of e x i s t i n g s t r u c t u r e s and a m e n i t i e s t h a t a r e i m p o r t a n t t o t h e a r e a ' s a t t r a c t i v e ness. V i s t a s , o p e n s p a c e s , a n d a r e a w a y s c a n be o b l i t e r a t e d o r d e s t r o y e d i n v a l u e by e x c e s s i v e b u l k and d e n s i t y o f b u i l d ings. Economic p r e s s u r e s r e f l e c t e d i n c o n t i n u o u s l y r i s i n g l a n d v a l u e s can f o r c e the removal of important historic buildings. On t h e W a t e r f r o n t i t s e l f , t h e f e a t u r e s t h a t m a k e i t a t t r a c t i v e f o r new i n v e s t m e n t s c a n t h e m s e l v e s b e j e o p a r d i z e d by e x c e s s i v e d e n s i t i e s . The r e s u l t c a n be a d i m i n u t i o n i n G e o r g e t o w n ' s p o w e r o f a t t r a c t i o n as a p l a c e t o l i v e , work, shop, v i s i t , and f i n d entertainment. O v e r t i m e t h i s c a n mean a d i r e c t l o s s i n t a x d o l l a r s to the D i s t r i c t . The p r o c e s s o f r e d e v e l o p m e n t t h a t o v e r t h e p a s t 30 y e a r s h a s b r o u g h t G e o r g e t o w n t o i t s p r e s e n t h i g h l e v e l o f v i a b i l i t y and p r o d u c t i v i t y i s c l e a r l y r e v e r s i b l e ; t h e e s s e n c e o f s o u n d p u b l i c p o l i c y s h o u l d be n o t t o a l l o w t h e negative forces to take hold. I t i s p r e c i s e l y because suburban areas o f f e r s p e c i a l amenities t h a t much o f t h e o u t w a r d f l i g h t o f m a r k e t demand a n d p r i v a t e investment t a k e s p l a c e ( q u i t e a p a r t from the obvious a v a i l a b i l i t y of expansion l a n d ) . I t i s p r e c i s e l y because Georget o w n now o f f e r s u n i q u e a m e n i t i e s o f i t s own t h a t t h e r e h a s b e e n a c o u n t e r f l o w o f m a r k e t demand and i n v e s t m e n t into r a t h e r than out of t h i s p a r t i c u l a r c e n t r a l - c i t y e n c l a v e . And i t i s p r e c i s e l y b e c a u s e t h e f a c t o r s t h a t h a v e c r e a t e d t h i s i n w a r d f l o w c a n g i v e way a g a i n t o p r e s s u r e s i n t h e o p p o s i t e d i r e c t i o n t h a t a strong p u b l i c p o l i c y i n f a v o r of development c o n t r o l s i n the Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t i s needed. -76- �O V E R A L L DISTRICT REDEVELOPMENT The t e x t above has b e e n c o n c e r n e d w i t h accommodating new growth i n the Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t w i t h i n development l i m i t s t h a t can p r o t e c t the Georgetown sub-economy a g a i n s t c o u n t e r f o r c e s o f o v e r - b u i l d i n g and o v e r - c o n g e s t i o n - c o n c e r n e d , t h a t i s , w i t h b r i n g i n g t h e d i r e c t c o s t s and b e n e f i t s o f waterfront development i n t o r e a l i s t i c balance. The o t h e r c o s t e l e m e n t i n t h e c o s t - b e n e f i t e q u a t i o n i s i n d i r e c t but of equal importance. Involved i s the s e t of imp l i c a t i o n s t h a t a w a t e r f r o n t development p o l i c y can have f o r other redevelopment e f f o r t s i n the c e n t r a l areas of the D i s t r i c t of Columbia. T h e r e l e v a n t e l e m e n t s t o be t a k e n i n t o account i n t h i s e v a l u a t i o n would include the following: 1. As a " h o t " r e a l e s t a t e a r e a i n w h i c h a c o m b i n a t i o n o f a t t r a c t i v e f a c t o r s a r e c r e a t i n g s t r o n g d e v e l o p m e n t and i n v e s t ment i n t e r e s t , t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t r e p r e s e n t s a m a r k e t f o r 9 , 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 s q u a r e f e e t o f new r e s i d e n t i a l a n d c o m m e r c i a l b u i l d i n g space. 2. T h i s i s o v e r t w i c e t h e v o l u m e o f p o t e n t i a l d e v e l o p m e n t that wise public policy should allow i n t h i s area i n order t o p r o t e c t t h e sub-economy's v i a b i l i t y and p r o d u c t i v i t y . 3. M e a n w h i l e , t h e D i s t r i c t G o v e r n m e n t i s e n g a g e d i n m a s s i v e and e x p e n s i v e u r b a n r e n e w a l e f f o r t s t o a t t r a c t p r i v a t e i n vestments i n t o other c e n t r a l redevelopment areas, the r e c y c l i n g of which i s important to the v i a b i l i t y of the D i s t r i c t ' s o v e r a l l economy. 4. M e a n w h i l e , a l s o , t h e D i s t r i c t G o v e r n m e n t i s e n g a g e d i n p l a n s t o t a k e a d v a n t a g e o f t h e new M e t r o r e g i o n a l r a p i d t r a n s i t s y s t e m f o c u s e d upon t h e D i s t r i c t ' s c e n t r a l a r e a and pot e n t i a l l y capable of producing major development enclaves a r o u n d c l o s e - i n subway s t o p s . 5. I n a d d i t i o n , t h e r e a r e a c t i v e p l a n s b y p r i v a t e i n t e r e s t s to redevelop large sections of the c e n t r a l area without urban r e n e w a l a s s i s t a n c e , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t h e West End a r e a imm e d i a t e l y e a s t of Georgetown. These f a c t s would suggest t h a t the D i s t r i c t ' s development p o l i c i e s v i s - a - v i s t h e G e o r g e t o w n W a t e r f r o n t s h o u l d be put w i t h i n t h e f r a m e w o r k o f an o v e r a l l r e d e v e l o p m e n t s t r a t e g y f o r the c e n t r a l area as a whole. I n c i t y a f t e r c i t y , urban r e n e w a l and o t h e r c e n t r a l a r e a r e d e v e l o p m e n t e f f o r t s h a v e been j e o p a r d i z e d and c u r t a i l e d by t h e " l e a k a g e " o f p r i v a t e i n v e s t m e n t f u n d s r e s u l t i n g f r o m p u b l i c p o l i c i e s t h a t s u p p o r t comp e t i t i v e development p r o j e c t s . The r a t i o n a l e i s p e r s u a s i v e . -77- �The p r i v a t e funds "want" t o f l o w t o t h e "hot" r e a l e s t a t e a r e a s and i f t h e s e m a r k e t p r e s s u r e s a r e n o t accommodated through t h e r e l a x i n g o f zoning o r other p u b l i c supporting m e a s u r e s t h e y w i l l be o t h e r w i s e l o s t t o t h e m u n i c i p a l i t y . B u t p l a n n i n g a n d z o n i n g t h u s move i n o n e d i r e c t i o n a n d r e development e f f o r t s i n t h e o t h e r . T h e r e i s , o f c o u r s e , no g u a r a n t e e t h a t p r i v a t e i n v e s t m e n t s n o t made i n t h e " h o t " r e a l e s t a t e a r e a s a r e a u t o m a t i c a l l y t r a n s f e r a b l e t o other c e n t r a l a r e a development p r o j e c t s i n which there i s a strong p u b l i c i n t e r e s t . I ti s t h eabsence o f f a v o r a b l e development f a c t o r s i n these o t h e r a r e a s t h a t brought about t h e i r economic d e c l i n e i n t h e f i r s t place. I t i s d i f f i c u l t t o c r e a t e a new s e t o f f a v o r a b l e conditions that can reverse the adverse trends o f the past. B u t s e v e r a l o t h e r p o i n t s m u s t b e made - a n d t h e y a r e d i r e c t l y a p p l i c a b l e t o t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t s i t u a t i o n . Much o f t h e demand g e n e r a t e d by t h e a c t i v e m a r k e t a r e a s s u c h a s G e o r g e t o w n i s c e n t r a l - o r i e n t e d demand t h a t i s n o t r e s t r i c t e d to a p a r t i c u l a r l o c a t i o n . I t w i l l f i l l spaces and c r e a t e patronage i n any c e n t r a l a r e a l o c a t i o n i n which development takes place. I n s h o r t , much o f t h i s m a r k e t demand i s t r a n s f e r a b l e given t h e type o f development t h a t o f f e r s t h e necess a r y amenities and economies. I ti s n o t " l o s t " i fi t i s r e s t r i c t e d from a p a r t i c u l a r a r e a ; i t i s made e f f e c t i v e a t other c e n t r a l - a r e a developments o r i t remains l a t e n t u n t i l s u c h new d e v e l o p m e n t s t a k e p l a c e . I n t h e D i s t r i c t o f C o l u m b i a , a new s e t o f c o n d i t i o n s i s b e i n g created a t key spots i n the c e n t r a l area which, i n the course o f n e a r - t e r m t i m i n g , s h o u l d s t i m u l a t e new i n t e r e s t o n t h e p a r t of developers and i n v e s t o r s . I t h a s been a l o n g , h a r d p u l l for c e n t r a l a r e a urban renewal - long d e l a y s i n c l e a r a n c e , heavy c o m p e t i t i o n from c l o s e - i n developments o u t s i d e t h e D i s t r i c t ( a si n Rosslyn and C r y s t a l C i t y ) , delays i n t r a f f i c improvements, p h y s i c a l d i s o r g a n i z a t i o n caused by Metro cons t r u c t i o n , and t h e p s y c h o l o g i c a l as w e l l a s p h y s i c a l a f t e r math o f t h e i n n e r - c i t y r i o t s . Up a h e a d i n t h e i m m e d i a t e f u t u r e , h o w e v e r , p r o s p e c t s f o r a t t r a c t i n g new c e n t r a l - a r e a investments look b r i g h t e r . There h a s been a l a r g e - s c a l e deployment o f p u b l i c funds e a s t o f 1 4 t h S t r e e t , r e p r e s e n t e d b y new p a t t e r n s o f g o v e r n m e n t o f f i c e b u i l d i n g s and p h y s i c a l improvements i n t r a f f i c f a cilities. New p u b l i c w o r k s p r o j e c t s a r e r e n o v a t i n g t h e c o r e of t h e r e t a i l d i s t r i c t . The p r o j e c t e d Eisenhower Memorial C o n v e n t i o n C e n t e r a n d t h e new V i s i t o r s C e n t e r a t U n i o n S t a t i o n w i l l u n d e r g i r d new p r i v a t e r e d e v e l o p m e n t e f f o r t s . Programs o f -78- �t h e P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue Development C o m m i s s i o n and various p r o j e c t s planned i n connection w i t h the B i c e n t e n n i a l c e l e b r a t i o n w i l l be o t h e r d e v e l o p m e n t c a t a l y s t s . Completion of the c e n t r a l s e c t i o n s of the Metro r a p i d t r a n s i t system w i l l set the stage f o r f u r t h e r redevelopment a c t i v i t i e s . Two p o i n t s r e l a t e t h e s e new d e v e l o p m e n t p o t e n t i a l s d i r e c t l y to the Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t p o l i c y c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . One is t h a t e m e r g e n c e o f t h e s e new d e v e l o p m e n t o p p o r t u n i t i e s should undermine the c r e d i b i l i t y of the i d e a t h a t the D i s t r i c t G o v e r n m e n t m u s t a l l o w "maximum" d e v e l o p m e n t a l o n g t h e G e o r g e town W a t e r f r o n t b e c a u s e o f l i m i t e d o p p o r t u n i t i e s elsewhere. T h i s i s no l o n g e r a v a l i d i d e a , i f i n d e e d i t e v e r w a s . The o t h e r i s t h a t much o f t h e c e n t r a l - o r i e n t e d m a r k e t t h a t c o u l d b e e f f e c t i v e l y c a p t u r e d i n G e o r g e t o w n m i g h t be d i r e c t l y t r a n s f e r a b l e to other c e n t r a l redevelopment p r o j e c t s i f the " l e a k a g e " i s p l u g g e d up b y e f f e c t i v e c o n t r o l s . I t i s poss i b l e to e l i m i n a t e the " c o s t " i n the p u b l i c c o s t - b e n e f i t equation represented by d i s s i p a t i o n o f p r i v a t e f u n d s f r o m p r o j e c t s w h e r e t h e y a r e m o s t n e e d e d by t h e i m p o s i t i o n of development c o n t r o l s i n the c u r r e n t l y "hot" Georgetown a r e a . Important i s s u e s of p u b l i c p o l i c y are involved here. Millions of d o l l a r s of p u b l i c funds have been spent to c r e a t e condit i o n s favorable to p r i v a t e redevelopment i n urban renewal areas. M i l l i o n s more h a v e b e e n s p e n t , a s p a r t o f a d e l i b e r a t e p u b l i c s t r a t e g y , t o d e p l o y p u b l i c b u i l d i n g s and facilities w h e r e t h e y c a n h a v e t h e maximum m u l t i p l i e r e f f e c t on p r i v a t e r e a l e s t a t e and e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l a c t i v i t i e s - by c r e a t i n g new consumer m a r k e t s , e l i m i n a t i n g o b s o l e s c e n t b u i l d i n g s , and improving physical environments. More m i l l i o n s h a v e b e e n s p e n t on a r a p i d t r a n s i t s y s t e m w h o s e p o t e n t i a l b e n e f i t s a s a c e n t r a l r e d e v e l o p m e n t t o o l h a v e l o n g b e e n r e c o g n i z e d t o be as important as i t s i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r t r a n s p o r t a t i o n . To make t h e s e p u b l i c i n v e s t m e n t s p a y o f f , t h e r e s h o u l d be a n o v e r a l l development s t r a t e g y t h a t prevents c o s t l y d i v e r s i o n s of f u n d s w h i l e a t t h e same t i m e p r o v i d i n g i n c e n t i v e s f o r development where i t i s most needed. N o t e s h o u l d be p a r t i c u l a r l y t a k e n o f t h e r e d e v e l o p m e n t pot e n t i a l s i n the West End a r e a i m m e d i a t e l y e a s t o f Georgetown. T h i s h i g h l y s t r a t e g i c a r e a f l a n k e d by R o c k C r e e k P a r k on the w e s t a n d P e n n s y l v a n i a a n d M a s s a c h u s e t t s A v e n u e s on t h e s o u t h and n o r t h i s r i p e f o r r e d e v e l o p m e n t w i t h i t s i m m e d i a t e p r o x i m i t y t o t h e a d j a c e n t f u n c t i o n a l a r e a s o f Foggy Bottom, G e o r g e W a s h i n g t o n U n i v e r s i t y , E m b a s s y Row, the c e n t r a l o f f i c e c o r e , and t h e G e o r g e t o w n community. No a r e a i n t h e D i s t r i c t o f f e r s s u c h a p o t e n t i a l f o r g e n e r a t i n g new r e a l e s t a t e i n v e s t m e n t s and t a x d o l l a r s . A l a r g e - s c a l e r e d e v e l o p m e n t p r o g r a m f o r W e s t E n d i s now b e i n g p u t t o g e t h e r b y p r i v a t e i n - i -79- �terests; development c o n t r o l s i n the Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t c o u l d h a v e a s a l u t a r y e f f e c t upon t h e p r o s p e c t s o f t h i s p r i vate program. Conversely, the absence of such c o n t r o l s c o u l d be a n e g a t i v e f a c t o r i n a l l o w i n g a d i v e r s i o n o f m a r k e t demands t h a t c o u l d be more a d v a n t a g e o u s l y met i n t h e adj a c e n t West End area. THE DISTRICT'S DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY T h e r e i s no e s c a p i n g t h e f a c t t h a t t h e a d o p t i o n o f p o l i c i e s r e l a t i n g t o d e v e l o p m e n t on t h e G e o r g e t o w n W a t e r f r o n t i n v o l v e s a broader p e r s p e c t i v e t h a t must c o v e r the i m p l i c a t i o n s of these p o l i c i e s f o r what happens elsewhere i n the D i s t r i c t . The c o n c e r n e x p r e s s e d i n t h i s r e p o r t , p u t w i t h i n t h e context of a c o s t - b e n e f i t approach r a i s e s the f o l l o w i n g a d d i t i o n a l q u e s t i o n s beyond the i m p l i c a t i o n s of w a t e r f r o n t development f o r the Georgetown community i t s e l f : - What a r e t h e c o s t s o f a l l o w i n g an " e x c e s s i v e " d i v e r s i o n o f p r i v a t e d o l l a r s i n t o an a r e a l i k e t h e Georgetown Waterfront through permissive zoning, c a l c u l a t i n g these costs i n t e r m s o f t h e p o t e n t i a l e f f e c t s upon r e d e v e l o p m e n t e f f o r t s elsewhere? - What a r e t h e b e n e f i t s - t o o t h e r r e d e v e l o p m e n t e f f o r t s as w e l l as those i n Georgetown - of a p p l y i n g c e i l i n g s i n the Waterfront that might r e s u l t i n t r a n s f e r r i n g p r i v a t e investment dollars elsewhere? No p r e c i s e e s t i m a t e s c a n be made o f t h e d o l l a r v o l u m e o f t r a n s f e r a b l e i n v e s t m e n t s f r o m o n e a r e a t o a n o t h e r ( a l t h o u g h some f i g u r e s w i l l be e x a m i n e d i n s u b s e q u e n t p a r a g r a p h s r e l a t i n g t o t h e w a t e r f r o n t d i v e r s i o n p o t e n t i a l ) . T h i s i s why t h e i s s u e m u s t be c a s t i n t e r m s o f o v e r a l l p o l i c y d i r e c t i o n s a n d dev e l o p m e n t s t r a t e g i e s . The b a s i c p r o p o s i t i o n t h a t t h e r e i s a range of p o t e n t i a l c o s t s and b e n e f i t s r e s u l t i n g from p o l i c y p o s i t i o n s t a k e n by t h e D i s t r i c t G o v e r n m e n t c a n s e t f o r t h e v e n i f i t i s not p o s s i b l e to p r e c i s e l y q u a n t i f y the i m p l i c a t i o n s . R a t i o n a l p o l i c i e s do n o t d e p e n d e x c l u s i v e l y - i f e v e n p r e d o m i n a n t l y - on s t a t i s t i c a l p r o o f f o r t h e i r r a t i o n a l i t y . I t i s d i r e c t l y r e l e v a n t to these c o n s i d e r a t i o n s to examine a g a i n the economic p l i g h t i n which the D i s t r i c t f i n d s i t s e l f . T h e p r e s s u r e s t o d e v e l o p new t a x r e v e n u e s a n d a t t h e s a m e time to check the outward d i v e r s i o n of jobs, investment, b u s i n e s s e s and w e a l t h a r e e x t r e m e l y p r e s s i n g . Under the circumstances, i t i s l o g i c a l t o e x p e c t an o f f i c i a l i n c l i n a t i o n t o a l l o w t h e maximum d e v e l o p m e n t i n a p r o d u c t i v e real e s t a t e e n c l a v e l i k e the Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t i n o r d e r to -80- �g e t new r a t a b l e s o n t h e a s s e s s m e n t b o o k s a n d new e m p l o y m e n t in the labor force. I t m i g h t , h o w e v e r , be t h e w r o n g s t r a t e g y f o r t h e a r e a i n v o l v e d ( a s d i s c u s s e d e a r l i e r ) and i n terms o f i t s i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r development p o t e n t i a l s elsewhere. B e h i n d t h e i m p r e s s i v e g a i n s i n " a t - p l a c e " employment i n t h e D i s t r i c t ( a n i n c r e a s e i n 118,000 j o b s b e t w e e n 1960 and 1970) are the following sobering facts r e l a t i n g to trends i n the D i s t r i c t ' s economic s t r u c t u r e : 1 . T h e D i s t r i c t l o s t a n e t t o t a l o f 1,326 r e t a i l e s t a b l i s h m e n t s b e t w e e n 1958 a n d 1 9 6 7 , one o u t o f f i v e o f i t s 1968 number. D u r i n g t h e same p e r i o d , t h e r e s t o f t h e m e t r o p o l i t a n a r e a added a n e t t o t a l o f 2,595 e s t a b l i s h m e n t s . 2. T h e D i s t r i c t l o s t a n e t t o t a l o f 4 1 8 r e t a i l s e r v i c e e s t a b l i s h m e n t s d u r i n g t h e same p e r i o d , w h i l e t h e s u b u r b a n a r e a s w e r e g a i n i n g 2,478 s u c h e n t e r p r i s e s . 3. T h e D i s t r i c t l o s t 1 6 8 p e r s o n a l s e r v i c e e s t a b l i s h m e n t s i n t h a t p e r i o d i n f a c e o f a g a i n o f 1,458 i n t h e o u t l y i n g a r e a s . 4. T h e r e w e r e f e w e r h o t e l a n d m o t e l e s t a b l i s h m e n t s i n 1 9 6 7 t h a n t h e r e w e r e i n 1 9 5 8 , b u t 126 more i n t h e m e t r o p o l i t a n suburbs. 5. I n t h e p e r i o d b e t w e e n e a r l y 1 9 6 7 a n d t h e s e c o n d h a l f o f 1972, t h e D i s t r i c t a c c o u n t e d f o r o n l y f o u r p e r c e n t - one d o l l a r o u t o f 25 - o f t h e t o t a l v a l u e o f r e s i d e n t i a l b u i l d ing permits i n the Washington M e t r p o l i t a n a r e a . 6. B e t w e e n 1 9 6 0 a n d 1 9 7 0 , t h e D i s t r i c t l o s t a n e t o f 1 0 , 0 0 0 h o u s e h o l d s w h i l e t h e r e m a i n d e r o f t h e m e t r o p o l i t a n a r e a was adding 221,000. 7. I n 1 9 7 0 , 85 p e r c e n t o f M e t r o p o l i t a n W a s h i n g t o n ' s h i g h e r income f a m i l i e s l i v e d o u t s i d e t h e D i s t r i c t o f C o l u m b i a . 8. T h r e e o u t o f f i v e a t - p l a c e j o b s by n o n - r e s i d e n t s o f t h e D i s t r i c t . i n the D i s t r i c t are held Why a r e t h e s e f a c t s r e l e v a n t t o t h e D i s t r i c t G o v e r n m e n t ' s p o s i t i o n on d e v e l o p m e n t i n t h e G e o r g e t o w n W a t e r f r o n t ? There are t h r e e important reasons, a l l o f which have a l r e a d y been briefly alluded to. F i r s t , t h e D i s t r i c t ' s p l i g h t i s e s s e n t i a l l y one o f a " d i s i n v e s t m e n t s y n d r o m e " - an i n c a p a c i t y t o o f f e r t h e y i e l d pot e n t i a l s and s e c u r i t y t h a t can a t t r a c t a l a r g e a c r o s s - t h e board investment of p r i v a t e c a p i t a l i n t o D i s t r i c t p r o j e c t s and e n t e r p r i s e s . T h e r e a r e o b v i o u s i n v e s t m e n t situations within t h e D i s t r i c t where t h e syndrome does n o t o p e r a t e - -81- �i n t h e c e n t r a l o f f i c e b u i l d i n g c o r e and i n c e r t a i n h i g h - v a l u e r e s i d e n t i a l p r o j e c t s , f o r example. But these l u c r a t i v e aberrations are limited. I t i s u r g e n t l y important t h a t the r a n g e o f i n v e s t m e n t and r e - i n v e s t m e n t o p p o r t u n i t i e s w i t h i n t h e D i s t r i c t be v a s t l y e x p a n d e d . Businesses are being l o s t , p r o p e r t y i s d e c a y i n g , and p u b l i c i n v e s t m e n t s a r e l y i n g unp r o d u c t i v e e v e n a s t h e r e i s a boom i n a l i m i t e d n u m b e r o f s e l e c t i v e a r e a s of economic a c t i v i t y . The D i s t r i c t Government m u s t c o n s i d e r , i n a l l o f i t s s t r a t e g i e s a f f e c t i n g development w i t h i n the c i t y , what l e v e r a g e s a r e a v a i l a b l e n o t o n l y t o g e n e r a t e new i n v e s t m e n t i n t e r e s t but a l s o t o encourage the most advantageous deploym e n t o f new i n v e s t m e n t s o n t h e b r o a d e s t p o s s i b l e b a s i s . This means, w h e r e v e r f e a s i b l e , a g e o g r a p h i c a l r e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f i n v e s t m e n t s w h e r e t h e y w i l l do t h e m o s t g o o d . These cons i d e r a t i o n s b e a r d i r e c t l y upon t h e d e v e l o p m e n t p o l i c i e s t h a t g o v e r n t h e l e v e l o f i n v e s t m e n t i n an a c t i v e and v i a b l e market a r e a such as the Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t . To w h a t e x t e n t can i n c r e m e n t a l "Waterfront d o l l a r s " f i l l vacant spaces and support r e v i t a l i z a t i o n e f f o r t s elsewhere? Second, a preponderantly l a r g e p a r t of the D i s t r i c t ' s pot e n t i a l f o r r e v e r s i n g t h e d i s i n v e s t m e n t s y n d r o m e m u s t be r e a l i z e d - a t l e a s t i n the s h o r t run - i n the c e n t r a l area of the c i t y . The D i s t r i c t ' s economy i s h e a v i l y b u i l t upon t h e c e n t r a l - t y p e a c t i v i t i e s g e n e r a t e d by i t s u n i q u e r o l e a s a n a t i o n a l and i n t e r n a t i o n a l p o l i c y c e n t e r . I n economic terms, t h i s i s where the major l i n k a g e s are i n the s t r u c t u r e of employment; i n r e a l e s t a t e terms, the c e n t r a l a r e a i s where the main a c t i o n i s . There are economically a c t i v e e n c l a v e s i n the D i s t r i c t outside the c e n t r a l a r e a , of course, but the g r e a t e s t "pay d i r t " i s t o be f o u n d i n t h e " c e n t r a l e m p l o y ment a r e a " t h a t s t r e t c h e s between Georgetown and U n i o n S t a t i o n on t h e w e s t and e a s t and t h e g e n e r a l M a s s a c h u s e t t s - N e w Y o r k A v e n u e on t h e n o r t h . Money c a n f i n d r e t u r n s i n t h i s area; t h e r e a r e p o t e n t i a l t e n a n t s f o r b u i l d i n g s and p o t e n t i a l patrons f o r shops. L a n d v a l u e s a r e h i g h and l a n d a s s e m b l y i s d i f f i c u l t , b u t p a y - o f f p r o s p e c t s a r e p o t e n t i a l l y good. I n d e a l i n g w i t h t h e s t a g n a t i o n f o r c e s i n t h e c i t y ' s economy i n face of the c e n t r i f u g a l p r e s s u r e s of investment d i s p e r s a l , t h e r e f o r e , the D i s t r i c t Government must put heavy emphasis on c e n t r a l - a r e a p a y - o f f p o t e n t i a l s . T h i s i s not to suggest t h a t t h e s o c i a l and economic needs o r t h e d e v e l o p m e n t p o t e n t i a l s o f o t h e r p a r t s o f t h e D i s t r i c t s h o u l d be n e g l e c t e d . I t i s saying simply t h a t the c e n t r a l area contains the heart of the D i s t r i c t ' s e c o n o m i c m a c h i n e a n d o f f e r s a l m o s t t h e o n l y immedi a t e prospects f o r major, large-scale, a c t i v i t y - g e n e r a t i n g new p r i v a t e i n v e s t m e n t s . The f u n c t i o n s t h a t make up t h i s c e n t r a l economy a r e b o t h n a t i o n a l c a p i t a l and c e n t r a l c i t y functions. They embrace a broad range o f uses - o f f i c e a c t i v i t i e s o f a l l k i n d s , s e r v i c e s t o t o u r i s t s and v i s i t o r s , -82- �c o n v e n t i o n s and m e e t i n g s , s p e c i a l t y r e t a i l i n g , b o t h w o r k i n g c l a s s and l u x u r y h o u s i n g , e n t e r t a i n m e n t and r e c r e a t i o n , c u l t u r e and t h e a r t s , p r o f e s s i o n a l s e r v i c e s , i n s t i t u t i o n a l and o r g a n i z a t i o n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n , e a t i n g and d r i n k i n g a c t i v i t i e s , c e l e b r a t i o n s a n d a s s e m b l i e s , t r a n s i e n t l o d g i n g , a n d s o on a c r o s s an i m p r e s s i v e list. T h e c e n t r a l - t y p e f u n c t i o n s t h a t m a k e up t h e h e a r t o f t h e D i s t r i c t economy - w h i c h m u s t be v i g o r o u s l y e x p l o i t e d i f t h e n e g a t i v e t r e n d s m e n t i o n e d e a r l i e r a r e t o be r e s e r v e d m u s t be a c c o m m o d a t e d w i t h i n a c o n s t a n t l y c h a n g i n g p h y s i c a l environment. The g r e a t e s t c h a l l e n g e s t o e c o n o m i c d e v e l o p m e n t i n the D i s t r i c t of Columbia are r e a l e s t a t e challenges c r e a t i n g the c o n d i t i o n s under which f r e s h c a p i t a l can p r o f i t a b l y a c q u i r e p r o p e r t i e s and make i m p r o v e m e n t s i n w h i c h ent r e p r e n e u r s c a n s u c c e s s f u l l y m e e t t h e s t r o n g i n h e r e n t demands of the market. And t h e i n h e r e n t m a r k e t p r e s s u r e s f o r t h e u n i q u e N a t i o n a l C a p i t a l and c e n t r a l c i t y f u n c t i o n s o f Washi n g t o n a r e i n d e e d s t r o n g , and w i l l r e m a i n s o . They b e l i e the o v e r a l l f a c t s of apparent stagnation i n the D i s t r i c t ' s o v e r a l l economy. And t h e y a r e c e n t r a l a r e a p r e s s u r e s c a l l i n g f o r a c e n t r a l a r e a development s t r a t e g y - hence again the f i r e s t r e l e v a n c e o f t h i s d i s c u s s i o n t o Georgetown as an i n t e g r a l component. T h i r d - and t h i s i s t h e most i m m e d i a t e l y important point to m a k e - t h e c e n t r a l a r e a o f t h e D i s t r i c t o f C o l u m b i a i s now r i p e f o r a tremendous economic t a k e - o f f . The p i e c e s o f a m a j o r c e n t r a l a r e a r e d e v e l o p m e n t a r e a b o u t t o be p u t together. L a r g e - s c a l e o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r new p r i v a t e i n v e s t m e n t s a r e i n the process of being created. And u n l i k e t h e s i t u a t i o n i n m o s t c e n t r a l c i t i e s i n t h e U.S., t h e D i s t r i c t has an i n h e r e n t and p e n t - u p m a r k e t demand c r e a t e d by i t s u n i q u e n a t i o n a l c a p i t a l r o l e t h a t c a n s u p p o r t and s u s t a i n t h e dev e l o p m e n t a n d r e d e v e l o p m e n t p r o j e c t s t h a t a r e a b o u t t o be undertaken. The f a c t s on central area t h i s p o t e n t i a l economic t a k e - o f f i n the are unmistakably clear: 1. Large t r a c t s of Urban Renewal Area District's l a n d h a v e b e e n c l e a r e d i n t h e Downtown and a r e r e a d y f o r r e d e v e l o p m e n t . 2. T h e M e t r o s u b w a y s y s t e m t r a l area. i s nearing completion i n the cen- 3. T h e new N a t i o n a l V i s i t o r C e n t e r i s b e i n g b u i l t t o p r o v i d e a s t r o n g g e n e r a t i n g f o r c e on t h e e a s t e n d o f t h e c e n t r a l c o r e area. -83- �4. T h e new C e n t e r L e g o f t h e E x p r e s s w a y i s b e i n g c o m p l e t e d t o g i v e new a c c e s s t o t h e e a s t e r n f l a n k o f d o w n t o w n . 5. New F e d e r a l b u i l d i n g s and e n c l a v e s - t h e F e d e r a l B u r e a u o f I n v e s t i g a t i o n , t h e U.S. Information Agency, the Department of Labor, J u d i c i a r y Square - have been s t r a t e g i c a l l y deployed t o c r e a t e new a c t i v i t y c e n t e r s e a s t o f 1 4 t h S t r e e t . 6. P l a n s a r e f i r m l y m o v i n g a h e a d f o r t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e D w i g h t D. E i s e n h o w e r B i c e n t e n n i a l M e m o r i a l C o n v e n t i o n C e n t e r a t Mt. V e r n o n S q u a r e . 7. T h e P e n n s y l v a n i a A v e n u e D e v e l o p m e n t C o r p o r a t i o n i s now g e t t i n g underway w i t h a major redevelopment program f o r the n a t i o n ' s number one s t r e e t t h r o u g h t h e h e a t o f downtown. 8. M a j o r p u b l i c - p r i v a t e e f f o r t s t o r e d e v e l o p t h e d o w n t o w n r e t a i l c o r e a r e p a y i n g o f f i n t e r m s o f new p u b l i c i m p r o v e m e n t s a n d new p r i v a t e i n v e s t m e n t s . 9. New p r i v a t e i n v e s t m e n t s a r e v i r t u a l l y r e b u i l d i n g M a s s a c h u s e t t s Avenue west of 14th S t r e e t out through the " t h i n k - t a n k " a r e a to Embassy Row. 10. and T h e r e a r e p l a n s f o r an i n t e r n a t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s the r e v i t a l i z a t i o n of Chinatown i n the h e a r t of center downtown. 11. L a r g e - s c a l e redevelopment has t a k e n p l a c e along Pennsylv a n i a Avenue w e s t o f t h e W h i t e House t o Washington. C i r c l e b u i l t around i n t e r n a t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s , m e d i c a l and h o s p i t a l f u n c t i o n s , and t h e George W a s h i n g t o n U n i v e r s i t y campus expansion. 12. The o f f i c e and r e t a i l c o r e o f C o n n e c t i c u t Avenue and K S t r e e t i s continuing to expand v i g o r o u s l y to both the north a n d w e s t , c r e a t i n g new d e v e l o p m e n t o p p o r t u n i t i e s i n t h e p r o cess . 1 3 . New i n n e r - c i t y h o u s i n g d e v e l o p m e n t s a r e t a k i n g p l a c e f r o m 1 4 t h S t r e e t w e s t , w i t h a m a j o r c o n c e n t r a t i o n o f new facilities a l o n g t h e New H a m p s h i r e A v e n u e c o r r i d o r s o u t h w e s t o f D u p o n t Circle. 14. S o u t h w e s t W a s h i n g t o n , w i t h t h e c o m p l e t i o n o f L'Enfant P l a z a a n d t h e new w a t e r f r o n t , i s c r e a t i n g t h e c o n d i t i o n s t h a t c a n make i t one o f M e t r o p o l i t a n W a s h i n g t o n ' s m a j o r a c t i v i t y centers. 15. As n o t e d e gram i s b e i n g West End A r e a , current level opportunities a r l i e r , a l a r g e - s c a l e new r e d e v e l o p m e n t p r o p r o p o s e d by p r i v a t e i n t e r e s t s i n t h e s t r a t e g i c where t h e f a c t o r s o f l o c a t i o n a l a d v a n t a g e s and o f u n d e r u t i l i z a t i o n combine t o o f f e r u n p a r a l l e l e d f o r new investments. -84- �No c e n t r a l c i t y a r e a i n t h e U.S. f a c e s such a p r o p i t i o u s s e t of development p r o s p e c t s . G i v i n g t h e s e p r o s p e c t s an a d d i t i o n a l c r e d i b i l i t y i s t h e p o t e n t i a l s u p p o r t t h a t w i l l be g i v e n by t h e B i c e n t e n n i a l c e l e b r a t i o n i n 1976 w h i c h w i l l b r i n g m i l l i o n s of v i s i t o r s to the Nation's C a p i t a l . A g a i n t h e f o c u s m u s t be upon t h e D i s t r i c t ' s d e v e l o p m e n t s t r a t e g y to take advantage of these u n p a r a l l e l e d redevelopm e n t o p p o r t u n i t i e s . To r e i t e r a t e , t h e g r e a t p o t e n t i a l s t r e n g t h o f t h e D i s t r i c t economy l i e s i n t h e m a x i m i z a t i o n of i t s unique c e n t r a l a r e a f u n c t i o n s . There i s l i t t l e prosp e c t o f r e i n v i g o r a t i n g t h e economy o f t h e r e m a i n d e r o f t h e D i s t r i c t and o f s t a b i l i z i n g t h e m u n i c i p a l budget u n l e s s and u n t i l t h i s happens. The m u l t i p l i e r e f f e c t s o f l a r g e - s c a l e c e n t r a l r e d e v e l o p m e n t w i l l be f e l t t h r o u g h o u t t h e e n t i r e D i s t r i c t - i n new j o b s , i n new e n t r e p r e n e u r s h i p s , i n new t a x r e s o u r c e s , p e r h a p s m o s t i m p o r t a n t i n a new i m a g e f o r t h e D i s t r i c t t h a t can support a r e v e r s a l of the d i s i n v e s t m e n t syndrome a f f e c t i n g t h e D i s t r i c t economy a s a w h o l e . I n the absence o f a l a r g e - s c a l e m a n u f a c t u r i n g p o t e n t i a l and i n t h e face of a c o n s t a n t l y growing market r e l a t i n g to a c t i v i t i e s b u i l t around the n a t i o n a l c a p i t a l f u n c t i o n , the D i s t r i c t ' s p r i m a r y e m p h a s i s i n e c o n o m i c d e v e l o p m e n t m u s t c l e a r l y be f o c u s e d upon s t r a t e g i e s f o r p h y s i c a l r e d e v e l o p m e n t , largely in the c e n t r a l area. Once a g a i n , t h e G e o r g e t o w n W a t e r f r o n t i s b r o u g h t i n t o c o n t e x t . What h a p p e n s on t h e W a t e r f r o n t r e p r e s e n t s o n l y a s m a l l p a r t o f t h e t o t a l r a n g e o f a c t i v i t i e s t o be b r o u g h t i n t o p e r s p e c t i v e , but the important point i s t h a t these o v e r a l l c e n t r a l a r e a r e d e v e l o p m e n t c o n s i d e r a t i o n s s h o u l d be t a k e n i n t o a c c o u n t in the adoption of p o l i c i e s r e l a t i n g to w a t e r f r o n t development. There are investment p o t e n t i a l s t h a t are t r a n s f e r a b l e from the Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t t o o t h e r a r e a s . There are major development o p p o r t u n i t i e s o u t s i d e the Waterfront area t h a t c a n a b s o r b t h e e x c e s s demands t h a t a b r a k e on W a t e r f r o n t development might generate. The Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t , i n s h o r t , m u s t be l o o k e d a t a s one o f a number o f h i g h l y i m p o r t a n t and h i g h l y s p e c i a l i z e d e n c l a v e s whose optimum d e v e l o p ment i s e s s e n t i a l t o s w i n g i n g t h e D i s t r i c t economy a r o u n d t o a major upturn. G E O R G E T O W N IN T H E DISTRICT'S S T R A T E G Y I t i s n o t t h e p u r p o s e o f t h i s R e p o r t t o s u g g e s t an o v e r a l l development s t r a t e g y f o r the D i s t r i c t . C l e a r l y , however, the p o l i c i e s adopted w i t h r e s p e c t t o Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t development i n v o l v e c o n s i d e r a t i o n s t h a t e x t e n d f a r beyond the -85- �short-run p r o d u c t i v i t y of the land p a r c e l s themselves. c o s t - b e n e f i t approach must look t o t h e o p t i m i z a t i o n o f long-run w e l f a r e of the D i s t r i c t as a whole. A the The r a t i o n a l e b e h i n d a d e v e l o p m e n t p l a n f o r t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t - a t l e a s t as f a r as economics i s concerned i s to s e e k an optimum d e v e l o p m e n t p a t t e r n f o l l o w i n g t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a new e x p r e s s w a y t h r o u g h t h e a r e a a n d t h e r e moval of the e x i s t i n g e l e v a t e d W h i t e h u r s t Freeway. As n o t e d e i i r l i e r , g e t t i n g t h e maximum d e v e l o p m e n t s u p p o r t a b l e by t h e m a r k e t on r e d e v e l o p e d w a t e r f r o n t p a r c e l s d o e s n o t n e c e s s a r i l y produce t h e optimum r e t u r n s t o t h e D i s t r i c t . On t h e c o n t r a r y , i t i s t h e j u d g m e n t o f t h e GPG p l a n n i n g t e a m t h a t d e v e l o p m e n t beyond t h e l e v e l recommended i n i t s p l a n c o u l d h a v e d e l e t e r i o u s e f f e c t s upon t h e i m p o r t a n t Georgetown subeconomy and h e n c e upon t h e economy o f t h e D i s t r i c t a s a whole. C l e a r l y the Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t r e p r e s e n t s a major redevelopment opportunity f o r the D i s t r i c t . Sizable additions c a n b e made t o t h e D i s t r i c t ' s t a x b a s e w i t h o u t t h e n e e d f o r l a r g e - s c a l e d i s l o c a t i o n and r e l o c a t i o n t h a t u s u a l l y accompany e f f o r t s a t urban renewal. No i n c e n t i v e s a r e n e c e s s a r y t o c r e a t e a m a r k e t f o r new b u i l d i n g s p a c e s o r a f l o w o f p r i v a t e investment. A t t h e same t i m e , i t i s e q u a l l y c l e a r t h a t t h e e s s e n c e o f a sound development p o l i c y f o r the Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t s h o u l d be r e s t r a i n t . The l e v e l o f d e v e l o p m e n t p r o p o s e d i n t h e P l a n w o u l d be v e r y s u b s t a n t i a l - a s s u m i n g t h e n e c e s s a r y t r a f f i c i m p r o v e m e n t s t o p r o v i d e v e h i c u l a r and p e d e s t r i a n movements a t a c c e p t a b l e s t a n d a r d s - b u t i t s h o u l d be l i m i t e d . Other p a r t s o f the c e n t r a l a r e a s h o u l d c a p t u r e most o f the c e n t r a l l y o r i e n t e d d e m a n d t h a t w o u l d n o t be a c c o m m o d a t e d w i t h i n t h e c o n t r o l l e d envelope w i t h i n the Waterfront area i t s e l f . One f u r t h e r p o i n t m i g h t b e n o t e d b e f o r e p r o c e e d i n g t o f u r t h e r documentation of t h e above p o i n t s . T h e r e a r e o b v i o u s l y some a d d i t i o n a l economic v a l u e s i n v o l v e d i n p r e s e r v i n g Georgetown - and i t s W a t e r f r o n t - a s a u n i q u e h i s t o r i c a l and c u l t u r a l enclave w i t h i n the Nation's C a p i t a l . Such v a l u e s cannot be given q u a n t i t a t i v e measurements, but they are i n h e r e n t i n t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n t h a t Georgetown makes t o t h e C i t y ' s o v e r a l l image. Georgetown i s a major t o u r i s t a t t r a c t i o n ; i t provides a s e t t i n g f o r a s i g n i f i c a n t p a r t of the C i t y ' s s o c i a l and c u l t u r a l l i f e ; and i t s s c a l e c f a c t i v i t i e s c o n t r i b u t e s r i c h l y to the governmental a n d d i p l o m a t i c l i f e o f t h e community. The m a i n t e n a c e o f a p h y s i c a l e n v i r o n m e n t t h a t supp o r t s s u c h d e f i n a b l e r o l e s and f u n c t i o n s i n t h e b u s i n e s s o f t h e N a t i o n ' s C a p i t a l s h o u l d be r e g a r d e d a s a p r a c t i c a l a n d desirable objective. �The Productive Sub-Economy From t h e s t a n d p o i n t o f m u n i c i p a l f i n a n c e , Georgetown i s one of t h e D i s t r i c t ' s most p r o d u c t i v e sub-economies. As a d d i t i o n a l development takes p l a c e along the w a t e r f r o n t , i t s net contributions to the D i s t r i c t ' s t r e a s u r y w i l l further i n crease . W i t h o n l y 1.5 p e r c e n t o f t h e D i s t r i c t ' s Georgetown community a c c o u n t s f o r : population, -3.1 percent of the C i t y ' s municipal local sources revenue -7.4 p e r c e n t o f t h e C i t y ' s r e a l e s t a t e assessment single-family -3.2 personal percent of the City's the from residential income. More i m p o r t a n t , G e o r g e t o w n i s h i g h l y p r o d u c t i v e t o t h e D i s t r i c t i n i t sn e t c o n t r i b u t i o n s t o t h e C i t y ' s f i n a n c e s o v e r and above i t s demands and r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r p u b l i c s e r v i c e s . As a n e t revenue producer, i t i s probably t h e C i t y ' s most p r o d u c t i v e community o u t s i d e t h e s m a l l c o r e d i s t r i c t o f o f f i c e b u i l d i n g s and r e t a i l shops i n t h e C o n n e c t i c u t Avenue-K S t r e e t s e c t i o n o f Downtown W a s h i n g t o n . I n 1972, i t i s e s t i m a t e d t h a t Georgetown produced c l o s e t o $16,000,000 i n t a x e s and o t h e r r e v e n u e s f o r t h e D i s t r i c t o f Columbia, a p p r o x i m a t e l y 3.1 p e r c e n t o f t h e h a l f - b i l l i o n d o l l a r s i n l o c a l , non-Federal r e c e i p t s i n the D i s t r i c t budget. Georgetown's t o t a l r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r m u n i c i p a l s e r v i c e s u p p o r t e d by l o c a l funds were o n l y a p p r o x i m a t e l y $5,000,000. In short, Georgetown y i e l d e d a " s u r p l u s " t o t h e D i s t r i c t o f about $11,000,000, w h i c h was e q u i v a l e n t t o a $2,400 " c o n t r i b u t i o n " t o m u n i c i p a l f i n a n c e s on t h e p a r t o f e a c h o f G e o r g e t o w n ' s 4,500 households. The f o l l o w i n g t a b l e b r i e f l y i t e m i z e s t h e v a r i o u s e l e m e n t s m a k i n g up t h e s e o v e r a l l f i g u r e s o n t h e G e o r g e t o w n m u n i c i p a l balance sheet: -87- �Payments to and Services from the District Government, Georgetown, 1972 Payments to the District Property T a x e s $ 6,200,000 Income T a x e s 4,100,000 Sales and gross receipts taxes 3,600,000 Other taxes and charges 1,800,000 Total Payments $15,700,000 Services from the District General government, public safety, transportation and public works $ 4,400,000 Education 200,000 Welfare and Recreation 300,000 $ 4,900,000 The remarkable a s p e c t o f Georgetown's heavy n e t c o n t r i b u t i o n to t h e D i s t r i c t Government i s t h e s m a l l s i z e o f t h e community r e l a t i v e t o the C i t y as a whole. T h e r e a r e o n l y 4,500 h o u s e h o l d s i n G e o r g e t o w n w h i c h i n c l u d e s a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1,600 f a m i l i e s (one p e r c e n t o f t h e D i s t r i c t t o t a l ) a n d 2,800 n o n - f a m i l y household u n i t s . A p p r o x i m a t e l y 4,000 o f t h e c o m m u n i t y ' s 1 1 , 5 0 0 p e o p l e a r e s t u d e n t s , w i t h 2,800 l i v i n g i n g r o u p q u a r t e r s a t Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y . A p p r o x i m a t e l y 328 r e t a i l e s t a b l i s h m e n t s operate i n the area. There a r e s e v e r a l keys t o Georgetown's p r o d u c t i v i t y as a n e t municipal revenue producer. Average a n n u a l h o u s e h o l d income i n Georgetown i n 1969 was a p p r o x i m a t e l y $31,800, about t h r e e times the average f o r the D i s t r i c t as a whole. The average s i n g l e - f a m i l y r e s i d e n t i a l p r o p e r t y i n G e o r g e t o w n i n 1972 was a s s e s s e d f o r t a x purposes a t $39,600, compared w i t h a c i t y - w i d e average o f $14,300. M o s t o f G e o r g e t o w n ' s r e t a i l s h o p s a r e making most o f t h e i r s a l e s t o n o n - r e s i d e n t s o f t h e D i s t r i c t , b r i n g i n g i n new t a x a b l e d o l l a r s f r o m t h e o u t s i d e . As t o p u b l i c s e r v i c e r e q u i r e m e n t s , G e o r g e t o w n h a s a r a t i o o f p u b l i c s c h o o l e n r o l l m e n t o f o n l y two s t u d e n t s p e r 100 p o p u l a t i o n compared w i t h a 19-100 r a t i o f o r t h e D i s t r i c t a s a w h o l e . -88- �W e l f a r e and r e c r e a t i o n a l e x p e n d i t u r e s a r e minor. Overall, per c a p i t a c o s t s o f m u n i c i p a l government i n Georgetown (calc u l a t e d i n terms o f s e r v i c e s rendered from l o c a l funds) were a p p r o x i m a t e l y $426 i n 1972 compared w i t h a D i s t r i c t - w i d e average of $671. There a r e s e v e r a l o t h e r ways t o i l l u s t r a t e t h e c o m p a r a t i v e p r o d u c t i v i t y o f Georgetown t o D i s t r i c t f i n a n c e s — a n d t o h i g h l i g h t the importance of p r e s e r v i n g t h e c o n d i t i o n s under which t h i s p r o d u c t i v i t y c a n be maintained. I f Georgetown's s i n g l e f a m i l y r e s i d e n t i a l p r o p e r t i e s were producing t a x e s a t the same l e v e l a s t h e D i s t r i c t a v e r a g e a n d i f G e o r g e t o w n r e s i d e n t s were making o n l y a v e r a g e s a l e s and income t a x payments t o t h e C i t y , t o t a l p r o d u c t i o n from t h e s e s o u r c e s would have been $6,700,000 i n 1972. A c t u a l payments from t h e s e s o u r c e s were an e s t i m a t e d $10,100,000. S i m i l a r l y , i f Georgetown's r e q u i r e ments f o r m u n i c i p a l s e r v i c e s were a t t h e D i s t r i c t a v e r a g e , they would have t o t a l e d $8,900,000 i n s t e a d o f an e s t i m a t e d $4,900,000 t h a t was a c t u a l l y needed. The District's Stake in Georgetown The economies o f t h e P l a n f o r t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t d i r e c t l y i n v o l v e two b a s i c c o n s i d e r a t i o n s r e l a t i n g t o phys i c a l development w i t h i n the area: 1. for R e s p o n s e t o t h e l e g i t i m a t e demands o f t h e p r i v a t e a v a r i e t y o f f u n c t i o n s and l a n d u s e s ; and market 2. the Protection of the unique c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s that undergird sub-economy o f t h e l a r g e r Georgetown community. The Phase I I A P r e l i m i n a r y P l a n a l l o w e d a t o t a l development e n v e l o p e i n t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t A r e a o f 4,705,000 s q u a r e feet. T h i s p r o j e c t e d l e v e l o f development would include 3 , 4 0 5 , 0 0 0 s q u a r e f e e t o f new c o n s t r u c t i o n f o r r e s i d e n t i a l a n d n o n - r e s i d e n t i a l u s e s , w i t h a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1,300,000 s q u a r e f e e t of e x i s t i n g b u i l d i n g space remaining i n the area. I ti s assumed t h a t 300,000 s q u a r e f e e t o f t h e e x i s t i n g s p a c e t h a t w o u l d r e m a i n w o u l d b e r e n o v a t e d t o b e c o m p e t i t i v e w i t h new space. T h i s proposed development e n v e l o p e would embrace n e a r l y f o u r t i m e s t h e v o l u m e o f b u i l d i n g s p a c e now o c c u p i e d i n t h e W a t e r f r o n t a r e a (1,254,000 square f e e t ) . I t would include a wide d i v e r s i t y o f new u s e s — r e s i d e n t i a l ( w h i c h now a c c o u n t s f o r -89- �o n l y a minor s h a r e of the a r e a ' s development, or 151,000 s q u a r e f e e t ) , o f f i c e , r e t a i l , h o t e l and o t h e r c o m m e r c i a l . I t would r e p r e s e n t a t l e a s t $150,000,000 w o r t h of t a x a b l e improvements in a d d i t i o n to the assessable land base. Total real estate t a x e s a t c u r r e n t t a x and a s s e s s m e n t r a t e s w o u l d a p p r o x i m a t e $6,500,000, compared w i t h a c u r r e n t t a x y i e l d i n the a r e a o f about $900,000. Projected Additions, As an a d d i t i o n a l 3,000,000 o r 4,000,000 s q u a r e f e e t o f new b u i l d i n g space i s added s o u t h o f M S t r e e t as suggested i n the P l a n , Georgetown's net c o n t r i b u t i o n s to the D i s t r i c t budget w i l l correspondingly increase. The p r o j e c t e d d e v e l o p m e n t w o u l d a d d 25 p e r c e n t t o G e o r g e t o w n ' s e x i s t i n g p o p u l a t i o n a n d 50 p e r c e n t t o i t s e x i s t i n g e m p l o y m e n t b a s e ( w h i c h i s now a t a b o u t 13,000 e m p l o y e e s ) . I t would n e a r l y double Georgetown's t a x a b l e r e a l estate assessment r o l l s , which are c u r r e n t l y a t a l e v e l of about $160,000,000. Because of the high l a n d v a l u e s i n the Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t and t h e s t r o n g a m e n i t y a t t r a c t i o n o f t h e o v e r a l l G e o r g e t o w n c o m m u n i t y , i t c a n be a n t i c i p a t e d t h a t t h e s a m e g e n e r a l c o s t b e n e f i t p r o f i l e t h a t G e o r g e t o w n now h a s w i t h r e s p e c t t o m u n i c i pal f i n a n c e s w i l l a p p l y t o t h e new d e v e l o p m e n t s o u t h o f M S t r e e t , H o u s e h o l d i n c o m e s w i l l be h i g h ; t h e r a t i o o f s c h o o l enrollment t o t o t a l p o p u l a t i o n w i l l be l o w ; w e l f a r e and r e c r e a t i o n c o s t s t o t h e C i t y w i l l be l o w . Georgetown's net $11,000,000 a n n u a l c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e D i s t r i c t t r e a s u r y c o u l d e a s i l y d o u b l e on a n o n - i n f l a t e d - d o l l a r b a s i s as a r e s u l t of the Waterfront dev e l o p m e n t p r o j e c t e d by t h e P l a n . T h e r e v e n u e p r o s p e c t s o f t h e new h o u s i n g o v e r t h e e x p r e s s w a y tunnel proposed i n the Phase I I A P r e l i m i n a r y P l a n should be p a r t i c u l a r l y noted. N e t new l a n d v a l u e s o f n e a r l y $ 3 , 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 w o u l d be c r e a t e d b y t h e p r o j e c t e d d e v e l o p m e n t o f t o w n h o u s e and a p a r t m e n t u n i t s o v e r t h e e x p r e s s w a y a i r r i g h t s (after t a k i n g i n t o account the minor a d d i t i o n a l c o s t s of tunnel r e inforcement for that purpose). T h e s e new l a n d v a l u e s w o u l d be d i r e c t l y c a p t u r e d by t h e D i s t r i c t Government t h r o u g h t h e s a l e of a i r r i g h t s to developers. I n a d d i t i o n , of course, these l a n d v a l u e s — p l u s more t h a n $8,000,000 i n t h e v a l u e o f t h e h o u s i n g a n d r e l a t e d i m p r o v e m e n t s — w o u l d go o n t h e r e a l e s t a t e assessment r o l l s of the D i s t r i c t . MILL MARKET M (II Oft! 313! CD IS M.i 11 FREEWAY TUNNEL Potomac St. -90- St. �Waterfront Development Costs I t m i g h t be a r g u e d t h a t a r e a l i s t i c c o s t - b e n e f i t a p p r o a c h t o the Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t s h o u l d take i n t o a c c o u n t t h e base c o s t s o f t h e new t u n n e l e d e x p r e s s w a y p r o j e c t , i n c l u d i n g t h e removal of the elevated Whitehurst Freeway. These major imp r o v e m e n t s w i l l have a d e c i s i v e e f f e c t on t h e A r e a ' s r e d e v e l o p m e n t p o t e n t i a l s ( a l t h o u g h i t i s a l s o c l e a r t h a t some new d e v e l o p m e n t s c a n and w i l l t a k e p l a c e w i t h o u t t h e s e improvements i n response t o t h e market f o r c e s t h a t have a l r e a d y been r e f l e c t e d over the years i n constantly r i s i n g land p r i c e s ) . As o r i g i n a l l y p l a n n e d , t h e need f o r an expanded f r e e w a y c o n n e c t o r t h r o u g h t h e W a t e r f r o n t c o r r i d o r was t o be met by adding to the c a p a c i t y of the e x i s t i n g Whitehurst Freeway. Although t h i s would have been a major p r o j e c t i n i t s e l f , i t s c o s t would have been c o n s i d e r a b l y l e s s than t h a t c a l l e d f o r by s u b s e q u e n t p l a n s t o e l i m i n a t e t h e e l e v a t e d s t r u c t u r e and b r i n g t h e new f r e e w a y t o g r o u n d l e v e l o r i n t u n n e l . Primary c o n s i d e r a t i o n s f o r t a k i n g t h e more e x p e n s i v e c o u r s e w e r e t o remove t h e b l i g h t i n g i n f l u e n c e o f t h e e l e v a t e d s t r u c t u r e upon a d j a c e n t W a t e r f r o n t p r o p e r t i e s a n d t o o p e n up t h e p o t e n t i a l f o r p r o f i t a b l e a n d p r o d u c t i v e new d e v e l o p m e n t s i n t h e a r e a . T o l o o k t o new d e v e l o p m e n t a c t i v i t y f o r j u s t i f i c a t i o n o f t h e a d d i t i o n a l c o s t s o f the modified freeway p l a n , however, i s hardly supportable. The a p p l i c a t i o n o f s u c h a p r i n c i p l e t o major p u b l i c improvements would s t u l t i f y any r e a l i s t i c p u b l i c works planning. The c r i t i c a l d e c i s i o n i n t h i s i n s t a n c e was t h e o r i g i n a l one t o b u i l d an e l e v a t e d f r e e w a y t h r o u g h one o f the D i s t r i c t ' s most v a l u a b l e p r o p e r t y c o r r i d o r s . This freeway has a c t e d a s a d e t e r r e n t t o p r o d u c t i v e r e a l e s t a t e development i n t h e a r e a f o r many y e a r s , d e n y i n g t h e D i s t r i c t m a n y t h o u s a n d s o f d o l l a r s o f t a x r e v e n u e s t h r o u g h i t s a d v e r s e e f f e c t s o n new r e a l estate investments. The t o t a l a s s e s s e d v a l u e o f a l l r e a l e s t a t e i m p r o v e m e n t s i n t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t A r e a i n 1972 was l e s s t h a n $ 8 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 , o n l y a t h i r d a s h i g h a s t h e a s s e s s e d v a l u e o f t h e l a n d on w h i c h t h e s e i m p r o v e m e n t s w e r e l o c a t e d . T h e r e c o u l d be no more p e r s u a s i v e e v i d e n c e o f t h e d e t e r r i n g e f f e c t t h a t t h e W h i t e h u r s t F r e e w a y h a s had upon t h e a r e a ' s economic v i a b i l i t y . I f t h e a d d i t i o n a l c o s t s o f removing t h i s e l e v a t e d highway and r e b u i l d i n g i t a t g r o u n d o r t u n n e l l e v e l w e r e t o be p u t i n t o a c o s t - b e n e f i t e q u a t i o n , t h e y w o u l d h a v e t o be o f f s e t by t h e c a p i t a l i z e d value of taxes l o s t to the D i s t r i c t as a r e s u l t of the f a i l u r e t o b u i l d the a p p r o p r i a t e f a c i l i t y i n the f i r s t place. T h i s w o u l d mean i n e f f e c t a c a l c u l a t i o n o f t h e c o s t to t h e D i s t r i c t o f n o t b u i l d i n g t h e t u n n e l e d freeway and t h e further costs — i n t e r m s o f e f f e c t s on d e v e l o p m e n t i n t h e -91- �area—adding to the existing elevated structure i n the future. S u c h c a l c u l a t i o n b a s e d on t h e p r e m i s e t h a t t h e f r e e w a y c o s t s s h o u l d be i n c l u d e d i n t h e c o s t - b e n e f i t e q u a t i o n c o u l d h a r d l y be f r u i t f u l , h o w e v e r . T h e y c a n be a r e d h e r r i n g t h a t c a n d i r e c t a t t e n t i o n away f r o m t h e m a i n i s s u e o f o p t i m i z i n g t h e l o n g - r u n development p o t e n t i a l of the Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t w i t h i n the f r a m e w o r k o f a v i a b l e and p r o d u c t i v e G e o r g e t o w n community. The D i s t r i c t ' s s t a k e i n t h e G e o r g e t o w n sub-economy i s a subs t a n t i a l o n e , a n d t h e D i s t r i c t ' s m a j o r c o n c e r n s h o u l d be with the maintenance of i t s environmental q u a l i t y , v i a b i l i t y and productivity. M 34 th IMPLICATIONS OF THE F I N A L D E V E L O P M E N T P L A N AND St PROGRAM The F i n a l D e v e l o p m e n t P l a n and P r o g r a m c a l l s f o r a s h a r p r e d u c t i o n i n the proposed development envelope f o r the Georgetown Waterfront area. I n a c t u a l square footage, the envelope cont a i n s a c o m m e r c i a l and c o m m e r c i a l e q u i v a l e n t o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y 2,700,000 s q u a r e f e e t o f b u i l d i n g s p a c e compared w i t h an earl i e r f i g u r e of 3,300,000 s q u a r e f e e t . The P r e l i m i n a r y P l a n s e t f o r t h e a r l i e r i n P h a s e I I A c a l l e d f o r n e a r l y 1,000 u n i t s of h o u s i n g p l u s a 400-room h o t e l ; the r e v i s e d F i n a l P l a n w o u l d a l l o w f e w e r t h a n 800 r e s i d e n t i a l u n i t s w i t h o u t the h o t e l component. A s s u m i n g t h a t t h e Dodge a n d I n l a n d S t e e l p r o j e c t s a r e d e v e l o p e d i n f u l l , o t h e r new commercial s p a c e w o u l d be c u t b y a b o u t 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 s q u a r e f e e t b y t h e revised plan, a very substantial reduction. F o l l o w i n g i s a comparative t a b l e summarizing the space allowa n c e s o f t h e P r e l i m i n a r y and r e v i s e d P l a n s , u s i n g r o u g h f i g u r e s for purposes of s i m p l i f i c a t i o n : St. �Commercial and Commercial Equivalents for Space Use, Georgetown Waterfront Area (In square feet of building space) Phase I I - A Prelim. Plan Final Revised Plan Existing space to remain 1,000,000 1,000,000 0 Re-use renovation space 300,000 300,000 _0_ Sub-total 1,300,000 1,300,000 0 600,000 1,100,000 600,000 600,000 0 - 500,000 1,700,000 1,200,000 - 500,000 New commercial space: Dodge/Inland Other Sub-total New residential space Total 300,000* 200,000** 3,300,000 2,700,000 Indicated Changes - 100,000 - 600,000 * 9 8 7 housing units and 4 0 0 hotel rooms. * * 7 8 5 housing units and no hotel rooms. Source: Hammer, Siler, George Associates O t h e r k e y e l e m e n t s o f t h e F i n a l P l a n s h o u l d be n o t e d . The P l a n c a l l s f o r the e l i m i n a t i o n o f housing u n i t s along t h e r i v e r f r o n t , w h i c h was an i m p o r t a n t component i n t h e e a r l i e r d e s i g n . The Plan's reduction o f commercial space presumably would a f f e c t b o t h o f f i c e a n d r e t a i l u s e s , a l t h o u g h no p r o p o r t i o n a t e reduct i o n i n t h e s e two uses h a s n e c e s s a r i l y been assumed. The r e v i s e d p l a n c o u l d accommodate a h o t e l b u t t h i s w o u l d p r e s u m a b l y n e c e s s i t a t e a f u r t h e r r e d u c t i o n i n t h e n u m b e r o f new h o u s i n g u n i t s t h a t w o u l d be b u i l t . I f t h e Dodge a n d I n l a n d S t e e l p r o j e c t s a r e not b u i l t to t h e i r f u l l envelope, of course, addit i o n a l new c o m m e r c i a l d e v e l o p m e n t m i g h t b e a c c o m m o d a t e d e l s e where w i t h i n t h e r e v i s e d c e i l i n g . The p r o p o s e d r e d u c t i o n s i n a l l o w a b l e s p a c e u n d e r t h e F i n a l P l a n w e r e n o t made o n t h e b a s i s o f m a r k e t c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . As p o i n t e d o u t i n some d e t a i l e a r l i e r , t h e m a r k e t c o u l d t h e o r e t i c a l l y a b s o r b a g r e a t d e a l more s p a c e t h a n e v e n t h e more l i b e r a l Phase I I A P l a n would a l l o w . The b a s i c c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n s e t t i n g c e i l i n g s s u b s t a n t i a l l y below t h e market absorption p o t e n t i a l , of course, has been t h e sharp l i m i t a t i o n o f s t r e e t and t r a f f i c capacities within this area. -93- �On t h e o t h e r h a n d , t h e " e f f e c t i v e m a r k e t " f o r s p a c e i n t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t a r e a would n o t a s a p r a c t i c a l m a t t e r be a s h i g h a s t h e t h e o r e t i c a l m a r k e t demand s e t f o r t h e a r l i e r . The l i m i t a t i o n s o f t r a f f i c a n d p a r k i n g c a p a c i t y w o u l d o b v i o u s l y be o p e r a t i v e i n t h e m a r k e t , p r o b a b l y w i t h i n c r e a s i n g i n t e n s i t y over time. There a r e evidences that e x i s t i n g r e t a i l i n g i n the area i s a l r e a d y f e e l i n g t h e e f f e c t s o f t r a f f i c c o n g e s t i o n and the l a c k o f adequate p a r k i n g . Even under t h e r e s t r i c t e d Phase I I B d e v e l o p m e n t c e i l i n g , n o p r o v i s i o n i s made f o r p a r k i n g o t h e r t h a n t h a t w h i c h c a n be accommodated w i t h i n s t r u c t u r e s b u i l t f o r other uses. I n s h o r t , t h e same r e s t r a i n t s on c i r c u l a t i o n and p a r k i n g w h i c h have prompted t h e space c u r t a i l m e n t c a l l e d f o r i n t h e F i n a l P l a n would a l s o d i r e c t l y i n f l u e n c e the m a r k e t even i n t h e a b s e n c e o f t h e P l a n and i t s a t t e n d a n t controls. Even s o , the " e f f e c t i v e market" would c e r t a i n l y exceed what t h e r e v i s e d P l a n would a l l o w — w h i c h i s s i m p l y t o say t h a t t h e p l a n r e p r e s e n t s an attempt t o o b v i a t e a complete f u t u r e breakdown o f c i r c u l a t i o n and t o p r o t e c t t h e q u a l i t y and e f f i c i e n c y o f t h e environment which f r e e market f o r c e s would u n d o u b t e d l y t e n d t o damage. T h e d e v e l o p e r s o f new s p a c e f o r a n y a n d a l l p u r p o s e s i n t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t a r e a w i l l f i n d t h a t t h e l i m i t a t i o n s o f t r a f f i c c i r c u l a t i o n a n d p a r k i n g w i l l be a m a j o r c o n s t r a i n t . In l i g h t of the very strong appeal of the area f o r r e a l estate development p u r p o s e s , however, i t i s n o t l i k e l y t h a t t h i s r e s t r a i n t w i l l be s u c h a d e t e r r e n t t h a t t h e r e s t r i c t e d l e v e l o f development c a l l e d f o r i n t h e F i n a l P l a n w i l l n o t be r e a c h e d in the near-term future. Even i n face o f t h i s r e s t r a i n t , t h e market w i l l undoubtedly push f o r a h i g h e r l e v e l o f development t h a n t h e F i n a l P l a n c e i l i n g s c a l l f o r . I t i s by no means a n "onward a n d upward f o r e v e r " s i t u a t i o n f o r t h e p r i v a t e d e v e l o p e r , however. Even w i t h the d i v e r s i o n o f through t r a f f i c i n t o the new t u n n e l , l i m i t e d s t r e e t a n d p a r k i n g c a p a c i t i e s w i l l p o s e d i f f i c u l t problems i n the development and m a r k e t i n g p r o c e s s . T h e r e w i l l be no r a p i d t r a n s i t s e r v i c e t o p r o v i d e a d d i t i o n a l a c c e s s c a p a c i t i e s , and t h e r e w i l l be a l i m i t t o t h e peak hour c a p a c i t i e s o f the s u r f a c e bus system t o b r i n g people i n t o the area. The r e d u c t i o n i n t h e number o f h o u s i n g u n i t s c a l l e d f o r b y t h e r e v i s e d F i n a l P l a n c o u l d dampen t h e c o m m e r c i a l d e v e l o p m e n t p o t e n t i a l somewhat b e c a u s e t h e w a l k - t o - w o r k and w a l k - t o - s h o p p o t e n t i a l s w o u l d p r o v i d e some i n c r e m e n t a l s u p p o r t f o r o f f i c e and r e t a i l e x p a n s i o n . E x c e p t a s a t o o l i n m a r k e t i n g s t r a t e g y , however, t h i s f a c t o r would probably n o t have a s i g n i f i c a n t o v e r a l l e f f e c t on t h e q u a n t i t i e s o f s p a c e i n v o l v e d . The e l i m i n a t i o n negative factor of the r i v e r f r o n t housing i s regarded as a from t h e s t a n d p o i n t o f economics. Although -94- �the d i f f i c u l t i e s of b u i l d i n g r e s i d e n t i a l u n i t s over or i n p r o x i m i t y t o t h e t u n n e l s a r e r e c o g n i z e d , t h e r e w o u l d be a s t r o n g m a r k e t f o r s u c h u n i t s and t h e i r development c o u l d cont r i b u t e t o t h e e f f i c i e n c y a n d m a r k e t a b i l i t y o f n e a r b y commerc i a l space. B r i n g i n g Georgetown a c t i v i t y t o t h e r i v e r f r o n t i n t h e f o r m o f h o u s i n g w o u l d s u p p o r t t h e h i s t o r i c image o f t h e a r e a and add t o i t s l o n g - r u n e c o n o m i c s t r e n g t h . Land Values The c r i t i c a l e l e m e n t i n t h e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t p l a n , o f c o u r s e , i s t h e i s s u e o f e x i s t i n g and potent i a l p r o p e r t y v a l u e s w h i c h w o u l d be a d v e r s e l y a f f e c t e d by development c o n t r o l s . The p r i n c i p l e o f development r i g h t s t r a n s f e r i s an e x c e l l e n t one b u t h a s n o t b e e n f u l l y t e s t e d i n active situations. The a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h i s a p p r o a c h t o t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t a r e a has n o t been e v a l u a t e d from an e c o n o m i c s t a n d p o i n t ; t h i s e v a l u a t i o n s h o u l d be u n d e r t a k e n i n order to understand the dimensions of the problems t h a t might be i n v o l v e d . W h e t h e r s u c h d e v e l o p m e n t r i g h t s c a n i n d e e d be s o l d and t r a n s f e r r e d a t p r i c e s t h a t r e f l e c t b o t h c u r r e n t m a r k e t v a l u e s a n d p o t e n t i a l r e u s e v a l u e s on d e v e l o p a b l e s i t e s i s n o t clear at this point. Some o f t h e r e d u c t i o n s i n t h e d e v e l o p m e n t c e i l i n g s c a l l e d f o r i n the F i n a l Plan would not a f f e c t the property v a l u e i s s u e of course. The e l i m i n a t i o n o f p o t e n t i a l h o u s i n g development f r o m t h e p u b l i c l y owned l a n d s a l o n g t h e r i v e r f r o n t w o u l d p l a c e no f u r t h e r l i m i t a t i o n upon t h e d e v e l o p m e n t p o t e n t i a l o f p r i v a t e l y owned l a n d s — i n d e e d t h e open s p a c e c o u l d e n h a n c e t h e value of adjacent lands. I t i s a l s o p o s s i b l e t h a t a hardheaded e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e e f f e c t s o f t r a f f i c and p a r k i n g l i m i t a t i o n s upon t h e d e v e l o p m e n t p o t e n t i a l o f s p e c i f i c p a r c e l s t h r o u g h o u t t h e a r e a w o u l d s h o w t h a t many e x i s t i n g a n d p o t e n t i a l p r o p e r t y v a l u e s a r e a l r e a d y s u b s t a n t i a l l y i n f l a t e d and hence t h e p r i c e a d j u s t m e n t p r o b l e m i n t h e r i g h t s t r a n s f e r p r o c e s s may n o t t u r n o u t t o be a s s e r i o u s a s i t may now a p p e a r . N o n e t h e l e s s , t h e i s s u e i s a f o r m i d a b l e one. S u b s t a n t i a l downzoning o r r e z o n i n g poses d i f f i c u l t l e g a l a s w e l l as economic issues. T h e e x t e n t t h a t t h e s e i s s u e s c a n be m i t i g a t e d by evidence of the market acceptance of development r i g h t s t r a n s fer i s not c l e a r . There i s always the p o s s i b i l i t y , of course, t h a t d e v e l o p m e n t r i g h t s c a n be d i r e c t l y p u r c h a s e d r a t h e r t h a n t r a n s f e r r e d (by a neighborhood a s s o c i a t i o n o r a d i s t r i c t aut h o r i t y ) b u t t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e has n o t been e x p l o r e d i n depth. The o v e r a l l a t t e m p t t o l i m i t development i n t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t a r e a (which i s a t t h e h e a r t o f t h e Georgetown -95- �P l a n n i n g Group's p r o p o s a l s ) i s regarded a s h i g h l y d e s i r a b l e from the standpoint of the long-run v i a b i l i t y of t h i s v a l u a b l e p i e c e o f r e a l e s t a t e . B a s i n g t h e P l a n on t h e r e a l i t i e s o f t r a f f i c and p a r k i n g c a p a c i t i e s i s a r e a l i s t i c approach and should provide adequate c o r r o b o r a t i o n f o r the necessary p u b l i c policies involved. Over time t h e s e t r a f f i c and p a r k i n g r e s t r a i n t s w o u l d dampen d e v e l o p m e n t a c t i v i t i e s i n t h e a r e a e v e n i n the absence of a c o n t r o l p l a n , as noted e a r l i e r . I t would be e x t r e m e l y r i s k y , h o w e v e r , t o r e l y u p o n t h e e f f e c t s o f s u c h negative f o r c e s i n the market t o achieve the development l e v e l t h a t can a s s u r e the a r e a ' s continued economic v i a b i l i t y . Both q u a l i t a t i v e v a l u e s and f u n c t i o n a l d e v e l o p m e n t g o a l s w o u l d be i n jeopardy i n t h e absence o f p u b l i c c o n s t r a i n t s , and both elements a r e e s s e n t i a l to the p r e s e r v a t i o n of the conditions t h a t make f o r c o n t i n u e d e c o n o m i c v i a b i l i t y . The District's Interest A f i n a l q u e s t i o n t o be a d d r e s s e d i s w h e t h e r t h e f u r t h e r r e d u c t i o n s i n development l e v e l s c a l l e d f o r i n the F i n a l P l a n would be p r e j u d i c i a l t o t h e b e s t i n t e r e s t s o f t h e D i s t r i c t G o v e r n m e n t i n t h e i r i m p a c t upon t a x a b l e v a l u e s . The answer c l e a r l y i s t h a t , i f t h e development l e v e l s have been c u t back i n t h e F i n a l Plan s p e c i f i c a l l y to b r i n g development i n l i n e w i t h f u r t h e r reductions i n circulation capacity—which i s the c a s e — t h e i n t e r e s t s of the D i s t r i c t are protected r a t h e r than jeopardized. T h e a r g u m e n t c a n b e made t h a t e v e n t h e r e s t r i c t e d development l e v e l s i n the F i n a l P l a n a r e too high from the standpoint of a d e q u a t e t r a f f i c a n d p a r k i n g s u p p o r t , a n d t h e m a r k e t may indeed r e f l e c t t h i s sooner r a t h e r than l a t e r . I t s h o u l d be i n t h e D i s t r i c t ' s i n t e r e s t t o m a i n t a i n and p r e s e r v e t h e a r e a ' s economic v i a b i l i t y as w e l l as h i s t o r i c character. Nobody c a n s a y f o r s u r e when t h e p o i n t o f o v e r b u i l d i n g m i g h t be r e a c h e d . I ti s c l e a r , however, t h a t the "hot" r e a l e s t a t e a r e a s u s u a l l y c o n t a i n t h e s e e d s o f t h e i r own d e s t r u c t i o n i n t h e momentum o f p r e s s u r e s ( b u l w a r k e d b y t h e " r i g h t s " o f p r o p e r t y o w n e r s ) t o go t o o f a r . T h e G e o r g e t o w n W a t e r f r o n t a r e a h a s some b u i l t - i n restraints t h a t m u s t be r e c o g n i z e d , a n d t h i s t h e P l a n d o e s . SUMMARY A D i s t r i c t p o l i c y r e s t r i c t i n g development i n t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t a r e a a s p r o p o s e d i n t h e P l a n s h o u l d , on b a l a n c e , h a v e a d i r e c t i n f l u e n c e upon d i v e r t i n g p r i v a t e i n v e s t m e n t s t o other a t t r a c t i v e central p r o j e c t s — a highly desirable object i v e f o r t h e v i a b i l i t y o f b o t h Georgetown and t h e o t h e r developments. I n t o t a l , t h i s d i v e r s i o n c o u l d amount t o 3,000,000 -96- �o r 4,000,000 s q u a r e f e e t , c o n c e n t r a t e d p r i m a r i l y i n t h e r e s i d e n t i a l t r a n s i e n t h o u s i n g and r e t a i l f i e l d s . The p r i v a t e i n v e s t m e n t p o t e n t i a l s i n v o l v e d c o u l d be a s l a r g e a s $ 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 . The p o t e n t i a l m u l t i p l i e r e f f e c t o f t h e s e d i v e r t e d i n v e s t m e n t s s h o u l d be p a r t i c u l a r l y n o t e d . I n the Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t a r e a t h e " l e v e r a g e " o f s u c h i n v e s t m e n t s upon o t h e r d e v e l o p m e n t s w o u l d be l i m i t e d f o r t w o r e a s o n s : ( 1 ) f u r t h e r d e v e l o p m e n t w o u l d be r e s t r i c t e d by t h e l i m i t a t i o n s o f l a n d a v a i l a b i l i t y ; a n d ( 2 ) the area a l r e a d y r e p r e s e n t s "hot" r e a l e s t a t e market i n which l i t t l e s t i m u l a t i o n f o r a d d i t i o n a l i n v e s t m e n t i s needed. However, i n other development p r o j e c t s i n the c e n t r a l a r e a — p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the urban renewal p r o j e c t s — s u c h d i v e r t e d investments c o u l d e x e r t s t r o n g c a t a l y t i c l e v e r a g e on o t h e r i n v e s t m e n t s . In p r o j e c t s where the redevelopment process i s j u s t g e t t i n g underway and a r e v e r s a l i n development t r e n d s i s b e i n g sought, t h e " p r i mary" i n v e s t m e n t d o l l a r g e n e r a t e s numerous "secondary" dollars a s u n t a p p e d m a r k e t s a r e a t t r a c t e d b y t h e new s u p p l y o f occupable spaces. The D i s t r i c t Government must u s e e v e r y t o o l a v a i l a b l e t o t a k e f u l l advantage of the c e n t r a l a r e a development p o t e n t i a l where t h e u l t i m a t e s t r e n g t h o f t h e C i t y ' s economy l i e s . The D i s t r i c t ' s development s t r a t e g y i s c l e a r l y a s e r i e s of s t r a t e g i e s p r e s s i n g f o r the completion of urban renewal; b r i n g i n g F e d e r a l o f f i c e - l e a s i n g p o l i c i e s i n behind s p e c i f i c redevelopment prog r a m s ; d e p l o y i n g p u b l i c w o r k s a n d i m p r o v e m e n t s t o g e t maximum l e v e r a g e on p r i v a t e i n v e s t m e n t d o l l a r s o u t o f e v e r y p u b l i c d o l l a r spent; adapting zoning to the r e a l i t i e s of both neighborhood v i a b i l i t y and m a r k e t p o t e n t i a l s ; p r o v i d i n g i n c e n t i v e s and s e c u r i t y f o r r e i n v e s t m e n t s i n s t i l l v i a b l e e n c l a v e s o f e x i s t i n g r e a l e s t a t e ; and so on. B e h i n d t h e n e g a t i v e e v i d e n c e o f e c o n o m i c s t a g n a t i o n c a u s e d by the d i s i n v e s t m e n t syndrome a f f e c t i n g a l l c e n t r a l c i t i e s i s t h e e v e r more i m p r e s s i v e p o s i t i v e e v i d e n c e i n t h e D i s t r i c t o f Columbia of tremendous p o t e n t i a l market support f o r c e n t r a l area a c t i v i t i e s . H o p e f u l l y the proposed P l a n f o r the Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t w i t h i n t h e p e r s p e c t i v e p r o v i d e d by t h i s o p t i m i s t i c view of the C i t y ' s development p o t e n t i a l . The o v e r a l l c o n c l u s i o n t h e r e f o r e , i s t h a t t o o v e r l o a d t h e W a t e r f r o n t w o u l d be a t t h e c o s t o f n o t o n l y d a m a g i n g t h e W a t e r f r o n t i t s e l f , but a l s o u n d e r c u t t i n g Georgetown's o v e r a l l c o n t r i b u t i o n to t h e C i t y ' s economic w e l l - b e i n g , and u n d e r c u t t i n g i n v e s t m e n t for the C i t y ' s other c e n t r a l a r e a programs. When t h e s e f a c t o r s are taken i n t o account, the c o s t - b e n e f i t r a t i o swings decidedly i n f a v o r o f l i m i t i n g d e v e l o p m e n t on t h e W a t e r f r o n t t o t h a t w h i c h i s c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the o v e r a l l goals of the Plan. -97- �VI Plan Evaluation -98- �The C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n d e s i g n a t e s G e o r g e t o w n , i n a manner c o n s i s t a n t w i t h the o r i g i n a l o b j e c t i v e s of the National C a p i t a l P l a n n i n g C o m m i s s i o n * s, "A P o l i c y P l a n f o r t h e Y e a r 2 0 0 0 " ( 1 9 6 1 ) , as a p r e d o m i n a n t l y r e s i d e n t i a l community w i t h r e c r e a t i o n a l oppor t u n i t i e s on t h e W a t e r f r o n t a n d t h e W h i t e h u r s t F r e e w a y r e m o v e d . T h r o u g h t h e g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s o f t h e D e v e l o p m e n t P l a n and P r o g r a m and a s s o c i a t e d S e c t i o n a l Development P l a n f o r t h e George town W a t e r f r o n t , t h e P l a n r e f l e c t s t h e needed t r a n s i t i o n from e x i s t i n g i n d u s t r i a l uses to the proposed r e s i d e n t i a l , r e c r e a t i o n a l , and c o m m e r c i a l l a n d u s e s . GOALS The f o u r p r i n c i p l e o r o v e r a l l g o a l s e s t a b l i s h e d f o r t h e p u b l i c a n d p r i v a t e d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e P l a n a r e a a r e s t a t e d o n p a g e 12 of t h i s Report. These goals are intended to seek: 1. 2. 3. 4. t h e p r e s e r v a t i o n and s t r e n g t h e n i n g o f Georgetown as a v i a b l e community w i t h i n the D i s t r i c t of Columbia, t h e more e f f i c i e n t accommodation o f t r a f f i c moving through the plan area, t h e p r e s e r v a t i o n and enhancement o f t h o s e q u a l i t i e s of Georgetown which j u s t i f y i t s d e s i g n a t i o n a s a R e g i s t e r e d N a t i o n a l Landmark, and the enhancement o f s c e n i c v i s t a s o f t h e Potomac R i v e r and o f p a r k s and monuments o f t h e N a t i o n a l C a p i t a l a s v i e w e d f r o m Georgetown, and o f t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t as viewed from the R i v e r and t h e s e p a r k s and monuments. These goals are c h a r a c t e r i z e d as r e l a t i n g , i n a broad sense, to n a t i o n a l g o a l s , p o l i c i e s , and p r o g r a m s . They are a l l a p p l i c a b l e to the e n t i r e Waterfront. They a r e not i n c o n f l i c t but r a t h e r a r e m u t u a l l y r e i n f o r c i n g ; t h e r e f o r e , t h e a t t a i n m e n t o f one d o e s not imply a compromise i n the a t t a i n m e n t of another. OBJECTIVES To a c h i e v e t h e g o a l s s p e c i f i c o b j e c t i v e s w e r e a d o p t e d a s s t a t e d o n p a g e 13 o f t h i s R e p o r t . These o b j e c t i v e s g e n e r a l l y f a l l u n d e r t h e c o n c e r n s o f c i r c u l a t i o n , l a n d u s e and design, community f a c i l i t i e s , and e n v i r o n m e n t a l impact as described i n the S e c t i o n a l Development P l a n . H i s t o r i c o b j e c t i v e s are cont a i n e d under a l l of these areas of concern. Unlike the goals, the o b j e c t i v e s , although a l l i n d i v i d u a l l y compatible w i t h the g o a l s , are not m u t u a l l y compatible w i t h each other. Furthermore, c l e a r v a l u e judgement c o n f l i c t s e x i s t between o b j e c t i v e s , the r e s o l u t i o n of which i n v o l v e s -99- �"trade-offs" i n objective attainment; the choices b a s i s f o r the Plan. Thus, the l e v e l of o b j e c t i v e i n the P l a n i s not equal. G O A L AND becoming the attainment OBJECTIVE ATTAINMENT The P l a n a t t e m p t s f u l l a t t a i n m e n t o f t h e g o a l s by t h e optimizat i o n of those o b j e c t i v e s found as most r e i n f o r c i n g to t h e s e g o a l s . No c o m p r o m i s e i s n e c e s s a r y from goal to g o a l , however, " t r a d e o f f s " were found as necessary i n the o b j e c t i v e s . C r i t i c a l concepts i d e n t i f i e d i n the e a r l y development of the Plan w e r e t h a t t h e r e i s a d i r e c t and q u a n t i f i a b l e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e c a p a c i t y o f t h e movement s y s t e m and t h e t r a f f i c g e n e r a t e d by a c t i v i t i e s i n the area; t h a t only l i m i t e d i n c r e a s e s i n t h i s c a p a c i t y a r e p o s s i b l e w i t h o u t m a j o r c h a n g e s i n t h e l o c a l movement s y s t e m ; and t h a t c o m m e r c i a l u s e s a r e more c o n s t r a i n e d by the above than a r e r e s i d e n t i a l u s e s . The and p r a c t i c a l consequences of objectives are: these concepts i n terms of goals 1. 2. "Tame" t h e e x p r e s s w a y , l i m i t o v e r a l l development w e l l below the zoning envelope, 3. h a v e new d e v e l o p m e n t s e l f - c o n t a i n e d i n t e r m s o f parking, 4. l i m i t t h e a m o u n t o f c o m m e r c i a l g r o w t h t o b e l o w i t s "market" p o t e n t i a l i n order to take pressure o f f h i s t o r i c s t r u c t u r e s and t o e m p h a s i z e and extend the r e s i d e n t i a l c h a r a c t e r of Georgetown, 5. l i m i t t h e h e i g h t o f new b u i l d i n g s t o b e c o m p a t i ble with older structures, 6. p r e s e r v e t h e h i s t o r i c c h a r a c t e r o f t h e W a t e r f r o n t , 7. m a k e t h e w a t e r ' s e d g e i n t o a p u b l i c p a r k , 8. m a x i m i z e v i e w s o f t h e R i v e r . The above c o n s e q u e n c e s d i r e c t l y i m p l y t h e a t t e m p t a t m a x i m i z a t i o n o f some o b j e c t i v e s , b u t t h e i r t r a n s l a t i o n i n t o t h e P l a n n e c e s s i t a t e d a d d i t i o n a l compromise i n t h e i r l e v e l s of a t t a i n ment. I t was n o t p o s s i b l e t o m a x i m i z e b u t o n l y t o o p t i m i z e some o b j e c t i v e s . T h i s i s implied through the following elements of the P l a n : 1. Of t h e a l t e r n a t i v e s c o n s i d e r e d , w i t h t h e e x c e p t i o n o f t h e GPG I I ( f u l l t u n n e l ) Potomac R i v e r F r e e w a y a l t e r n a t i v e , t h e GPG I alternative was f o u n d t o h a v e t h e m o s t p o s i t i v e and l e a s t negative o v e r a l l impact. T h e GPG I alternative i s p a r t o f t h e recommended v e h i c u l a r c i r c u l a t i o n system of the Plan. -100- �A g a i n , w i t h t h e e x c e p t i o n o f t h e GPG I I a l t e r n a t i v e , t h e GPG I P o t o m a c R i v e r F r e e w a y a l t e r n a t i v e p r o v i d e s t h e maximum l o c a l movement capacity. To a c h i e v e t h e f u l l b e n e f i t o f a r e c o n s t r u c t e d K S t r e e t and o t h e r improvements t o t h e l o c a l movement s y s t e m , a c o n n e c t i o n t o K e y B r i d g e i s e s s e n t i a l ; however, i n development o f t h e F i n a l D e v e l o p m e n t P l a n a n d P r o g r a m , t h e GPG w a s i n s t r u c t e d t o e l i m i n a t e t h e ramp c o n n e c t i o n f r o m Key B r i d g e e a s t b o u n d t o K S t r e e t . W i t h t h e GPG I P o t o m a c R i v e r F r e e w a y a l t e r n a t i v e and t h e a s s o c i a t e d c a p a c i t y o f t h e i m p r o v e d l o c a l s t r e e t system, t h e a l l o w a b l e l i m i t o f development i n t h e W a t e r f r o n t i s a p p r o x i m a t e l y 3.3 m i l l i o n square feet of commercial or commercial equival e n t development. With the i n s t r u c t e d e l i m i n a t i o n of t h e e a s t b o u n d Key B r i d g e t o K S t r e e t c o n n e c t i o n , t h i s l i m i t i s a p p r o x i m a t e l y 3.0 m i l l i o n s q u a r e feet. Furthermore, t h e P l a n c a l l s f o r a proposed development l i m i t e d by t h e c a p a c i t y o f t h e p u b l i c facil i t i e s a v a i l a b l e t o support such development a t acceptable environmental standards. A development o f 3.0 m i l l i o n s q u a r e f e e t o f c o m m e r c i a l o r commercial e q u i v a l e n t development i m p l i e s a l o c a l t r a f f i c l e v e l o f s e r v i c e " E " . The P l a n recommends a t o t a l d e v e l o p m e n t l i m i t o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y 2.7 m i l l i o n square feet of commercial or commercial e q u i v a l e n t development i m p l y i n g an a c c e p t a b l e l o c a l t r a f f i c l e v e l o f s e r v i c e "D". P a r k i n g a s a n e l e m e n t o f t h e movement s y s t e m i s even more o f a c o n s t r a i n t on d e v e l o p m e n t t h a n street capacity. The P l a n , however, does n o t m e e t p a r k i n g demand t o t h e p r o p o s e d a l l o w a b l e l e v e l o f d e v e l o p m e n t i n t h a t i t i s f e l t t o do s o w o u l d encourage o n l y g r e a t e r development and g r e a t e r congestion. N o t t o do s o demands t h e p r o v i s i o n o f p a r k i n g t h a t w i l l command p r e m i u m p r i c e s . This provision of parking i s f e l t as feasible i n the short-term strong market p o t e n t i a l o f t h e Waterfront; but i n the long-run, i s expected t o a s s i s t in containing continued market pressure f o r development. Although t h e economic p o t e n t i a l f o r development i n t h e W a t e r f o n t i s c o n s i d e r a b l e , when a l l economic factors a r e taken into account, the cost-benefit -101- �r a t i o s w i n g s i n f a v o r of l i m i t i u y development lit the W a t e r f r o n t t o t h a t w h i c h i s c o n s i s t e n t w i t h overall goals. However, t h e r e d u c t i o n from t h e P h a s e I I A a l l o w a b l e 3.3 m i l l i o n t o t h e F i n a l D e v e l o p m e n t P l a n a n d P r o g r a m a l l o w a b l e o f 2.7 m i l l i o n square feet of commercial or commercial e q u i v a l e n t d e v e l o p m e n t w a s n o t made o n t h e b a s i s of m a r k e t c o n s i d e r a t i o n s , b u t on t h e s h a r p l i m i t a t i o n o f s t r e e t and t r a f f i c c a p a c i t i e s . Furthermore, t h e e l i m i n a t i o n o f t h e W a t e r f r o n t h o u s i n g , a s p e r d i r e c t i v e t o t h e GPG i n t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f the f i n a l Plan, i s regarded as a negative factor from t h e standpoint o f economics. 7. T h e GPG w a s i n s t r u c t e d t o c o n s i d e r t h e Dodge Center and Phase I Georgetown I n l a n d d e v e l o p m e n t s a s " g i v e n s " ( t h e y a r e now u n d e r c o n s t r u c t i o n ) . N o t o n l y do t h e s e d e v e l o p m e n t s a b s o r b a major p o r t i o n o f t h e improved s t r e e t c a p a c i t y but t h e y do n o t c o n f o r m t o m a n y o f t h e g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s o f t h e P l a n (image, u s e , s c a l e and c h a r a c t e r ; p r o t e c t i o n and enhancement o f h i s t o r i c s t r u c t u r e s a n d t h e C&O C a n a l ; e t c . ) 8. T h e P l a n r e c o m m e n d s a r e z o n i n g o f t h e W a t e r f r o n t below t h a t o f r e c e n t r e z o n i n g t o a l l o w a l e v e l of development c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e above c o n c e p t s and c o n s e q u e n c e s i n a t t a i n i n g t h e g o a l s and objectives of the Plan. To t h i s end a m a j o r p o r t i o n o f t h e W a t e r f r o n t i s z o n e d f o r 40 f o o t h i g h r e s i d e n t i a l development and commercial development i s zoned i n s e l e c t e d a r e a s f o r a m a x i m u m o f 60 f e e t i n h e i g h t w i t h a F . A . R . of 3.0. T h e r e i s f l e x i b i l i t y f o r a d d i t i o n a l development i fr e s i d e n t i a l uses a r e s u b s t i t u t e d for o f f i c e and commercial. I n summary, o b j e c t i v e s c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e l e v e l o f d e v e l o p m e n t to be p e r m i t t e d i n t h e W a t e r f r o n t , a n d t h e i m p l i c a t i o n s o f t h i s development ( t r a f f i c congestion, danger t o h i s t o r i c s t r u c t u r e s , etc.) were o p t i m i z e d . These o b j e c t i v e s were n o t maximized i n t h a t t h i s would r e q u i r e an e v e n g r e a t e r r e s t r i c t i o n on d e v e l o p ment t h a n t h a t p r o p o s e d ; t h i s p r o p o s e d r e s t r i c t i o n b e i n g s u b s t a n t i a l with the imposition of further controls (design guidel i n e s , e t c . ) f e l t as u n r e a l i s t i c , even s e l f - d e f e a t i n g . An a d e q u a t e m e t h o d o f s t a g i n g d e v e l o p m e n t a n d t h e r e b y m i n i m i z i n g a d v e r s e impact d u r i n g proposed development was n o t found t o e x i s t and, t h e r e f o r e , a Program o f Development R i g h t s t r a n s f e r i s i l l u s t r a t e d a n d recommended, a p r o g r a m t h a t c o u l d n o t be worked o u t i n d e t a i l i n t h e scope o f t h e study. -102- �The P l a n a c h i e v e s o r w i l l , when i m p l e m e n t e d , a c h i e v e of a l l of t h e p r i n c i p l e o r o v e r a l l g o a l s . The P l a n w i l l a c h i e v e o r n e a r l y a c h i e v e ing objectives: attainment attainment of the follow- 1. the extension of those d e s i r a b l e a t t r i b u t e s o f Georgetown n o r t h o f M S t r e e t i n t o t h e W a t e r f r o n t , where a p p r o p r i a t e , t o c r e a t e a c o n s i s t e n t and u n i f i e d community; 2. t h e f u n c t i o n a l and a e s t h e t i c i n t e g r a t i o n o f p r o p o s e d d e v e l o p m e n t a n d t h e movement o f t r a f f i c ; 3. t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f d e v e l o p m e n t r e q u i r e m e n t s and c o n t r o l s ( b u l k , h e i g h t , and l a n d c o v e r a g e ) ; 4. t h e p r e s e r v a t i o n , r e s t o r a t i o n a n d e n h a n c e m e n t of c u l t u r a l , h i s t o r i c and s c e n i c a t t r i b u t e s ; 5. t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f a p e d e s t r i a n s y s t e m , and r e c r e a t i o n a l f a c i l i t i e s ; and 6. t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f a W a t e r f r o n t parks, park. The f o l l o w i n g o b j e c t i v e s h a v e been compromised i n t h e o p t i m i z a t i o n o f t h e above o b j e c t i v e s and t h e a t t a i n m e n t o f g o a l s ; these objectives w i l l not achieve f u l l attainment: 1. t h e m i n i m i z a t i o n o f any adverse e f f e c t s o f movement; environmental 2. t h e i n s u r i n g o f a m o v e m e n t s y s t e m , a n d p a r k i n g , adequate t o f u t u r e development and m i n i m i z i n g impact on a d j a c e n t u s e s ; 3. t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f d e s i g n g u i d e l i n e s ; 4. t h e p r o v i s i o n o f a d e v e l o p m e n t p r o g r a m ( s t a g i n g ) t o minimize adverse environmental impact during development ; and 5. t h e r e f l e c t i o n o f t h e n e e d s o f a r e s i d e n t i a l community i n t h e development o f t h e W a t e r f r o n t park. In c o n c l u s i o n , t h e Development P l a n and Program and t h e a s s o c i a t e d S e c t i o n a l Development P l a n f o r t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t are designed t o , and i f implemented, w i l l a c h i e v e a t t a i n m e n t of t h e p r i n c i p l e o r o v e r a l l g o a l s they s e t f o r t h . Objectives are o p t i m i z e d t o r e i n f o r c e t h i s a t t a i n m e n t . An a t t e m p t w a s made t o m a x i m i z e t h e a t t a i n m e n t o f t h e o b j e c t i v e s f o u n d t o b e most s i g n i f i c a n t i n terms o f t h e development o f those c r i t i c a l concepts i d e n t i f i e d i n the P l a n . T h u s , some o b j e c t i v e s a c h i e v e a greater l e v e l of attainment than others. -103- �I t i s t h e purpose o f the Zoning Commission i n adopting the Development P l a n and Program and S e c t i o n a l Development P l a n t o g u i d e new d e v e l o p m e n t a n d a c c o m p l i s h w i t h i n t h e G e o r g e t o w n W a t e r f r o n t P l a n a r e a t h e o v e r a l l g o a l s upon w h i c h t h e P l a n i s b a s e d , i n a manner c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e Comprehensive P l a n and t h e b e s t i n t e r e s t s o f t h e N a t i o n a l C a p i t a l and t h e C i t i z e n s of the D i s t r i c t of Columbia. -104- �Appendix A: Historic Area Studies - i - �HISTORIC A R E A STUDIES W i t h i n the Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t Study A r e a , which i s a p a r t o f t h e g r e a t e r G e o r g e t o w n H i s t o r i c D i s t r i c t , t h e r e a r e a number of s m a l l e r a r e a s which have been s t u d i e d most u s e f u l l y as s e p a r a t e b u t r e l a t e d , o r e v e n o v e r l a p p i n g , d e v e l o p m e n t and a t a larger scale. These a r e a s , w h i c h c o n t a i n most o f t h e e x i s t i n g h i s t o r i c b u i l d i n g s a n d a r t i f a c t s , s h a r e many c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , b u t d i f f e r f r o m one a n o t h e r i n o t h e r i m p o r t a n t r e s p e c t s w h i c h a f f e c t t h e i r d e v e l o p m e n t o p p o r t u n i t i e s and w h i c h s u g g e s t somewhat d i f f e r e n t d e v e l o p m e n t s t a n d a r d s and strategies. Even i f i t were acknowledged t h a t t h e i r s i m i l a r i t i e s o u t w e i g h t h e i r d i f f e r e n c e s , t h e r e seem t o be a d v a n t a g e s i n t h e s u b d i v i s i o n o f t h e D i s t r i c t i n t o s m a l l e r a r e a s f o r det a i l e d s t u d y s i m p l y b e c a u s e i t i s e a s i e r t o comprehend them a s a s e r i e s o f n e i g h b o r h o o d s and s p a c e s , i n t e r r e l a t e d and l i n k e d t o g e t h e r by c e r t a i n s h a r e d c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f u r b a n design. The b o u n d a r i e s o f t h e s p e c i a l h i s t o r i c s t u d y a r e a s are somewhat a r b i t r a r y and i t m u s t be r e c o g n i z e d t h a t t h e planning of the i n t e r f a c e of these areas w i t h s e c t i o n s of t h e W a t e r f r o n t A r e a w h i c h w i l l b e r e d e v e l o p e d a s a l l new, or m o s t l y new, b u i l d i n g s i s j u s t a s i m p o r t a n t a s t h e i n t e r n a l planning of the h i s t o r i c areas themselves. The l o c a t i o n o f t h e s e b o u n d a r i e s a s u s e d b e l o w i s shown i n t h e H i s t o r i c A r e a K e y Map. A l s o s h o w n o n t h i s map a r e a l l b u i l d i n g s c o n s i d e r e d as " g i v e n s " f o r the purposes of these s t u d i e s . I t i s i m p o s s i b l e , w i t h i n t h e l i m i t a t i o n s o f t i m e and scope o f t h e c o n t r a c t t o a n a l y z e and d e v e l o p p l a n s f o r a l l o f t h e S t u d y A r e a t o t h e same d e g r e e o f d e t a i l , n o r i s i t n e c e s s a r y . What h a s b e e n done i s t o : ( a ) d e l i n e a t e and e x p l a i n t h e g e n e r a l design c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the e n t i r e h i s t o r i c d i s t r i c t as a p a r t of the I l l u s t r a t i v e S i t e P l a n of the W a t e r f r o n t Area; and (b) t o d e v e l o p a s e r i e s o f p r o t o t y p e a r e a p l a n s i n g r e a t e r det a i l , t o s e r v e as models f o r the e n t i r e Area. Design g u i d e l i n e s o r s t a n d a r d s w h i c h c a n be p r o f i t a b l y a p p l i e d t o t h e w h o l e W a t e r f r o n t Area as d i s t i n c t from the s p e c i a l or unique c o n t r o l s which should apply to s p e c i f i c areas or even to s p e c i f i c s t r u c t u r e s w i t h i n the h i s t o r i c d i s t r i c t s have been o u t l i n e d . Upper Canal — Area A A r e a A i s bounded by K e y B r i d g e on t h e n o r t h , 3 3 r d S t r e e t N.W. on t h e south. Its i n v e n t o r y of 1. P r i n c i p a l H i s t o r i c Landmarks A r e a s - Key Map"): (numbers a r e — ramps a t f o o t o f C&O Canal, existing t h e w e s t , M S t r e e t N.W. e a s t , K S t r e e t N.W. on a s s e t s and footbridge and -2- liabilities on the shows: f o u n d on 34th "Historic Street. �HISTORIC STUDIES KEY MAP �— 2. Forrest-Marbury Other Contributing House (Nos. 4 & 49) . Structures: — — 3. A nearby i n t a c t block of 19th century commercial b u i l d i n g s on t h e s o u t h s i d e o f M S t r e e t t o be r e h a b i l i t a t e d and improved. (Nos. 159, 114, 144, 1 1 9 , 7 5 , 7 6 , 7 7 , 7 8 , 79 & 1 2 0 ) . E x i s t i n g b u i l d i n g s o n t h e n o r t h b a n k o f t h e C&O C a n a l from 34th S t r e e t t o 33rd S t r e e t . Of v a r y i n g q u a l i t y , none o u t s t a n d i n g , t h e y a r e o f good s c a l e a n d i n some i n s t a n c e s t h e s t o n e f o u n d a t i o n w a l l s at t h e i r base a r e an important c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e e n c l o s u r e and atmosphere o f t h e C a n a l . Other Physical Assets: — — The C a n a l and tow-path a r e a a r e c o m p a r a t i v e l y s e c l u d e d and a r e f r e e f r o m a u t o m o b i l e t r a f f i c . Because of the very steep slopes n e i t h e r 34th S t r e e t nor 33rd S t r e e t c r o s s e s t h e C a n a l and 3 4 t h S t r e e t c a n n o t be e x t e n d e d from K S t r e e t t o t h e C a n a l . — Key B r i d g e and ramps - i n g e n e r a l , v i e w s o f t h e b r i d g e and t h e ramps o v e r t h e C a n a l a r e n o t u n p l e a s a n t b e cause o f t h e q u a l i t y o f t h e i r d e s i g n and c o n s t r u c t i o n . — 4. T o p o g r a p h i c a l - t h e g r o u n d s l o p e s up s h a r p l y f r o m t h e Potomac R i v e r and t h e l e v e l o f K S t r e e t , a f f o r d i n g t h e o p p o r t u n i t y f o r maximum s u n l i g h t a n d f o r v i e w s t o t h e south and s o u t h - e a s t . T r e e s and p l a n t s . The w i l d s c r u b growth along t h e banks o f t h e C a n a l i s s u r p r i s i n g l y a t t r a c t i v e and e f f e c t i v e d u r i n g t h e months when f o l i a g e i s i n bloom. (The p r e s e n t n a t u r a l i n f o r m a l c h a r a c t e r o f l a n d s c a p e s h o u l d be p r e s e r v e d i n t h e n a r r o w a r e a n o r t h o f t h e PEPCO i n s t a l l a t i o n i f p o s s i b l e , a s a c o n t r a s t t o t h e more u r b a n c h a r a c t e r o f t h e C a n a l t o t h e e a s t a n d w e s t . ) Existing Physical Liabilities: — PEPCO s u b s t a t i o n a n d t r a n s f o r m e r f i e l d c a n a l bank and west o f 33rd S t r e e t . — The h e i g h t o f Key B r i d g e and t h e need t o connect B r i d g e by ramp t o K S t r e e t . — I n a c c e s s i b i l i t y t o c a r s c a n be c o n v e r t e d , i t i s bel i e v e d , from a p o t e n t i a l l i a b i l i t y t o a p o t e n t i a l asset i f land use i s r e s t r i c t e d t o r e s i d e n t i a l or p a r k l a n d south o f t h e C a n a l and i f t h e i n t e n s i t y o f use -4- south of the the �north 5. of the Canal Opportunities — c a n be k e p t low o r as park. and C o n s t r a i n t s : R e s t o r a t i o n o f t h e F o r r e s t - M a r b u r y House t o i t s c o n d i t i o n i n 1800-1810 i s recommended. The most i m p o r t a n t h i s t o r i c a l e v e n t s c o n n e c t e d w i t h t h e House o c c u r r e d i n 1791-1803 and t h e s c a l e and a p p e a r a n c e o f t h e House a t t h a t t i m e w o u l d be more h a r m o n i o u s w i t h t h e f o l l o w ing : R e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e F r a n c i s S c o t t Key House on t h e s i t e d i r e c t l y t o t h e west a t t h e west corner o f 34th S t r e e t a n d M S t r e e t , N.W. T h e K e y House was d e m o l i s h e d when Key B r i d g e was c o n s t r u c t e d i n 1923 a n d s i n c e r e c o n s t r u c t i o n on i t s o r i g i n a l s i t e i s i m p o s s i b l e , t h e p r o p o s e d s i t e , w h i c h i s o n l y 400 f e e t e a s t w a r d , i s t h e best choice. N o r m a l l y , one w o u l d c o n s i d e r t h e p r o s p e c t o f r e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f an h i s t o r i c house w i t h c o n s i d e r a b l e s k e p t i c i s m but t h e r e a r e compelling arguments i n f a v o r o f t h i s instance. F i r s t , i ti s an h i s t o r i c b u i l d i n g o f g r e a t s e n t i m e n t a l and p a t r i o t i c importance t o t h e American p u b l i c - a s t h e home o f t h e a u t h o r o f t h e n a t i o n a l anthem. Second, measured drawings a r e a v a i l a b l e , taken o f t h e b u i l d i n g , i n s i d e and o u t , b e f o r e i t s d e m o l i t i o n (HABS), and i t c a n be r e c o n s t r u c t e d on a site virtually identical to the original - third, i t s r e c o n s t r u c t i o n would g r e a t l y a s s i s t j o i n t e f f o r t s t o r e s t o r e t h e F o r r e s t - M a r b u r y House - a b u i l d i n g o f u n i q u e importance i n t h e h i s t o r y o f t h e C a p i t a l and t h e only r e s i d e n c e i n t h e C i t y s t i l l s t a n d i n g t h a t was v i s i t e d by G e n e r a l W a s h i n g t o n . A r e l a t i v e l y low s c a l e o f development i s p a r t i c u l a r l y d e s i r a b l e i n t h e s u b j e c t area, i n p a r t because o f t h e p h y s i c a l c o n s t r a i n t s which e x i s t ( s e e above) and a l s o because t h e r e s t o r a t i o n and r e s i d e n t i a l areas would b e n e f i t from t h e lower intensity. A maximum h e i g h t o f 40 f e e t a n d maximum F A R o f 2.0 i s r e c o m m e n d e d f o r t h e e n t i r e b l o c k . Much o f t h e a r e a i s recommended f o r d e v e l o p m e n t i n p a r k l a n d . V i s t a and a c c e s s from 34th and 33rd S t r e e t s . An open r i g h t - o f - w a y s h o u l d be m a i n t a i n e d f o r b o t h o f t h e s e s t r e e t s , from M S t r e e t t o t h e R i v e r . A p u b l i c walkway -5- �and s t e p s f r o m t h e C a n a l t o t h e R i v e r e s p l a n a d e will l i n k t h e Canal D i s t r i c t and h i s t o r i c b u i l d i n g s t o t h e Waterfront, and w i l l provide a c c e s s i b i l i t y t o r e s i d e n t i a l c o n s t r u c t i o n t o t h e e a s t on t h e s l o p e between K S t r e e t and t h e C a n a l . The p u b l i c walkway and b i c y c l e p a t h on t h e s o u t h bank o f t h e C a n a l s h o u l d be m a i n t a i n e d and i m p r o v e d . L i m i t e d r e s i d e n t i a l d e v e l o p m e n t i s b e l i e v e d t o be f e a s i b l e and d e s i r a b l e along south bank o f t h e c a n a l to the e a s t o f 34th S t r e e t . T h e r e s i d e n c e s s h o u l d be C a n a l - o r i e n t e d and designed t o p r o v i d e adequate p r i v a c y from p u b l i c ways on 34th S t r e e t and t h e C a n a l . Low density r e s i d e n t i a l construction should extend asf a r e a s t w a r d a s p o s s i b l e , up t o t h e l i n e o f t h e PEPCO property, w i t h a mixed use o r apartment b u i l d i n g o r i e n t e d t o w a r d t h e r i v e r f i l l i n g t h e gap on K S t r e e t b e l o w t h e t r a n s f o r m e r s i t e on t h e c a n a l on w h a t i s p r e s e n t l y p a r t o f t h e PEPCO s i t e . I f PEPCO c o u l d be p e r s u a d e d t o e x c h a n g e t h e t r a n s former s i t e along t h e bank o f t h e C a n a l f o r a t o t a l l y e n c l o s e d f a c i l i t y on K S t r e e t s o u t h o f t h a t t r a c t , i t w o u l d be a g r e a t i m p r o v e m e n t i n t h e e n v i r o n m e n t a l potent i a l o f t h e r e s i d e n t i a l d i s t r i c t , b u t i ti s n o t an a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y by any means. Another p o s s i b l e o p t i o n w o u l d p l a c e t h e t u n n e l v e n t i l a t i o n b u i l d i n g on t h e PEPCO K S t r e e t s i t e , m a i n t a i n i n g t h e t r a n s f o r m e r s i t e w h e r e i t i s now. I f the v e n t i l a t i n g b u i l d i n g can be o f f s e t f r o m t h e p r o p o s e d t u n n e l a n d p l a c e d n o r t h o f K S t r e e t , t h i s i s p r o b a b l y t h e optimum l o c a t i o n from a t e c h n i c a l a s w e l l a s an a e s t h e t i c and e n v i r o n mental point of view. North o f t h e Canal t h e economic p o t e n t i a l f o r mixed uses i s probably b e s t - r e s i d e n t i a l and p r o f e s s i o n a l , design and t r a d e o f f i c e s j u s t north o f t h e Canal and c o m m e r c i a l , r e t a i l a l o n g M S t r e e t . Restoration of t h e h i s t o r i c b u i l d i n g s should help upgrade t h e commercial p o t e n t i a l a t t h i s end o f M S t r e e t , w i t h more f a m i l y - o r i e n t e d s h o p s a n d r e s t a u r a n t s . T h e r e i s c o n s i d e r a b l e open space a t t h e e a s t e r n end o f t h e block f o r " c o u r t y a r d " development behind t h e M S t r e e t facades. -6- �6. Aesthetic Considerations: — — 7. R e s i d e n t i a l development i n t h e a r e a south o f t h e c a n a l s h o u l d be c o n t e m p o r a r y i n d e s i g n t o h e l p m i n i m i z e t h e d i f f i c u l t i e s o f t h e s i t e and t a k e f u l l b e n e f i t o f t h e opportunities. I t s h o u l d , however, be c o m p a t i b l e i n both m a t e r i a l s and s c a l e w i t h t h e r e s t o r e d h i s t o r i c residential buildings to the north. Special care should be t a k e n i n t h e d e s i g n o f t h e b u i l d i n g s a s s e e n f r o m above - from t h e h i g h e r ground n e a r M S t r e e t . The a e s t h e t i c and e n v i r o n m e n t a l p o t e n t i a l f o rr e s i d e n t i a l development along t h i s s e c t o r of t h e Canal i s very high. T h e p r o b l e m o f n o i s e f r o m K e y B r i d g e may r e q u i r e sound i s o l a t i o n (double g l a z i n g ) . Optimum C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s — o f Development: Proposed l a n d use has been p r e v i o u s l y c i t e d summarized as f o l l o w s : b u t c a n be South o f C a n a l e a s t o f 34th S t r e e t : R e s i d e n t i a l , predominantly single-family i ff e a s i b l e economically. Ownership s h o u l d p r o b a b l y be condominium t o a l l o w shared p a r k i n g f a c i l i t i e s a t t h e K S t r e e t l e v e l and to permit g r e a t e r f l e x i b i l i t y i n d w e l l i n g u n i t d e s i g n . South of the Canal west o f 34th S t r e e t : Parkland. North Canal: Mixed u s e . R e s i d e n t i a l apartments and p r o f e s s i o n a l , d e s i g n - t r a d e o f f i c e s a l o n g t h e Canal. Commercial and o f f i c e use along M S t r e e t . Restored and r e c o n s t r u c t e d h i s t o r i c house s i t e s on t h e e a s t a n d w e s t s i d e s o f 3 4 t h S t r e e t a n d M Street. — R e s i d e n t i a l b u i l d i n g s south o f Canal should have a maximum, ( a l l i n c l u s i v e ) h e i g h t o f 40 f e e t a n d a m a x i m u m of t h r e e s t o r i e s t o r o o f c o r n i c e l i n e t o promote a b u i l d i n g form t h a t steps-up t h e h i l l . I n general these b u i l d i n g s should have t h e major l i v i n g areas o r i e n t e d toward t h e C a n a l and t o c o u r t s w h i c h open t o t h e C a n a l and t o t h e 3 4 t h S t r e e t s t e p s . — B u i l d i n g s n o r t h o f C a n a l s h o u l d h a v e a maximum ( a l l i n c l u s i v e ) h e i g h t o f 40 f e e t m e a s u r e d f r o m t h e a l l e y o r lane n o r t h o f t h e Canal o r from M S t r e e t , depending upon t h e p o i n t o f e n t r a n c e . Some b o n u s i n c o v e r a g e m i g h t be a l l o w e d f o r c o v e r e d ( t e r r a c e d - o v e r ) p a r k i n g a c c e s s i b l e from 33rd and 34th S t r e e t s . -7- �— — T h e a r c h i t e c t u r a l s c a l e o f d e v e l o p m e n t s h o u l d be residential, or t y p i c a l of the earlier small-scaled industrial-warehouse constructed north of the Canal. F u r t h e r i n c e n t i v e s t o promote r e h a b i l i t a t i o n and r e modeling o f t h e e x i s t i n g commercial buildings along M S t r e e t may n e e d t o b e d e v e l o p e d . — 8. S u i t a b l e , i . e . c o m p a t i b l e , u s e o f m a t e r i a l s may b e g o v e r n e d b y a r c h i t e c t u r a l r e v i e w o f p l a n s f o r new a n d r e m o d e l e d b u i l d i n g s , b a s e d upon g u i d e l i n e s f o r d e s i g n i n the area. I f PEPCO t r a n s f o r m e r s remain a t t h e i r e x i s t i n g present l o c a t i o n t h e y s h o u l d be s c r e e n e d by masonry w a l l s and planting. Some l a n d s c a p e d b u f f e r z o n e b e t w e e n t h e i n s t a l l a t i o n and t h e r e s i d e n t i a l development t o t h e w e s t s h o u l d be m a i n t a i n e d . Design Criteria: S p e c i a l r e g u l a t i o n s a r e r e q u i r e d t o p r o m o t e "optimum" d e v e l o p ment. The z o n i n g e n v e l o p e c a n be depended upon o n l y i n p a r t t o c o n t r o l t h e form o f development. Development on t h e n o r t h s i d e o f t h e c a n a l may r e q u i r e some s p e c i a l z o n i n g exceptions i n t h e absence o f s t r e e t ( r a t h e r than a l l e y ) frontage. A r c h i t e c t u r a l r e v i e w o f new c o n s t r u c t i o n under the p r o v i s i o n s o f t h e O l d Georgetown A c t c a n a s s i s t i n maintaining s u i t a b l e form and q u a l i t y o f development, but g u i d e l i n e s f o r design i n advance o f review can help e l i m i n a t e some o f t h e u n c e r t a i n t i e s o f t h a t p r o c e s s . 9. Development S t r a t e g i e s , Options: — The r e s t o r a t i o n o f t h e F o r r e s t - M a r b u r y House and t h e r e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e F r a n c i s S c o t t K e y House m i g h t be c a r r i e d o u t a n d a d m i n i s t e r e d b y t h e P a r k S e r v i c e a s a p a r t o f t h e C&O C a n a l h i s t o r i c d i s t r i c t , i f f u n d s can be o b t a i n e d f o r t h a t p u r p o s e w i t h i n a r e a s o n a b l e p e r i o d o f t i m e , b u t t h e r e i s some u r g e n c y i n m o v i n g ahead w i t h these p r o j e c t s a s q u i c k l y as p o s s i b l e . The i n f l u e n c e o f t h e i r d e v e l o p m e n t upon t h e r e s t o f t h e a r e a c a n s c a r c e l y be o v e r - e s t i m a t e d , a s i t w o u l d h a v e a c a t a l y t i c e f f e c t on t h e a d j o i n i n g r e s i d e n t i a l and commercial t r a c t s . — B i c e n t e n n i a l p r o j e c t s seem t o be i n a s t a t e o f l i m b o a t t h e moment, b u t t h i s w o u l d be a f i r s t p r i o r i t y i f -8- �f u n d s f o r r e c o n s t r u c t i o n c a n be f o u n d i n c o n n e c t i o n with that effort. The F o r r e s t - M a r b u r y House and adj o i n i n g property to the west are i n p r i v a t e ownership and w i l l h a v e t o be a c q u i r e d ; c a r e f u l p l a n s f o r r e s t o r a t i o n , l a n d s c a p e , i n t e r i o r s , e t c . , w i l l h a v e t o be p r e p a r e d ; a n d w o r k w o u l d h a v e t o move a h e a d q u i c k l y i f t h e B i c e n t e n n i a l d a t e f o r c o m p l e t i o n w e r e t o be realized. An e s t i m a t e d b u d g e t f o r t h e p r o j e c t c o u l d be e s t a b l i s h e d ( p r o b a b l y b e t w e e n one and two m i l l i o n dollars). Potomac Street - Area B A r e a B, b o u n d e d b y M S t r e e t , N.W., on t h e n o r t h and K S t r e e t , N.W. o n t h e s o u t h , i n c l u d e s t h e s t r u c t u r e s f r o n t i n g on M a r k e t S q u a r e - a l s o known as Potomac S t r e e t - above t h e c a n a l , and on P o t o m a c S t r e e t b e l o w t h e c a n a l . Its inventory of E x i s t i n g Assets 1. Principal Historic and Liabilities shows: Landmarks: — — The J o s e p h C a r l t o n House a t (No. 1 8 ) b u i l t a b o u t 1800. — P o t o m a c M a n u f a c t u r i n g Company a t (No. 5 3 ) b u i l t b e f o r e 1887. — C a r b a r n a t 3222 M S t r e e t on c o r n e r o f W a r e h o u s e Place. The b u i l d i n g i s l o c a t e d on t h e o n e - a c r e s i t e o f George Gordon's t o b a c c o w a r e h o u s e o f c a . 1774. The canal facade of t h i s b u i l d i n g i s of e x c e p t i o n a l value. (No. 38). — C&O — 2. T h e G e o r g e t o w n M a r k e t (No. 4 8 ) b u i l t i n 1 8 6 5 s i t e o f an e a r l i e r m a r k e t s t r u c t u r e . B o m f o r d M i l l b u i l t i n 1845 and p r e s e n t l y owned and o c c u p i e d by t h e W i l k i n s - R o g e r s F l o u r Company. The o r i g i n a l s t r u c t u r e i s l o c a t e d on t h e w e s t s i d e o f Potomac S t r e e t j u s t s o u t h of the c a n a l . (No. 34). Canal and Other Contributing — 1052-54 Potomac 1050 on the Street Potomac Street footbridge. Structures: 1043 W a r e h o u s e P l a c e , b u i l t a s b e f o r e 1890. The c a n a l f a c a d e (No. 85). -9- a b l a c k s m i t h ' s shop i s of c o n t r i b u t i n g value. �— 1048 Potomac S t r e e t . F o r m e r h a u l i n g c o m p a n y , now fessional office. B u i l t i n 1919 o f r e d sandstone (No. 1 5 5 ) . — 3278 t o 3282 M S t r e e t - C o m m e r c i a l b u i l d i n g s b u i l t b e f o r e 1890 on s o u t h w e s t c o r n e r o f Potomac and M S t r e e t s . ( N o s . 56 a n d 5 7 ) — 1046 Potomac S t r e e t (No. 1 9 6 ) . The foundation, v i s i b l e from C a n a l p a t h , i s o l d and o f c o n t r i b u t i n g v a l u e . — The r e t a i n i n g w a l l p a r a l l e l is of contributing value. — C a n a l w a r e h o u s e on G r a c e — D i s t r i c t o f C o l u m b i a P a p e r M a n u f a c t u r i n g Company b u i l d i n g , 3259 K S t r e e t , a t t h e n o r t h w e s t c o r n e r o f K a n d P o t o m a c S t r e e t , b u i l t a b o u t 1 9 0 0 (No. 9 1 ) . T h e s t r u c t u r e s a d j a c e n t t o i t on K S t r e e t a n d Potomac S t r e e t are also of contributing value. Other P h y s i c a l pro- t o and n o r t h o f t h e Canal Street. (No. 1 1 6 ) Assets: — T o p o g r a p h i c a l - There i s a s h a r p l e v e l change from t h e n o r t h e r n p o r t i o n o f Potomac S t r e e t t o t h e C a n a l and l o w e r Potomac S t r e e t a f f o r d i n g t h e o p p o r t u n i t y f o r a s e r i e s o f v i s t a s o f t h e R i v e r from d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s and v a n t a g e p o i n t s . The d r o p i n g r a d e from t h e C a n a l t o t h e R i v e r was used by t h e m i l l s f o r m i l l r a c e s , t o power w a t e r - d r i v e n machinery. Bomford M i l l (later known a s P i o n e e r M i l l s ) i s t h e l a s t s u r v i v i n g b u i l d i n g o f t h i s t y p e on t h e W a t e r f r o n t . — The i n d u s t r i a l b u i l d i n g s i n t h i s Study Area below t h e C a n a l - B o m f o r d M i l l , t h e P a p e r Company b u i l d i n g s , and t h e C a n a l Warehouses w i t h t h e h e a t i n g b u i l d i n g a t i t s w e s t e r n end - a r e good e x a m p l e s o f b r i c k a r c h i tecture i n the functional tradition. The narrow b r i c k s i d e d c a n y o n b e t w e e n t h e m i l l b u i l d i n g s l e a d i n g down to t h e R i v e r , t h e f i n e arched b r i c k openings and t h e spacious i n t e r i o r s h e l l of the heating building a r e examples o f t h e e x i s t i n g a r c h i t e c t u r a l and s p a t i a l a s s e t s w h i c h s h o u l d be p r e s e r v e d . Existing — Physical Liabilities: D e m o l i t i o n o f t h e o l d b u i l d i n g s on t h e e a s t s i d e o f Market Square, and gaps between t h e e x i s t i n g b u i l d i n g s on t h e w e s t s i d e h a v e v i r t u a l l y d e s t r o y e d t h e e n c l o s u r e -10- �and t h e s h e l t e r e d a t m o s p h e r e o f t h e f o r m e r place. Market- — T h e j u n k company s i t e , e a s t o f t h e M a r k e t , i s a s o u r c e o f s e r i o u s b l i g h t - l o o s e t r a s h , n o i s e and substandard structures. — The M i l l s i l o s , d e s p i t e t h e i r h e r o i c s c a l e , seem t o h a v e no p r a c t i c a l o r c o m p a t i b l e a d a p t i v e u s e s i f a n d w h e n t h e F l o u r Company d e c i d e s t o q u i t t h e s i t e . Opportunities — and C o n s t r a i n t s : P u b l i c Community: R e s t o r a t i o n o f t h e Georgetown Market t o i t s o r i g i n a l use and a p p e a r a n c e i s recommended. The p r e s e n t s t r u c t u r e was b u i l t i n 1865 on t h e f o u n d a t i o n s o f t h e O l d Georgetown Market ( c . 1796). The o r i g i n a l deeds by w h i c h t h e l a n d on w h i c h t h e M a r k e t s t a n d s b o t h s t i p u l a t e t h a t t h e s i t e was " f o rt h e u s e o f t h e market a f o r e s a i d f o r e v e r , a n d f o r no o t h e r u s e , i n t e r e s t o r purpose whatsoever". ( D e e d f r o m Adam K i n g t o t h e G e o r g e town C o r p o r a t i o n , 1802.) I n the recent past merchants have i n d i c a t e d i n t e r e s t i n r e s t o r i n g and r e o c c u p y i n g t h e M a r k e t , b u t t h e b u i l d i n g i s p r e s e n t l y owned b y the D i s t r i c t o f Columbia and l e a s e d t o an automotive parts wholesaler. R e s t o r a t i o n o f the Market should be a c c o m p a n i e d by f u r t h e r r e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e S q u a r e which i s subsquently discussed. A t some t i m e i n t h e f u t u r e B o m f o r d M i l l s h o u l d b e r e s t o r e d , i f p o s s i b l e , t o more n e a r l y i t s o r i g i n a l a p p e a r a n c e a n d t h e l o w e r f l o o r s c o n v e r t e d t o a museum o f W a t e r f r o n t i n d u s t r i a l h i s t o r y , a d m i n i s t e r e d by t h e P a r k S e r v i c e i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h t h e C&O C a n a l N a t i o n a l Park. Upper f l o o r s m i g h t be u s e d f o r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e o f f i c e s or other purposes. T h i s suggestion presumes, of course, t h a t t h e Wilkins-Rogers F l o u r M i l l would c e a s e t o h a v e need f o r t h e b u i l d i n g . I f , on t h e o t h e r h a n d , t h e company p l a n s t o o p e r a t e f o r a l o n g p e r i o d on t h i s s i t e they might f a v o r a b l y consider a cooperative e f f o r t with the Park S e r v i c e to p a r t i a l l y reconstruct t h e b u i l d i n g f o r museum p u r p o s e s a n d t o u p g r a d e t h e appearance o f t h e square below t h e Canal. -11- �A connection between t h e towpath and t h e p u b l i c square n e a r t h e f o o t b r i d g e a t Potomac S t r e e t s h o u l d be d e v e l o p e d . F u l l o r p a r t i a l c l o s u r e o f both Market Square and t h e M i l l Square t o automobile t r a f f i c i s d e s i r a b l e . I f t h e f l o u r m i l l s c e a s e t o o p e r a t e on t h e s i t e there i s a n o p p o r t u n i t y f o r new r e s i d e n t i a l c o n s t r u c t i o n south o f t h e C a n a l and w e s t and south o f Bomford M i l l . The e x i s t i n g i n t e r c o n n e c t e d m i l l b u i l d i n g s b e l o n g i n g t o t h e D i s t r i c t o f C o l u m b i a P a p e r Company p r e s e n t a n opportunity f o r adaptive reconstruction, preferably a m i x t u r e o f c o m m e r c i a l shops a n d s t u d i e s on t h e l o w e r f l o o r s and r e s i d e n t i a l u n i t s on t h e upper f l o o r s . I n f i l l c o m m e r c i a l s t r u c t u r e s and u s e s s h o u l d be d e v e l o p e d west o f t h e Georgetown Market b u i l d i n g and e a s t o f the Market a s t r u c t u r e p r o v i d i n g parking f o r a t l e a s t 125 c a r s , w i t h g r o u n d l e v e l s h o p s f a c i n g M S t r e e t a n d t h e S q u a r e , s h o u l d be c o n s t r u c t e d t o accommodate M a r k e t s h o p p e r s a n d museum v i s i t o r s . The basement l e v e l of t h e Market has p o t e n t i a l f o r remodeling f o r use as a shop, t a v e r n o r r e s t a u r a n t . The C a n a l w a r e h o u s e on G r a c e S t r e e t s h o u l d be r e t a i n e d and r e s t o r e d f o r c o m m e r c i a l , s t u d i o o r o f f i c e u s e and the former h e a t i n g p l a n t a t t h e west end o f t h e warehouse p r e s e n t s a remarkable o p p o r t u n i t y f o r remodeling as a r e s t a u r a n t , w i t h an outdoor c a f e f r o n t i n g on M i l l Square. I t i s hoped t h a t t h e f o o t b r i d g e from Warehouse P l a c e t o t h e C a n a l warehouse m i g h t be r e s t o r e d . Aesthetic — Considerations: The simple, rugged, i n d u s t r i a l appearance o f t h e d i s t r i c t s h o u l d n o t be " p r e t t i e d - u p " by t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f insuitable period r e s i d e n t i a l details. Improvements i n p a v i n g , p l a n t i n g , l i g h t i n g , g r a p h i c s and s t r e e t f u r n i t u r e c a n do much t o r a i s e t h e l e v e l o f a t t r a c t i v e n e s s o f the area. Optimum C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f D e v e l o p m e n t : — Proposed Land Use i s summarized a s f o l l o w s : South of t h e Canal: M i x e d u s e , r e s i d e n t i a l a n d comm e r c i a l a s d i s c u s s e d above. Adaptive reconstruction of valuable b u i l d i n g s . -12- �North of the Canal: Commercial use, r e s t o r a t i o n of M a r k e t , c o n s t r u c t i o n o f p a r k i n g a n d s u i t a b l e new i n f i l l s t r u c t u r e s as r e q u i r e d . — New r e s i d e n t i a l c o n s t r u c t i o n s o u t h o f t h e C a n a l and w e s t of Potomac S t r e e t s h o u l d i n g e n e r a l have a h e i g h t l i m i t o f t h r e e s t o r i e s o r 40 f e e t , s t e p p i n g up t h e s l o p e t o a d m i t v i e w s and s o u t h e r l y e x p o s u r e s . This h e i g h t w i l l a l s o be c o m p a t i b l e w i t h e x i s t i n g construct i o n n o r t h o f t h e C a n a l and w i t h p r o p o s e d r e s i d e n t i a l c o n s t r u c t i o n west of 33rd S t r e e t . — New commercial development north of the Canal should h a v e a maximum h e i g h t o f 40 f e e t t o c o n f o r m t o t h e s c a l e o f t h e G e o r g e t o w n M a r k e t and o t h e r h i s t o r i c b u i l d i n g s on t h e S q u a r e and on M S t r e e t . — The f a c a d e o f t h e shop and p a r k i n g s t r u c t u r e s h o u l d be r e l a t e d i n p r o p o r t i o n , f o r m , s c a l e a n d u s e o f m a t e r i a l s to M S t r e e t b u i l d i n g s r a t h e r than to the unique a r c h i t e c t u r a l c h a r a c t e r of the Market. Awnings and/or arcaded c o n s t r u c t i o n of the ground f l o o r toward t h e M a r k e t c o u l d h e l p t o e x p a n d t h e t r a d i n g a r e a on the e a s t s i d e of the Square. Service vehicles w i l l probably have to enter the Market Square to provide a c c e s s t o e x i s t i n g b u i l d i n g s , b u t t h e new s t r u c t u r e on t h e e a s t s i d e s h o u l d be d e s i g n e d t o be served from the p a r k i n g c o u r t a t the r e a r . Design Special ment. Criteria: regulations required t o promote "optimum" develop- — Demolition of e x i s t i n g buildings of h i s t o r i c , t e c t u r a l and c o n t r i b u t i n g " a t m o s p h e r i c " v a l u e be p r e v e n t e d . — A r c h i t e c t u r a l r e v i e w o f a l l new o r r e m o d e l e d b u i l d i n g s s h o u l d be r e q u i r e d a n d c o m p a t i b l e u s e o f m a t e r i a l s , s e t b a c k , s c a l e and p r o p o r t i o n s s h o u l d be g o v e r n e d by guidelines f o r design i n the area. — The S e c t i o n a l D e v e l o p m e n t P l a n p e r m i t s r e t e n t i o n o f nonc o n f o r m i n g m i l l b u i l d i n g s i n t h i s a r e a , t o be converted t o new u s e s . These b u i l d i n g s i n t h i s Area, exceed new standards f o r h e i g h t a n d FAR i n t h e d i s t r i c t b u t s h a l l b e p e r m i t t e d t o do s o i n t h a t t h e i r new u s e s do n o t o v e r b u r d e n t h e t r a f f i c and p a r k i n g c a p a c i t y o f t h e d i s t r i c t . -13- archishould �— — 9. Some e x c e p t i o n t o t h e F A R l i m i t a t i o n s may b e r e q u i r e d to e n c o u r a g e and a l l o w a d e q u a t e p a r k i n g f a c i l i t i e s i n s u i t a b l e and f e a s i b l e l o c a t i o n s . C a n a l w a l l and w a r e h o u s e by e a s e m e n t s r e q u i r e d by Development S t r a t e g i e s , f a c a d e s s h o u l d be p r o t e c t e d the Park Service. Options: — E x p a n s i o n o f t h e C&O C a n a l administration of the M i l l by t h e P a r k S e r v i c e s h o u l d Historic D i s t r i c t to allow S q u a r e and Bomford M i l l be c o n s i d e r e d . — The o r g a n i z a t i o n o f a n o n - p r o f i t M a r k e t S q u a r e M i l l S q u a r e D e v e l o p m e n t C o r p o r a t i o n s h o u l d be e x p l o r e d . P r o p e r t y o w n e r s , b o t h p u b l i c and p r i v a t e s h a r e , o r should share, development o b j e c t i v e s which are u n i q u e t o t h i s a r e a , a n d some f o r m s o f p u b l i c a s s i s t a n c e t h r o u g h g r a n t s f r o m HUD, the Department of the I n t e r i o r , e t c . , m i g h t be g a i n e d i f t h e r e d e v e l o p m e n t of i n d i v i d u a l s i t e s i s c o o r d i n a t e d through the agency of a cooperative o r g a n i z a t i o n . Lower Wisconsin Avenue - Area C A r e a C, b o u n d e d b y M S t r e e t , N.W., on t h e n o r t h , K S t r e e t , N.W. on t h e s o u t h i n c l u d e s t h e b u i l d i n g s f r o n t i n g on W i s c o n s i n A v e nue on t h e e a s t a n d w e s t . Its inventory of 1. Principal existing Historic assets and liabilities shows: Landmarks: — Dodge W a r e h o u s e s : 1000-1006 W i s c o n s i n Avenue. Built at e a r l y p a r t of 19th Century. T y p i c a l of waterf r o n t warehouses of o l d Georgetown tobacco p o r t . (Nos. 6,7,8) — 3205 K S t r e e t , (No. 9 2 ) — 3 1 3 4 - 3 6 S o u t h S t r e e t (No. 1 3 ) : t h e B r i c k y a r d H i l l H o u s e , p r o b a b l y b u i l t a b o u t 1800 by t h e f i r s t m a y o r of Georgetown, Robert P e t e r . — G r a c e E p i s c o p a l C h u r c h a n d g r o u n d s (No. 4 6 ) a t 1 0 4 1 W i s c o n s i n Avenue, b u i l t i n 1866. Adjacent Rectory and P a r i s h H a l l b u i l t i n 1895 and 1898. Granite c r o s s a t southwest corner of churchyard marks l o c a - adjacent to the -14- Dodge W a r e h o u s e s . �tion of mission church of 1855. — — C i t y Tavern 1796. — 2. V i g i l a n t F i r e H o u s e (No. 3 1 ) a t 1 0 6 6 W i s c o n s i n A v e n u e . Oldest e x i s t i n g firehouse i n D i s t r i c t of Columbia. B u i l t i n 1844. Bridge over Other (No. C&O Contributing 3) a t 3 2 0 6 - 3 2 0 8 M C a n a l on Wisconsin Street, built about Avenue. Structures: — — E x i s t i n g b u i l d i n g s on t h e e a s t s i d e o f W i s c o n s i n Avenue between M S t r e e t and t h e C a n a l . Built in l a t e 1 9 t h C e n t u r y and f i r s t q u a r t e r o f t h e 2 0 t h Century. — Existing buildings a t 3200 M r e e t and Avenue. (Nos. 58, — C h e r r y H i l l A p a r t m e n t s a t 1024 W i s c o n s i n at the t u r n of the century. (No. 1 3 2 ) — 3. E x i s t i n g c o m m e r c i a l b u i l d i n g s on s o u t h s i d e o f M S t r e e t f o r a t l e a s t one b l o c k on e i t h e r s i d e o f M Street. Many h a v e b e e n r e s t o r e d a n d some a r e o f s i g n i f i c a n t h i s t o r i c or a e s t h e t i c value. As a t o t a l i t y t h e y c r e a t e t h e c o n t i n u o u s commercial f a c a d e s whose i m p o r t a n c e i s m o r e t h a n t h e sum o f i t s p a r t s . B u i l d i n g s a t 1 0 2 8 - 3 2 , 1042 b u i l t i n the f i r s t quarter Nos. 1 4 9 , 150, 151) Acceptable, Non-Contributing — 4. on w e s t s i d e o f W i s c o n s i n A v e n u e a t 1048, 1076 and 1078 W i s c o n s i n 84, 97, 98) Physical built and 1044 W i s c o n s i n A v e n u e , of the 20th Century. Structures, Likely to O f f i c e b u i l d i n g s , e a s t o f W i s c o n s i n Avenue and of the Canal. ( N o s . 208 [2 b l d g s ] , 2 1 5 ) Other — Avenue, Remain: south Assets: T o p o g r a p h i c a l - T h e g r o u n d s l o p e s s h a r p l y up f r o m K Street to M Street. The v i e w from M S t r e e t o f t h e P o t o mac c o u l d b e q u i t e s p e c t a c u l a r , p a r t i c u l a r l y a f t e r t h e removal o f t h e W h i t e h u r s t Freeway and c r e a t i o n of a park a t the foot of Wisconsin a t the w a t e r ' s edge. The s l o p e e a s t o f W i s c o n s i n Avenue a l s o a f f o r d s -15- �the opportunity f o r r e s i d e n t i a l development maximum s o u t h e r n e x p o s u r e s a n d R i v e r v i e w s . with — T h e C&O C a n a l i s a m a j o r v i s u a l a s s e t o f t h e a r e a , but i n c o n t r a s t t o C a n a l - s i d e s i t e s both e a s t and west o f W i s c o n s i n Avenue, t h e Canal and towpath p a s s under t h e s t r e e t l e v e l i n a deep c u t , w i t h v e r t i c a l s t o n e w a l l s on e i t h e r s i d e . — Grace Existing — Churchyard. Physical Liabilities: Some o f t h e g a p s t h a t now e x i s t b e t w e e n t h e b u i l d i n g s f r o n t i n g on W i s c o n s i n Avenue a r e a v i s u a l liability; f i r s t , because t h e s t r e e t i s not adequately d e f i n e d o r " c o n t a i n e d " by t h e b u i l d i n g s on e i t h e r s i d e ( i n cont r a s t , f o r example, t o most b l o c k s o f W i s c o n s i n Avenue above M S t r e e t ) ; and second, because where t h e s e u n d e s i r a b l e gaps o r s e t b a c k s o c c u r , they a r e f i l l e d with parked automobiles. The d e s i r a b l e openings i n the s t r e e t facade - a t the Canal Bridge, a t Grace Churchyard and a t t h e end o f t h e s t r e e t toward the r i v e r - w o u l d be h e i g h t e n e d i n t h e i r e f f e c t i f the other spaces were f i l l e d w i t h s u i t a b l e b u i l d i n g s and t h e p a r k i n g l o t s w e r e h i d d e n f r o m v i e w . Examples are: P a r k i n g l o t o f t h e T e l e p h o n e Company B u i l d i n g (No. 2 0 8 ) j u s t s o u t h o f t h e Canal; Parking lots i n front of the building a t 1 0 1 5 W i s c o n s i n A v e n u e (No. 2 1 5 ) and a t t h e n o r t h w e s t c o r n e r o f K and Wisconsin. Opportunities and C o n s t r a i n t s : — P u b l i c , Community: The p r o p e r t y a t t h e e n d o f Wiscons i n Avenue between K S t r e e t and t h e Potomac R i v e r s h o u l d be d e v e l o p e d a s a p u b l i c p a r k and p l a z a . I t w i l l be l o c a t e d a t t h e p o i n t o f i n t e r s e c t i o n o f t h e R i v e r walk and W i s c o n s i n Avenue, and w i l l enhance the W a t e r f r o n t b o t h f u n c t i o n a l l y and v i s u a l l y . — Mixed use development: There a r e s e v e r a l s i t e s i n t h i s a r e a t h a t have p o t e n t i a l f o r commercial o r f o r mixed-use development. These i n c l u d e t h e two p a r k i n g l o t s i n f r o n t o f b u i l d i n g s on t h e e a s t s i d e o f Wisc o n s i n , t h e n o r t h e a s t c o r n e r o f W i s c o n s i n and K S t r e e t s , t h e i n f i l l between e x i s t i n g commercial -16- �u s e s on t h e w e s t s i d e o f W i s c o n s i n n o r t h o f t h e C a n a l a n d t h e u n d e v e l o p e d p r o p e r t y s u r r o u n d i n g t h e Dodge W a r e h o u s e ( S i t e o f t h e Dodge C e n t e r development). — 7. R e s i d e n t i a l d e v e l o p m e n t : T h e r e i s good p o t e n t i a l f o r r e s i d e n t i a l development above K S t r e e t j u s t e a s t o f W i s c o n s i n Avenue on t h e s i t e p r e s e n t l y o c c u p i e d by the D i s t r i c t o f Columbia r e f u s e i n c i n e r a t o r . Aesthetic Considerations: — — A l l new d e v e l o p m e n t , a n d r e s i d e n t i a l d e v e l o p m e n t i n p a r t i c u l a r , s h o u l d make u s e o f t h e n a t u r a l s l o p e up from t h e R i v e r t o maximize t h e exposures and v i e w s from t h e u n i t s . — 8. New c o m m e r c i a l a n d r e s i d e n t i a l d e v e l o p m e n t i n t h e a r e a s h o u l d be c o m p a t i b l e i n b o t h m a t e r i a l s a n d s c a l e w i t h t h e e x i s t i n g commercial and r e s i d e n t i a l b u i l d i n g s . The a r e a between K S t r e e t and t h e Potomac R i v e r below W i s c o n s i n Avenue s h o u l d r e m a i n open t o a s s u r e a R i v e r v i e w from t h e s t r e e t above and t o emphasize the c o n n e c t i o n between W i s c o n s i n Avenue (Water S t r e e t ) and t h e R i v e r p a r k s y s t e m a n d p r o p o s e d e s p l a n a d e . Optimum C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s - Proposed L — o f Development: l a n d use i s summarized as follows: E x i s t i n g c h a r a c t e r o f W i s c o n s i n Avenue above t h e c a n a l s h o u l d be m a i n t a i n e d and r e i n f o r c e d by s u i t able i n f i l l commercial development. Below t h e Canal p a r k i n g l o t s i n f r o n t o f b u i l d i n g s on t h e e a s t s i d e o f W i s c o n s i n Avenue and t h e s i t e a t t h e n o r t h e a s t c o r n e r o f W i s c o n s i n A v e n u e a n d K Street s h o u l d be i n f i l l e d w i t h mixed-use s t r u c t u r e s . T h e D.C. i n c i n e r a t o r s i t e e a s t o f W i s c o n s i n Avenue on K S t r e e t s h o u l d be a r e s i d e n t i a l d e v e l o p m e n t f o r r e a s o n s c i t e d e l s e where i n t h e P l a n . The l a n d f r o n t i n g on both Wiscons i n A v e n u e a n d o n K S t r e e t s u r r o u n d i n g t h e Dodge Warehouses s h o u l d be d e v e l o p e d w i t h a b u i l d i n g o r buildings compatible w i t h the h i s t o r i c s t r u c t u r e s . A l l s t r u c t u r e s f r o n t i n g on W i s c o n s i n Avenue s h o u l d c o n f o r m t o a h e i g h t l i m i t a t i o n o f 40 f e e t t o r e s p e c t and c o n t i n u e t h e g e n e r a l s c a l e o f development o f t h a t t h o r o u g h f a r e above a s w e l l a s below M S t r e e t . The -17- �r e s i d e n t i a l development on t h e i n c i n e r a t o r s i t e e a s t o f W i s c o n s i n Avenue s h o u l d be l i m i t e d t o 3 s t o r i e s w i t h a maximum h e i g h t o f 40 f e e t t o r e m a i n i n s c a l e w i t h t h e e x i s t i n g B r i c k y a r d houses and t o prevent overshadowing Grace Church and a d j o i n i n g low r e s i d e n t i a l b u i l d i n g s on t h e n o r t h s i d e o f South S t r e e t . C o m m e r c i a l o r m i x e d u s e d e v e l o p m e n t on K S t r e e t w e s t o f t h e Dodge W a r e h o u s e s s h o u l d h a v e b e e n l i m i t e d t o a maximum h e i g h t o f a b o u t 60 f e e t t o a v o i d o v e r p o w e r i n g t h e h i s t o r i c b u i l d i n g s and t o m a i n t a i n an a c c e p t a b l e t r a n s i t i o n i n h e i g h t f r o m t h e 40 f o o t l i m i t o n both s i d e s o f Wisconsin Avenue, b u t i t i s recognized a t t h i s p o i n t t h a t t h e Dodge C e n t e r d e v e l o p m e n t w i l l p r o c e e d a s p l a n n e d t o a h e i g h t o f 90 f e e t ( p l u s p e n t h o u s e ) m e a s u r e d f r o m a p o i n t somewhat h i g h e r than the e l e v a t i o n o f K S t r e e t . That part of the proposed b u i l d i n g w h i c h f r o n t s on W i s c o n s i n Avenue i s t o be l o w e r i n h e i g h t , h o w e v e r , t h a n t h e g e n e r a l mass o f t h e s t r u c t u r e . From t h e s t a n d p o i n t o f c o m p a t i b i l i t y w i t h t h e older b u i l d i n g s i t i s l e s s than i d e a l , b u t b e t t e r t h a n h a v i n g them d e s t r o y e d . I t i s important t o emphasize t h e f a c t t h a t e x c e s s i v e bulk and h e i g h t a r e n o t t h e only d e s t r u c t i v e , o r p o t e n t i a l l y d e s t r u c t u r e , d e v i a t i o n s which threaten the harmonious development o f lower Wisconsin Avenue. T h e T e l e p h o n e Company B u i l d i n g o n t h e s o u t h b a n k o f t h e C a n a l v i o l a t e s most p r e c e p t s o f p l a n n i n g and d e s i g n f o r t h i s h i s t o r i c urban area i n being too low i n h e i g h t , being s e t back too f a r from t h e s t r e e t and being a r c h i t e c t u r a l l y out of character with the area. T h e s a m e i s t r u e o f t h e r e l a t i v e l y new o f f i c e b u i l d i n g a t t h e corner o f Wisconsin and South S t r e e t s . I n both of these i n s t a n c e s an i n c r e a s e i n both coverage a n d h e i g h t ( t o a b o u t 40 f e e t ) w o u l d b e d e s i r a b l e i f t h e new c o n s t r u c t i o n w e r e t o r e i n f o r c e t h e s t r e e t facade l i n e , e n c l o s e t h e p a r k i n g and obscure t h e feeble design of the existing buildings. Other Characteristics: Lower W i s c o n s i n Avenue c o u l d b e n e f i t from a d d i t i o n a l s t r e e t t r e e s and i l l u m i n a t i o n . Lighting fixtures s h o u l d be t h e l o w e r , t r a d i t i o n a l g l a s s - g l o b e d f i x t u r e s on most o t h e r Georgetown s t r e e t s r a t h e r than t h e h i g h i n t e n s i t y f i x t u r e s u s e d on M S t r e e t . A connection t o t h e Canal towpath e a s t o f Wisconsin Avenue would be d e s i r a b l e . T h i s m i g h t b e s t be c o n s t r u c t e d w e s t o f C a n a l S q u a r e on t h e n o r t h s i d e o f t h e C a n a l -18- �S q u a r e on t h e n o r t h s i d e o f t h e C a n a l l e a d i n g up t h r o u g h a n a r c a d e d e n t r a n c e o n W i s c o n s i n Avenue. 9. Design Criteria: S p e c i a l r e g u l a t i o n s a r e r e q u i r e d t o promote development: "optimum" — — 10. A r c h i t e c t u r a l r e v i e w o f new c o n s t r u c t i o n u n d e r t h e p r o v i s i o n s of t h e Old Georgetown A c t can a s s i s t i n m a i n t a i n i n g s u i t a b l e form and q u a l i t y o f d e v e l o p ment, but g u i d e l i n e s f o r d e s i g n i n advance o f r e v i e w c o u l d h e l p e l i m i n a t e some o f t h e u n c e r t a i n t i e s o f t h a t process. S p e c i a l e x c e p t i o n s f o r l o t c o v e r a g e may b e r e q u i r e d t o e n c o u r a g e e n c l o s u r e o f e x i s t i n g p a r k i n g l o t s on Wisconsin Avenue. Development S t r a t e g i e s , Options: — The p a r k a t t h e f o o t o f W i s c o n s i n Avenue and a d j o i n i n g w a t e r s i d e s t r i p - p a r k and e s p l a n a d e and bulkhead s h o u l d be d e v e l o p e d and m a i n t a i n e d by t h e N a t i o n a l Park Service. The l a n d i s p r e s e n t l y owned by t h e D i s t r i c t of Columbia. The P a r k S e r v i c e m i g h t a l s o a s s i s t i n the development of a towpath connection to Wisconsin Avenue. — T h e D.C. incinerator s i t e offers a fine opportunity for i n n o v a t i v e r e s i d e n t i a l development coupled w i t h the c o n s t r u c t i o n of p u b l i c parking f o r the lower Waterfront Area. A two-stage design competition ( p r e - q u a l i f i c a t i o n of d e s i g n - d e v e l o p e r teams being t h e f i r s t s t a g e ) w o u l d be a f a i r method t o d i s p o s e o f t h e l a n d and t o a t t r a c t good d e v e l o p m e n t . The p r i c e o f t h e l a n d s h o u l d be f i x e d ( a s was done i n t h e S o u t h w e s t W a s h i n g t o n c o m p e t i t i o n s ) and p r o p o s a l s j u d g e d s o l e l y upon t h e q u a l i t y o f d e s i g n , i t s s u i t a b i l i t y f o r the Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t H i s t o r i c D i s t r i c t and i t s p o t e n t i a l c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e community. Lower Canal — Area D A r e a D i n c l u d e s t h e s t r u c t u r e s a l o n g t h e e d g e o f t h e C&O Canal a s f a r w e s t a s Thomas J e f f e r s o n S t r e e t and a s f a r e a s t a s Rock Creek P a r k . The b l o c k w e s t o f t h i s a r e a , t o 3 1 s t S t r e e t , t h e m o s t a t t r a c t i v e a n d , f o r t h e moment, t h e m o s t s t a b l e b l o c k o f t h e C a n a l was n o t i n c l u d e d i n t h e S t u d y A r e a s i m p l y b e c a u s e -19- �i t p r e s e n t s f e w e r p r o b l e m s , b u t i t s h o u l d s e r v e a s an example o f t h e s c a l e and a p p r o x i m a t e d e n s i t y o f d e v e l o p m e n t t h a t s h o u l d have been maintained a t l e a s t as f a r eastwards as 30th S t r e e t . Its inventory of e x i s t i n g 1. Principal Historic assets and liabilities shows: Landmarks: — — 2. C&O C a n a l a n d p a t h w i t h l o c k s a n d b a r g e l a n d i n g . T h i s i s the most h e a v i l y - a r t i c u l a t e d p o r t i o n o f the C a n a l and i s o f p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t t o v i s i t o r s . D u v a l l Foundry: (No. 4 4 ) Other Contributing 1050-30th S t r e e t , built about 1856. Structures: — — T o w n h o u s e s on w e s t s i d e o f Canal, b u i l t before 1890. — 3. T o w n h o u s e s on Thomas J e f f e r s o n S t r e e t Canal. Constructed before 1890. S a n d s t o n e C a n a l f a c a d e o f b u i l d i n g (No. 1 8 3 ) o n n o r t h side of Canal west of 29th S t r e e t . The sandstone f a c a d e f a c i n g t h e C a n a l and Rock Creek P a r k s h o u l d be p r e s e r v e d ; t h e r e s t o f t h e b u i l d i n g i s a c c e p t a b l e , but not of c o n t r i b u t i n g v a l u e . Acceptable but Not 30th Street Contributing, Likely the north of to the Remain: — W a s h i n g t o n G a s l i g h t Company — 4. (No. north of 182). W e s t H e a t i n g P l a n t (No. 2 0 0 ) : A l t h o u g h t h i s i s a building of considerable a r c h i t e c t u r a l merit i t does not c o n t r i b u t e t o the atmosphere o f t h e C a n a l Area. Other P h y s i c a l A s s e t s : — P r o x i m i t y t o Rock Creek — View t o the River from Park. Thomas J e f f e r s o n 5. Existing Physical Liabilities: Damage t o w a l l s a n d l o c k s . 6. O p p o r t u n i t i e s and C o n s t r a i n t s : — Lack Street. of water I t i s recommended t h a t D u v a l l F o u n d r y be i n t o a museum o f C a n a l h i s t o r y u n d e r t h e -20- i n the Canal. converted auspics of �the National Park S e r v i c e . T h i s seems a p a r t i c u l a r l y a p p r o p r i a t e use s i n c e i t i s d i r e c t l y a c r o s s from the l a n d i n g from which the m u l e - d r i v e n barges s t i l l begin and end t h e i r C a n a l e x c u r s i o n t r i p s . Current plans by G e o r g e t o w n I n l a n d w o u l d a p p e a r t o a c h i e v e t h e s e objectives. A p e d e s t r i a n b r i d g e o v e r t h e C a n a l a t t h e e a s t e r n end of the Study Area could l e a d to a path along the west bank of Rock Creek w h i c h , i n t u r n , c o u l d connect t o the Waterfront p e d e s t r i a n walk, or esplanade. — R e s i d e n t i a l development: A few s m a l l townhouses, l o c a t e d f a c i n g s o u t h on t h e C a n a l b e t w e e n 3 0 t h S t r e e t and Thomas J e f f e r s o n S t r e e t , m i g h t i m p r o v e and r e i n f o r c e t h e C a n a l s i d e a t m o s p h e r e , a s do t h e t o w p a t h h o u s e s o n t h e b l o c k to the west. — Commercial development: E x i s t i n g s t r u c t u r e s north of t h e C a n a l b e t w e e n 3 0 t h S t r e e t a n d t h e p a r k m i g h t be s a t i s f a c t o r i l y remodeled as r e s i d e n t i a l , or as a mixed u s e o f c o m m e r c i a l and r e s i d e n t i a l u n i t s . The s i t e south of the Canal a d j a c e n t to the D u v a l l Foundry b e t w e e n Thomas J e f f e r s o n and 3 0 t h S t r e e t w o u l d a l s o be m o s t s u i t a b l y d e v e l o p e d a s a m i x t u r e o f commercial and r e s i d e n t i a l . T h i s i s the s i t e of Georgetown I n l a n d f i r s t p h a s e d e v e l o p m e n t w h i c h i s t o be r e t a i l and o f f i c e space w i t h u n d e r g r o u n d p a r k i n g . Aesthetic Considerations: — The e x i s t i n g c h a i n l i n k f e n c e a r o u n d t h e s h o u l d be r e p l a c e d w i t h a m a s o n r y w a l l . — New d e v e l o p m e n t o n t h e s i t e o f t h e e x i s t i n g l a u n d r y b u i l d i n g (No. 1 8 3 ) s h o u l d b e r e q u i r e d t o p r e s e r v e t h e handsome s a n d s t o n e f a c a d e s o f t h e b u i l d i n g s w h i c h f a c e t h e C a n a l and t h e p a r k . — The g e n e r a l d i s p o s i t i o n o f w a l l s o f s t r u c t u r e s a l o n g t h e C a n a l s h o u l d be p a r a l l e l t o o r a t r i g h t a n g l e s t o t h e edge o f t h e C a n a l - i n conformance w i t h t h e t r a d i t i o n a l " w a l l e d edge" r e l a t i o n s h i p o f b u i l d i n g s t o the Canal. -21- Heating Plant �8. Optimum C h a r a c t e r i c s o f — Proposed land use Development: i s summarized as follows: E x i s t i n g r e s i d e n t i a l development along s h o u l d be p r e s e r v e d a n d r e i n f o r c e d . the Canal D u v a l l F o u n d r y s h o u l d b e c o n v e r t e d t o Museum of Canal History. A d j a c e n t s i t e and o t h e r C a n a l s i t e s i n S t u d y A r e a s h o u l d be p e r m i t t e d t o d e v e l o p as c o m m e r c i a l and r e s i d e n t i a l m i x e d u s e s ( w i t h a FAR i n c e n t i v e f o r r e s i d e n t i a l development). — A l l c o n s t r u c t i o n i n the Study Area west of 30th S t r e e t and s o u t h o f t h e C a n a l t o 2 9 t h S t r e e t s h o u l d be k e p t t o a m a x i m u m h e i g h t o f 40 f e e t t o m a i n t a i n t h e l o w r e s i d e n t i a l scale bordering the Canal; p a r t i c u l a r l y f o r t h e two b l o c k s b e t w e e n 3 0 t h and 3 1 s t S t r e e t s . The s h a r p c o n t r a s t i n h e i g h t and b u l k b e t w e e n t h e new m o t e l and o l d e r h o u s e s on Thomas J e f f e r s o n S t r e e t i s a n e x a m p l e o f how j a r r i n g s u c h a c h a n g e i n s c a l e c a n be. One o f t h e g r e a t q u a l i t i e s o f t h e C&O C a n a l a s i t p a s s e s through the n i n e b l o c k s of the Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t i s t h e c o n t r a s t o f c h a r a c t e r , s c a l e and l i g h t a s one p r o g r e s s e s a l o n g i t s p a t h . Through most of i t s l e n g t h , however, these c o n t r a s t s are from block to block r a t h e r than w i t h i n the boundaries of the blocks themselves. I f s i t e s on t h e b a n k s o f t h e C a n a l become h e a v i l y d e v e l o p e d and i f t h e p u b l i c s p a c e s o f s u c h b u i l d i n g s open out d i r e c t l y t o t h e C a n a l ( a s i s p r o p o s e d by t h e G e o r g e t o w n - I n l a n d development) the r e l a t i v e l y s e r e n e a t m o s p h e r e o f t h e C a n a l a s we k n o w i t t o d a y w i l l u l t i m a t e l y be d r a s t i c a l l y a l t e r e d . A limited amount o f s u c h c h a n g e c a n p r o b a b l y be accommodated w i t h out d e s t r o y i n g those unique q u a l i t i e s of the Canal w h i c h make i t a t t r a c t i v e , b u t t h e b l o c k s b e t w e e n 3 0 t h and 3 1 s t a r e , u n f o r t u n a t e l y , t h e most f r a g i l e i n c h a r a c t e r and l e a s t r e s i s t a n t t o s u c h change. — S u i t a b l e , i . e . , compatible, use of m a t e r i a l s , setback, s c a l e a n d p r o p o r t i o n s may b e g o v e r n e d b y a r c h i t e c t u r a l r e v i e w o f p l a n s f o r new o r r e m o d e l e d b u i l d i n g s , b a s e d on g u i d e l i n e s f o r d e s i g n i n t h e A r e a . — T h e s c a l e o f d e v e l o p m e n t s h o u l d be c o m p a t i b l e w i t h r e s i d e n t i a l b u i l d i n g s n o r t h and s o u t h o f t h e C a n a l and w i t h the o l d e r Canal warehouse s t r u c t u r e s s t i l l visible a l o n g t h e C a n a l a few b l o c k s t o t h e w e s t . Canal Square -22- �s h o u l d be c i t e d a s a C a n a l - s i d e d e v e l o p m e n t w h i c h m a i n t a i n s along t h e C a n a l edge, t h e t r a d i t i o n a l , canal-building interface. 9. Design Criteria: S p e c i a l r e g u l a t i o n s r e q u i r e d t o p r o m o t e "optimum" d e v e l o p m e n t : A r c h i t e c t u r a l r e v i e w o f new c o n s t r u c t i o n u n d e r t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f t h e O l d Georgetown A c t c a n a s s i s t i n m a i n t a i n ing s u i t a b l e form and q u a l i t y o f development, b u t guidel i n e s f o rdesign i n advance o f review can help e l i m i n a t e some o f t h e u n c e r t a i n t i e s o f t h a t p r o c e s s . 10. Development S t r a t e g i e s , Options: I t i s assumed t h a t , because o f i t s prime commercial and r e s i d e n t i a l l o c a t i o n , ecnomic i n c e n t i v e s w i l l be s u f f i c i e n t t o promote p r i v a t e development o f t h i s a r e a , p a r t i c u l a r l y i f r e s i d e n t i a l development i s allowed under a change i n zoning. T h e e x i s t e n c e o f a C a n a l Museum a s an added " a t t r a c t i o n " o f t h e a r e a m i g h t encourage t h e collaboration of private developers with the National Park S e r v i c e t o a s s u r e i t s development. T h e Museum and b a r g e l a n d i n g w o u l d be a d m i n i s t e r e d by t h e P a r k S e r v i c e a s p a r t o f t h e C&O C a n a l H i s t o r i c D i s t r i c t . M Street and Pennsylvania Avenue — Area E A r e a E , a t t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n o f M S t r e e t , N.W. a n d P e n n s y l v a n i a A v e n u e , N.W. b o u n d e d o n t h e e a s t b y R o c k C r e e k , i n c l u d e s b u i l d i n g s and p r o p e r t y f r o n t i n g on M S t r e e t a n d P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue a s f a r west a s 30th S t r e e t . Inventory 1. of existing Principal Historic assets and l i a b i l i t i e s shows: Landmarks: — — 2. S i m s H o u s e , 2 8 0 3 M S t r e e t , N.W. house on t h e c o r n e r o f M S t r e e t E a r l y 19th Century and 28th. Row o f c o m m e r c i a l b u i l d i n g s o n s o u t h s i d e o f M S t r e e t N.W. b e t w e e n 2 9 t h S t r e e t a n d 3 0 t h S t r e e t . The b u i l d i n g at t h e c o r n e r o f 30th S t r e e t and M S t r e e t dates from t h e 1 8 5 0 ' s , a s do t h e b u i l d i n g s a t 2 9 1 0 , 2 9 1 2 a n d 2914 M Street. A l l o t h e r s i n t h i s b l o c k d a t e between 1870 and 1890. (Nos. 5 4 , 6 7 , 6 6 , 6 4 , 6 3 , 6 5 , 36) Other C o n t r i b u t i n g S t r u c t u r e s : — E x i s t i n g row o f s m a l l b u i l d i n g s on P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue between 2 9 t h S t r e e t and t h e e x i t from Rock Creek -23- �Parkway. — These were b u i l t E x i s t i n g commercial e x c e p t gas s t a t i o n s and M S t r e e t s . before 1890. (No. 93) b u i l d i n g s on n o r t h s i d e o f M S t r e e t , a t 2 9 t h and M S t r e e t s and 3 0 t h / 3. Other P h y s i c a l A s s e t s : — — 4. P r o x i m i t y t o Rock C r e e k P a r k i s b o t h an a s s e t and a liability. A l t h o u g h t h e t r e e s and f o l i a g e make a p o s i t i v e c o n t r i b u t i o n to the atmosphere, the steep bank and t h e e x i t ramp f r o m Rock C r e e k P a r k w a y i n t e r rupt the c o m m e r c i a l - r e s i d e n t i a l f a b r i c of M S t r e e t i n Georgetown. At present t h e r e i s s m a l l urban park which i s a t t r a c t i v e l y p l a n t e d and, i f expanded t o i n c l u d e t h e p r e s e n t g a s s t a t i o n s i t e , c o u l d be a g r e a t a s s e t t o t h e a r e a . Existing Physical Liabilities: — — Two g a s s t a t i o n s - o n e v a c a n t - o n t h e n o r t h e a s t c o r n e r o f M S t r e e t and 2 9 t h S t r e e t , and on t h e t r i a n g u l a r s i t e between M S t r e e t and P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue j u s t west of the Park. — 5. G a p s i n c o m m e r c i a l d e v e l o p m e n t w h i c h o c c u r on P e n n s y l v a n i a A v e n u e e a s t o f 2 9 t h S t r e e t and on M S t r e e t a t 2 9 t h S t r e e t and e a s t o f 2 8 t h S t r e e t . The s t r e e t p a t t e r n a t t h e P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue-M S t r e e t i n t e r s e c t i o n i s b o t h c o n f u s i n g and r e d u n d a n t . I t needs t o be s i m p l i f i e d . O p p o r t u n i t i e s and C o n s t r a i n t s : — P u b l i c , Community: The P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue-M S t r e e t i n t e r s e c t i o n s h o u l d be s i m p l i f i e d a n d t h e a d j a c e n t s e r v i c e s t a t i o n removed t o c r e a t e a p u b l i c p a r k space. A d d i t i o n a l d e v e l o p m e n t b e t w e e n Rock C r e e k and 2 8 t h S t r e e t n o r t h o f M S t r e e t and b e t w e e n 2 8 t h and 2 9 t h S t r e e t s south of P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue would improve and b e t t e r d e f i n e t h i s "gateway" t o Georgetown. — R e s i d e n t i a l development: The former s c h o o l p r o p e r t y a t t h e e d g e o f t h e p a r k j u s t o f f M S t r e e t s h o u l d be d e v e l o p e d w i t h a l i m i t e d number o f t o w n h o u s e s o r apartments s i m i l a r i n c h a r a c t e r to those north of M Street. -24- �— C o m m e r c i a l d e v e l o p m e n t : V a c a n t p r o p e r t y on M S t r e e t a n d P e n n s y l v a n i a A v e n u e s h o u l d be i n f i l l e d w i t h s h o p s , r e s t a u r a n t s and p r o f e s s i o n a l o f f i c e s w h i c h complement and r e i n f o r c e t h e e x i s t i n g c o m m e r c i a l d e v e l o p m e n t . P a r k i n g l o t s and gas s t a t i o n a t M S t r e e t and 29th S t r e e t s h o u l d be replaced. Aesthetic Considerations: — R e s i d e n t i a l and c o m m e r c i a l i n f i l l d e v e l o p m e n t s h o u l d c o m p a t i b l e i n b o t h m a t e r i a l s and s c a l e w i t h t h e surrounding buildings. — A s e r v i c e s t a t i o n a t the Pennsylvania-M S t r e e t entrance to Georgetown i s i n a p p r o p r i a t e . I t s h o u l d be r e m o v e d and r e p l a c e d w i t h a p u b l i c p a r k . Optimum C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f — Proposed land use be Development: i s summarized as follows: E x i s t i n g c o m m e r c i a l u s e s t o be m a i n t a i n e d and reinf o r c e d w i t h c o m m e r c i a l i n f i l l o f t h e same c h a r a c t e r and s c a l e . P u b l i c p a r k t o b e d e v e l o p e d on t r i a n g u l a r p l o t a t i n t e r s e c t i o n o f M S t r e e t and Pennsylvania Avenue. P a r k i n g l o t on M S t r e e t n e a r b r i d g e t o be d e v e l o p e d a s t o w n h o u s e s o f same c h a r a c t e r and scale as those i n a d j a c e n t r e s i d e n t i a l a r e a n o r t h of M Street. — R e s i d e n t i a l buildings north of M Street should a m a x i m u m h e i g h t o f 40 f e e t a n d a m a x i m u m o f 3 — Commercial or r e s i d e n t i a l b u i l d i n g s south of M S t r e e t s h o u l d h a v e a m a x i m u m a l l - i n c l u s i v e h e i g h t o f 40 f e e t t o a d e p t h o f a b o u t 60 t o 100 f e e t f r o m t h e n o r t h and e a s t boundary l i n e s , a t w h i c h p o i n t a h e i g h t not to e x c e e d 60 f e e t c a n be r e c o m m e n d e d . — S u i t a b l e , i . e . , c o m p a t i b l e , use of m a t e r i a l s , s e t b a c k , s c a l e a n d p r o p o r t i o n s may be g o v e r n e d b y a r c h i t e c t u r a l r e v i e w o f p l a n s f o r new a n d r e m o d e l e d b u i l d i n g s , b a s e d upon g u i d e l i n e s f o r d e s i g n i n t h e A r e a . — The s c a l e o f d e v e l o p m e n t o f i n f i l l s t r u c t u r e s s h o u l d be residential-commercial i n conformance with the e x i s t i n g structures. -25- have stories. �8. Design Criteria: Special regulations development. a r e r e q u i r e d t o promote "optimum" — A r c h i t e c t u r a l r e v i e w o f new c o n s t r u c t i o n u n d e r t h e p r o v i s i o n s of the Old Georgetown A c t can a s s i s t i n m a i n t a i n i n g s u i t a b l e form and q u a l i t y o f d e v e l o p ment, b u t g u i d e l i n e s f o r d e s i g n i n advance o f r e v i e w c a n h e l p e l i m i n a t e some o f t h e u n c e r t a i n t i e s o f that process. — R e z o n i n g o f s i t e s s o u t h o f M S t r e e t and P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue t o p e r m i t r e s i d e n t i a l as w e l l as commercial construction w i l l probably stimulate redevelopment of e x i s t i n g i n d u s t r i a l - o f f i c e p r o p e r t i e s . The Aqueduct Abutment The Georgetown Abutment o f t h e o l d Potomac Aqueduct i s l o c a t e d n o r t h o f Key B r i d g e , j u s t o u t s i d e t h e Study A r e a . The doublearched stone abutment marks the p o i n t of connection o f the Potomac A q u e d u c t B r i d g e w i t h t h e C h e s a p e a k e and Ohio C a n a l . In the mid-nineteenth century barges b r i n g i n g i n l a n d produce t o t h e p o r t a t A l e x a n d r i a c r o s s e d t h e P o t o m a c on t h e A q u e d u c t B r i d g e and c o n n e c t e d t o t h e s e v e n - m i l e b r a n c h C a n a l t o A l e x a n d r i a . W i t h o u t t h i s b r i d g e , p r o d u c e w o u l d h a v e h a d t o be unloaded f r o m t h e b a r g e s and t r a n s p o r t e d by s a i l i n g s h i p s t o A l e x a n d r i a . T h i s a d d e d e x p e n s e w o u l d h a v e made i t i m p o s s i b l e f o r A l e x a n d r i a merchants t o compete w i t h t h o s e i n Georgetown. At the time of i t s c o n s t r u c t i o n , i n the 1830's, the Aqueduct B r i d g e was c o n s i d e r e d an e x c e p t i o n a l f e a t o f e n g i n e e r i n g . I t s g r a n i t e p i e r s w e r e t o p p e d w i t h a wooden w a t e r t r o u g h t h r o u g h w h i c h t h e b a r g e s moved, p u l l e d by m u l e s t r a v e r s i n g a n a r r o w towpath along the top of the B r i d g e . I t i s recommended t h a t t h e t r o u g h o f t h e a b u t m e n t be r e c o n s t r u c ted and f i l l e d , and c o n t a i n a r e p r o d u c t i o n o f a t y p i c a l c a n a l barge. The b a r g e d i s p l a y w o u l d be s u p e r v i s e d by t h e p r e s e n t o w n e r , t h e N a t i o n a l P a r k S e r v i c e , and w o u l d become an i m p o r t a n t h i s t o r i c feature along the w a t e r f r o n t l i k e the F o r r e s t M a r b u r y and Key H o u s e s and t h e M i l l and F o u n d r y Museums. The a b u t m e n t ' s c o n n e c t i o n o f t h e C a n a l t o t h e W a t e r f r o n t s h o u l d be r e i n f o r c e d t o p e r m i t p e d e s t r i a n s t o move e a s i l y f r o m t h e C a n a l towpath t o t h e W a t e r f r o n t promenade. Thus, the t y p i c a l Sunday s t r o l l e r o r c y c l i s t c o u l d w a l k west a l o n g t h e r i v e r o r c a n a l , m a k e a "U" t u r n a t t h e A q u e d u c t A b u t m e n t a n d r e t u r n e a s t on a d i f f e r e n t p a t h . I f t h e recommended c o n n e c t i o n o f t h e t o w p a t h t o t h e W a t e r f r o n t i s made a t t h e e d g e o f R o c k C r e e k P a r k , i t w o u l d t h e n be p o s s i b l e t o w a l k t o a l l h i s t o r i c -26- �p o i n t s of traffic. THE i n t e r e s t on the Waterfront without crossing auto WATERFRONT ZONE The W a t e r f r o n t Zone i s s t u d i e d m o s t u s e f u l l y a t a l a r g e r s c a l e . U n l i k e the H i s t o r i c Study A r e a s , t h i s a r e a does not contain existing historic buildings. I t d i f f e r s from the other areas i n many i m p o r t a n t r e s p e c t s w i t h d i f f e r e n t d e v e l o p m e n t o p p o r t u n i t i e s , s t r a t e g i e s and p r o b l e m s o f t h e F r e e w a y , s e w e r r e c o n s t r u c t i o n and flood control. Study Area Bounds and Description The W a t e r f r o n t Zone i s l o o s e l y d e f i n e d a s t h a t a r e a b e l o w K t o t h e P o t o m a c R i v e r , b o u n d e d on t h e w e s t by Key B r i d g e and t h e e a s t by Rock C r e e k . Street on T h e Z o n e p r e s e n t l y c o n t a i n s no h i s t o r i c s t r u c t u r e s ; i n f a c t no s i g n i f i c a n t structures whatever. With exception of the land b o r d e r i n g Rock C r e e k , p r e s e n t l y d e v e l o p e d as a p a r t o f Rock C r e e k P a r k , a l l l a n d i n t h e W a t e r f r o n t Zone i s a v a i l a b l e f o r development. Development o p p o r t u n i t y e x i s t s i n t h a t the l a n d i s p r e s e n t l y held i n the l a r g e p a r c e l ownership of four owners. The e x i s t i n g R o c k C r e e k P a r k i s owned and m a i n t a i n e d by t h e F e d e r a l G o v e r n m e n t , Department of the I n t e r i o r . A d j a c e n t t o t h e P a r k and b o r d e r i n g the s t r e e t right-of-way of 30th S t r e e t below K S t r e e t are four p a r c e l s c o m p r i s i n g a p p r o x i m a t e l y 2.5 a c r e s o w n e d b y t h e R e a l E s t a t e I m p r o v e m e n t Company o f B a l t i m o r e , a s u b s i d i a r y o f t h e B&O-C&O R a i l r o a d . A four acre p a r c e l extending west to 31st S t r e e t , f r o m K S t r e e t s o u t h t o t h e P o t o m a c , i s owned by the Georgetown I n l a n d C o r p o r a t i o n . The r e m a i n d e r o f t h e Zone i s i n the p u b l i c ownership of the D i s t r i c t of Columbia, having been a c q u i r e d f o r c o n s t r u c t i o n of the Potomac R i v e r Freeway. Opportunities and Constraints D e v e l o p m e n t o f t h i s Zone i s n o t w i t h o u t s e r i o u s c o n s t r a i n t s : t h e Zone i s f l a t , a l l b e i n g a t a p p r o x i m a t e l y e l e v a t i o n 8-12 f e e t ( m e a n w a t e r l e v e l b e i n g a t +04 f e e t ) a n d i s s u b j e c t t o frequent River flooding. A d e s i g n f o r t h e 50 y e a r c o m b i n e d R i v e r and t i d a l f l o o d w o u l d r e q u i r e t h a t h a b i t a b l e d e v e l o p m e n t b e h e l d a b o v e t h e 19 f o o t e l e v a t i o n . The a l i g n m e n t and c o n f i g u r a t i o n o f t h e p r o p o s e d Potomac R i v e r F r e e w a y , e v e n i n t h e s e l e c t e d GPG 1 Alternative presents problems f o r d e v e l o p m e n t b o t h d u r i n g and a f t e r c o n s t r u c t i o n . -27- �The t u n n e l e n t r a n c e and e x i t o f t h e F r e e w a y a t Thomas J e f f e r s o n S t r e e t t o t h e e a s t l i m i t s a c c e s s t o t h e Zone a s w e l l a s c r e a t i n g a m a j o r e n v i r o n m e n t a l n u i s a n c e ( n o i s e and a i r p o l l u t i o n and visual barrier) i n this area. The l o c a l s t r e e t s y s t e m h a s been m o d i f i e d t o p a r a l l e l t h e F r e e w a y on t h e n o r t h , l i n k i n g Thomas J e f f e r s o n t o 3 0 t h and 2 9 t h S t r e e t s . 29th S t r e e t i s depressed as n e c e s s a r y t o p a s s under t h e F r e e w a y and p r o v i d e l i m i t e d a c c e s s t o W a t e r f r o n t Zone d e v e l o p m e n t i n t h e v i c i n i t y o f Rock C r e e k . To t h e w e s t o f W i s c o n s i n A v e n u e t h e P o t o m a c R i v e r F r e e w a y i s i n t u n n e l , t h e e a s t e r n l a n e s f o r m i n g t h e s o u t h e r n t u n n e l and e s t a b l i s h i n g a new b u l k h e a d l i n e f r o m W i s c o n s i n A v e n u e t o K e y B r i d g e . The w e s t e r n l a n e s f o r m t h e n o r t h e r n t u n n e l on w h i c h K S t r e e t i s r e c o n s t r u c t e d through the length of the Waterfront. The t u n n e l i n g o f t h e F r e e w a y a l s o n e c e s s i t a t e s a l a r g e ( a p p r o x i m a t e l y 4 0 0 f o o t l o n g b y 40 f o o t w i d e b y 40 f o o t h i g h ) v e n t i l a t i n g b u i l d i n g w h i c h , a l t h o u g h i t c o u l d be p u s h e d n o r t h o f K S t r e e t i n t o t h e s i d e o f t h e h i l l n e a r Key B r i d g e , o r p l a c e d on t h e PEPCO p r o p e r t y i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h t h e e x i s t i n g t r a n s f o r m e r s , m i g h t e n d up o n t h e W a t e r f r o n t . The s p e c i f i c i m p l i c a t i o n s o f r e l o c a t i n g t h i s f a c i l i t y from i t s p r o p o s e d R i v e r ' s edge l o c a t i o n w e r e b e y o n d t h e l i m i t s o f t h i s S t u d y ; i t , h o w e v e r , i s known t h a t r e l o c a t i o n i s p h y s i c a l l y p o s s i b l e , a l t h o u g h a t an u n d e t e r mined i n c r e a s e i n c o s t . The t u n n e l i n g o f t h e F r e e w a y i n i t i a l l y a p p e a r i n g t o p r o v i d e a l l c o n s t r a i n t s , o n t h e c o n t r a r y p r o v i d e s a new b u l k h e a d l i n e t o t h e w e s t o f W i s c o n s i n A v e n u e * O t h e r c o n s t r a i n t s a r e i m p o s e d on d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e W a t e r f r o n t Zone t o a c t a s t h e d e s i g n g u i d e l i n e s f e l t n e c e s s a r y i n a c h i e v i n g t h e s p e c i f i c g o a l s and obj e c t i v e s of enhancing the Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t as viewed from t h e R i v e r , p a r k s and monuments o f t h e N a t i o n a l C a p i t a l ; p r e s e r v i n g t h e open v i s t a s o f t h e Potomac R i v e r , and d e v e l o p i n g a W a t e r f r o n t P a r k a l o n g t h e R i v e r t h a t w i l l p r o v i d e an o p p o r t u n i t y f o r a c t i v i t i e s t h a t are s u i t a b l y r e l a t e d to a d j a c e n t development. T h e s e g u i d e l i n e s h a v e b e e n l i s t e d i n t h e g o a l s and d e s i g n p r i n c i p l e s s e c t i o n o f t h i s R e p o r t and a r e d i s c u s s e d b e l o w i n r e l a t i o n t o t h e d e s i g n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and u s e s f o r development o f t h e W a t e r f r o n t Zone. Characteristics and Use The s p e c i f i c s o f programmed u s e s f o r t h e W a t e r f r o n t Zone h a v e b e e n l i s t e d i n t h e o v e r a l l P r e l i m i n a r y D e v e l o p m e n t P l a n and Program. The o r g a n i z i n g e l e m e n t f o r d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e Zone i s the Waterfront Park. A s t r i p 50 f e e t w i d e i s r e s e r v e d a l o n g -2 8- �t h e Potomac f o r a Promenade f r o m t h e n a t u r a l p a r k s o f Rock C r e e k on t h e e a s t t o t h a t p r o p o s e d t o t h e w e s t o f W i s c o n s i n A v e n u e and t h e P a l i s a d e s t o t h e w e s t o f Key Bridge. A 20 f o o t w i d e l a n d s c a p e d w a l k w a y f o l l o w s t h e R i v e r ' s e d g e a t e l e v a t i o n +8 f e e t ( m e a n w a t e r l e v e l +4 f e e t ) . A c o n t i n u o u s 10 f o o t w i d e s t r i p w i t h s t e p s , b e n c h e s , and s e a s o n a l p l a n t i n g s l o p e s t o a p a r a l l e l 20 f o o t w i d e w a l k w a y a t e l e v a t i o n +16 feet. T h i s upper walkway s e r v e s to feed commercial a c t i v i t y bordering t h e Promenade t o t h e e a s t o f W i s c o n s i n Avenue. T h i s "urban" p a r k changes i n c h a r a c t e r as does the major development of the W a t e r f r o n t Z o n e f r o m n a t u r a l , p a s s i v e t o a c t i v e , man-made e n v i r o n m e n t s o f c o m m e r c i a l s h o p s , r e s t a u r a n t s and r e c r e a t i o n , to a p a s s i v e environment of n a t u r a l park to the west. Secondary nodes of a c t i v i t y o c c u r where p e d e s t r i a n c i r c u l a t i o n c o r r i d o r s c o n n e c t a t t h e f o o t o f m a j o r s t r e e t s , and a s t h e s y s t e m opens to the R i v e r below. A l l h a b i t a b l e d e v e l o p m e n t i n t h e W a t e r f r o n t Zone i s t o o c c u r a t e l e v a t i o n +19 f e e t , o r a b o v e , f o r f l o o d p r o t e c t i o n . This i s t h e p r o p o s e d e l e v a t i o n o f much o f K S t r e e t a l t h o u g h t h e c e n t r a l s e c t i o n a t W i s c o n s i n A v e n u e i s t o be h e l d a t i t s p r e s e n t g r a d e . I t responds w e l l to the upper Waterfront walkway a t e l e v a t i o n 16 f e e t . A l l d e v e l o p m e n t b o r d e r i n g t h e W a t e r f r o n t P a r k i s h e l d t o a 30 f o o t c o r n i c e l i n e w i t h a 45° s e t b a c k r e q u i r e d t o a m a x i m u m a l l o w a b l e h e i g h t o f 40 f e e t ( m e a s u r e d f r o m t h e 19 f o o t d e c k elevation). Many o f t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a s r e g a r d s u s e o f m a t e r i a l s , s c a l e , e t c . as d e s c r i b e d i n the H i s t o r i c Area S t u d i e s w i l l a l s o apply i n the Waterfront Zone. Two m a j o r n o d e s o f a c t i v i t y a r e r e c o m m e n d e d . Development of the p r o p e r t y owned by G e o r g e t o w n I n l a n d C o r p o r a t i o n i s recommended, approximately i n accordance w i t h t h e i r p l a n s , as a l i v e l y t e r m i n a t i o n o f t h e i r Thomas J e f f e r s o n S t r e e t d e v e l o p m e n t s w i t h h o t e l , o f f i c e and m a j o r r e t a i l f a c i l i t i e s , a l l s t r o n g l y w a t e r oriented. At the f o o t of W i s c o n s i n Avenue development i s h e l d back t o provide a major v i s t a o f the Potomac. The d e c k i s m a i n t a i n e d a t o r b e l o w e l e v a t i o n +16 f e e t , s t e p p i n g t o t h e R i v e r a r o u n d a m a j o r b r e a k i n the otherwise continuous bulkhead. T h i s i s the focus of p u b l i c a c t i v i t y ( p r i m a r i l y outdoor) i n the Waterfront w i t h seasonal events as a p p r o p r i a t e . I t i s i n t e n d e d t o complement the a c t i v i t i e s of the Georgetown I n l a n d developments. -29- ��Appendix B: A Development Rights Program - i - �A l t h o u g h t h e f o l l o w i n g D e v e l o p m e n t R i g h t s P r o g r a m i s n o t made p a r t and p a r c e l o f t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t proposed S e c t i o n a l Development P l a n , i t i s i n c l u d e d here i n r e c o g n i t i o n o f t h e f a c t t h a t development: r i g h t s t r a n s f e r h a s g r e a t p o s s i b i l i t i e s f o r t h e W a t e r f r o n t a r e a and p r o b a b l y c o u l d be b l e n d e d i n t o t h e D i s t r i c t ' s A r t i c l e 7 5 w i t h some r e v i s i o n s . To d e t e r m i n e t h e l e g a l and e c o n o m i c f e a s i b i l i t y o f s u c h an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e p r o c e d u r e would r e q u i r e c o n s i d e r a b l e a n a l y s i s and the d r a f t i n g o f such a program both i n g e n e r a l f o r the D i s t r i c t and i n i t s s p e c i f i e s f o r t h e W a t e r f r o n t w o u l d h a v e t o be v e r y c a r e f u l l y done. Such an a n a l y s i s t h a t would have r e p e r c u s s i o n s beyond the W a t e r f r o n t S t u d y a r e a i s beyond t h e scope and budget l i m i t a t i o n s o f t h e p r e s e n t c o n t r a c t and i t i s t h e recommendation of the c o n s u l t a n t s t h a t the Development R i g h t s Program proposed a s f o l l o w s be p u r s u e d i n f u r t h e r s t u d i e s a s n e c e s s a r y . DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS PROGRAM The e x i s t i n g z o n i n g r e q u i r e m e n t s on t h e Georgetown Waterfront a r e a a r e u n r e a l i s t i c n o t o n l y i n t e r m s o f u s e , b u t more i m p o r t a n t l y i n r e g a r d s t o development i n t e n s i t y / d e n s i t y . The p r e s e n t l y p e r m i t t e d development p o t e n t i a l t h r e a t e n s most o f t h e important h i s t o r i c a l landmarks i n the area, s t a i n s e x i s t i n g public f a c i l i t i e s , and c a n n o t be accommodated by t h e e x i s t i n g s t r e e t s y s t e m . The e x i s t i n g c a p a c i t y o f t h e s t r e e t s s e r v i n g t h e a r e a a r e operating a t or near capacity. A n y new d e v e l o p m e n t o n t h e Waterfront w i l l aggravate the e x i s t i n g , untenable, traffic problems a t the peak t r a v e l hours. The P l a n shows t h a t w i t h c e r t a i n s t r e e t adjustments, namely t h e r e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f K S t r e e t a s a l o c a l m a j o r a r t e r i a l , t h e v e h i c u l a r movement c a p a c i t y c a n be i n c r e a s e d t o s u p p o r t a t o t a l d e v e l o p m e n t l i m i t o f a r ^ r o x i J M t e l y 2.7 m i l l i o n s q u a r e f e e t o f ~ c o m m e r c i a l , o r r e s i den t i a l e q ~ u a ^ a T ^ T r r r d e v e l o p m e n t . T h i s otelfelbpment ' l e v e l i s f e a s i b l e o n j L y i f t h e P o t o m a c R i v e r F r e e w a y a n d a new K S t r e e t a r e constructed. A n y t h i n g s h o r t o f t h i s m u s t be a c c o m p a n i e d by downward r e v i s i o n o f t h e f i g u r e s i n r e g a r d t o f u t u r e d e v e l o p m e n t allowed. F o r the d i s c u s s i o n of the Development R i g h t s Program t h a t follow-.;, i t i s a s s u m e d t h a t t h e r e i s a p u b l i c c o m m i t m e n t t o b u i l d t h e s e two f a c i l i t i e s and t h a t a t o t a l development o f 2.7 m i l l i o n s q u a r e f e e t o f c o m m e r c i a l a n d r e s i d e n t i a l e q u i v a l e n t development i s a d e s i r a b l e o b j e c t i v e f o r the Waterfront area. The P l a n c a l l s f o r an o v e r a l l r e d u c t i o n i n t h e p r e s e n t d e v e l o p ment p o t e n t i a l and t h e Development R i g h t s Program i s t o a c t a s a d e v i c e f o r t r e a t i n g a l l p r o p e r t y owners e q u i t a b l y . The Development R i g h t s Program o u t l i n e s a t e c h n i q u e and a r a t i o n a l -2- �for coming t o g r i p s w i t h t h e p l a n n i n g tion objectives f o r the area. and h i s t o r i c preserva- E a c h o f t h e p r o p e r t y o w n e r s i n t h e W a t e r f r o n t a r e a now h a s c e r t a i n development p o t e n t i a l as a matter "of r i g h t " which runs w i t h t h e i r land d e r i v e d from e x i s t i n g zoning r e g u l a t i o n s and o t h e r l e g i s l a t i o n . The r i g h t s e n j o y e d under t h e p r e s e n t o r d i n a n c e a r e t h e b a s i s f o r a l l o c a t i n g p o i n t s u n d e r t h e new ordinance. I f the W a t e r f r o n t a r e a i s e s t a b l i s h e d as a Development R i g h t s D i s t r i c t , coterminous with that defined i n the Plan as the S e c t i o n a l Development P l a n Area, t h e f o l l o w i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p s c a n be e s t a b l i s h e d . The t o t a l d e v e l o p a b l e l a n d w i t h i n t h i s area i s approximately 50 a c r e s . This excludes established p a r k l a n d b u t i n c l u d e s D i s t r i c t a n d F e d e r a l l a n d n o t now d e v e l o p e d , o r i n u s e s t h a t a r e o r may b e a v a i l a b l e f o r d e v e l o p m e n t i n t h e future. T h i s l a n d i s c u r r e n t l y z o n e d a s f o l l o w s : C-2-A 3.5 a c r e s ; C-M-2 19.0 a c r e s ; M 28.5 a c r e s . 1 A s s i g n i n g d e v e l o p m e n t r i g h t s t o a l l o f t h i s l a n d on t h e p r o p o r t i o n a l b a s i s of the e x i s t i n g zoning would recognize the e x i s t i n g d i f f e r e n c e i n development p o t e n t i a l . Thus, r i g h t s would be a s s i g n e d a s f o l l o w s : C-2-A 2 rights/1000 square feet C-M-2 4 rights/1000 square feet M 6 rights/1000 square feet rights i n the Waterfront The total THE USE O F development DEVELOPMENT a r e 10,800. RIGHTS T o t a l d e v e l o p m e n t r i g h t s a r e a s s u m e d by d e f i n i t i o n t o be e q u a l to the t o t a l permitted development i n the Waterfront area. The P l a n h a s e s t a b l i s h e d t h i s l e v e l a s 2,700,000 s q u a r e f e e t o f commercial or r e s i d e n t i a l e q u i v a l e n t development. Since t h i s t o t a l permitted development i s based p r i m a r i l y ( a l t h o u g h n o t s o l e l y ) on t h e p r o j e c t e d t r a f f i c c a p a c i t y o f the proposed improved C i r c u l a t i o n P l a n , development r i g h t u s a g e i s a s s i g n e d on t h e b a s i s o f t r a f f i c g e n e r a t i o n equivalence as f o l l o w s : Includes approximately Government l a n d . 9.5 acres -3- of D i s t r i c t and Federal �1 right/townhouse 2 rights/1000 residential square feet o f apartment 3 rights/1000 square feet of office commercial 5 feet of retail commercial rights/1000 square residential In a d d i t i o n , f o r computing e x i s t i n g r i g h t s used i n e x i s t i n g (to remain) g o v e r n m e n t / u t i l i t y u s e 1000 square f e e t o f governm e n t / u t i l i t y r e q u i r e s 1 development r i g h t . Other uses p e r m i t t e d i n t h e W a t e r f r o n t S e c t i o n a l Development P l a n A r e a a r e t o be a s s i g n e d a d e v e l o p m e n t r i g h t u s a g e a t t h e d i s c r e t i o n o f t h e Zoning Commission, a t t h e recommendation o f t h e NCPC, D i s t r i c t O f f i c e o f P l a n n i n g a n d M a n a g e m e n t o r o t h e r q u a l i f i e d a g e n c y a s b a s e d upon a c c e p t a b l e p l a n n i n g s t a n dards f o r t r a f f i c g e n e r a t i o n by t h a t u s e . I t c a n n o t be computed e x a c t l y by d i s t r i b u t i o n o f t h e s e r i g h t s how m u c h d e v e l o p m e n t w i l l b e a l l o w e d a t a n y g i v e n p h a s e . Howe v e r , t h e o u t e r l i m i t s c a n b e e s t a b l i s h e d a n d some e s t i m a t e s c a n b e made. F o r i n s t a n c e , i f t h e W a t e r f r o n t w e r e t o b e comp l e t e l y r e d e v e l o p e d w i t h new c o n s t r u c t i o n s o l e l y i n c o m m e r c i a l use ( 5 0 %o f f i c e and 50% r e t a i l commercial) r e q u i r i n g an average of f o u r development r i g h t s p e r 1000 s q u a r e f e e t , 2,700,000 square f e e t o f development would r e s u l t . This, of course, w i l l n o t happen i n t h a t a n e s t i m a t e d 1,000,000 s q u a r e feet of e x i s t i n g development i s assumed t o remain i n p r e s e n t u s e s . I n a d d i t i o n , up t o 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 s q u a r e f e e t o f e x i s t i n g s t r u c t u r e s are l i k e l y f o r renovation and reuse i n mostly non-conforming uses and i n t e n s i t i e s . To e s t a b l i s h t h e r e a l i s t i c l i m i t a l l o w e d b y t h e s e d e v e l o p m e n t r i g h t s , an e s t i m a t e o f t h e e x i s t i n g r i g h t s used i n t h e e x i s t i n g u s e s t o r e m a i n i s made: -4- �PRESENT RIGHTS OF PROPERTIES L I K E L Y T O R E M A I N IN C U R R E N T U S E Development Rights Used Existing Uses to Remain Square Feet Townhouse 100,000 50 Hotel/Apartments 250,000 500 Retail Commercial 200,000 1,000 Office Commercial 275,000 825 300,000 300 Residential Gov't/Utilities T o t a l Development R i g h t s Used 2,675 T h u s , t h e e q u i v a l e n t o f 8,125 d e v e l o p m e n t r i g h t s ( 1 0 , 8 0 0 - 2 6 7 5 ) r e m a i n t o be d i s t r i b u t e d on t h e s i t e s e s t a b l i s h e d a s s u s c e p t i b l e to development or o p p o r t u n i t y a r e a s . The s u s c e p t i b l e - t o - d e v e l o p ment s i t e s r e p r e s e n t a p p r o x i m a t e l y 365,000 e x i s t i n g s q u a r e f e e t i n C-M-2 and 1,110,00 0 s q u a r e f e e t i n M zone e q u a l l i n g a t o t a l o f 8,100 d e v e l o p m e n t r i g h t s . For t h e maximum d e v e l o p m e n t p e r m i t t e d u n d e r t h e recommended Z o n i n g P l a n on t h e s i t e s s u s c e p t i b l e - t o - d e v e l o p m e n t a t o t a l o f 6,925 d e v e l o p m e n t r i g h t s a r e r e q u i r e d . On t h e s e s i t e s o n l y 5,150 a r e a v a i l a b l e f r o m p r i v a t e l y owned p r o p e r t y a s s u m i n g everyone sold h i s surplus r i g h t s . T h u s , 1,775 a d d i t i o n a l r i g h t s are needed f o r f u l l development. T h e s e may come f r o m t h e f o l lowing : / 1. I t was s e e n t h a t t h e e q u i v a l e n t o f 2,675 d e v e l o p m e n t are used f o r e x i s t i n g d e v e l o p m e n t - t o - r e m a i n . The a c t u a l o f t h e s e r i g h t s w i l l be s o m e w h a t l e s s i n t h a t : rights number a. A u s e - t o - r e m a i n a t a g r e a t e r i n t e n s i t y a n d r e q u i r i n g a d d i t i o n a l d e v e l o p m e n t r i g h t s t h a n a l l o c a t e d w i l l n o t be required to purchase the additional r i g h t s but instead w i l l be c o n s i d e r e d a s n o n - c o n f o r m i n g . b. F o r a u s e p r e s e n t l y r e q u i r i n g l e s s t h a n i t s a l l o c a t e d d e v e l o p m e n t r i g h t s , t h e s u r p l u s may b e s o l d . An e x a c t accounting of available surplus rights i n the e x i s t i n g t o - r e m a i n d e v e l o p m e n t c a n o n l y be e s t a b l i s h e d by s u r v e y ; i t s m a g n i t u d e w i l l n o t be g r e a t e r , b u t t h e r e w i l l be more t h a n t h e 25 ( 8 , 1 2 5 v s 8 , 1 0 0 ) t h a t t h e a r i t h m e t i c h a s i n d i c a t e d a s e q u i v a l e n t r i g h t s n o t used i n t h e e x i s t i n g development-to-remain over those required f o r f u l l development o f t h e o p p o r t u n i t y a r e a s . -5- �V 2. N o t a l l d e v e l o p m e n t w i l l b e a t f u l l o r h i g h e s t p e r m i t t e d d e v e l o p m e n t , t h u s l o w e r i n g t h e r e q u i r e d number o f t o t a l d e v e l o p ment r i g h t s a s w e l l a s t h e o v e r a l l d e f i c i t o f r i g h t s . 3. F i n a l l y , t h e D i s t r i c t G o v e r n m e n t w i l l h o l d a s u r p l u s o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y 2,550 d e v e l o p m e n t r i g h t s a l l o c a t e d t o them f o r t h e i r l a n d h o l d i n g s a l o n g t h e Potomac R i v e r . The F e d e r a l Government w i l l h o l d a b o u t 300 d e v e l o p m e n t r i g h t s f o r t h e h e a t i n g p l a n t s i t e on Rock C r e e k P a r k a n d 2 9 t h S t r e e t . Because of the D i s t r i c t of Columbia's e x t e n s i v e land holdings i n t h i s a r e a , they have a v e r y f a v o r a b l e s i t u a t i o n w h i c h prov i d e s f o r a "bank" o f development r i g h t s . T h i s bank c a n be u s e d by t h e D i s t r i c t G o v e r n m e n t t o a s s i s t o w n e r s i n s e c u r i n g r i g h t s w h i c h m i g h t o t h e r w i s e n o t be a v a i l a b l e . The s a l e o f o r o t h e r w i s e t r a n s f e r o f development r i g h t s by t h e D i s t r i c t Government c a n be u s e d t o f u r t h e r c e r t a i n o f t h e p l a n n i n g o b j e c t i v e s w i t h i n t h e Development D i s t r i c t . I t i s recommended t h a t t h e D i s t r i c t a l l o c a t e a p p r o x i m a t e l y 815 development r i g h t s a s used by t h e p r e s e n t development o f both G e o r g e t o w n I n l a n d P h a s e I a n d Dodge C e n t e r . This would represent the r i g h t s required f o r these developments i n excess o f those a l l o c a t e d t o these s i t e s and would p l a c e t h e development r i g h t s formula back i n t o e q u i l i b r i u m f o r t h e f u t u r e development of t h e W a t e r f r o n t . I t i s a l s o recommended t h a t t h e D i s t r i c t r e l e a s e t h e r e m a i n d e r o f t h e i r r i g h t s a s r e q u e s t e d by t h e Zoning C o m m i s s i o n a n d a s recommended b y NCPC, t h e D i s t r i c t O f f i c e o f P l a n n i n g a n d Management, e t c . , t o a i d t h e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f t h e Plan. DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS ALLOCATION Development Rights 10,800 -2,675 =8,125 Total available Use i n e x i s t i n g - t o - r e m a i n R e m a i n i n g t o be u s e d remaining 5,350 2,675 300 =8,125 rights are distributed as Private ownership D i s t r i c t ownership Federal ownership Total available rights -6- development follows: �6,925 815 R e q u i r e d f o r d e v e l o p m e n t a t recommended z o n i n g R e q u i r e d f o r Dodge C e n t e r a n d G e o r g e t o w n I n l a n d Phase I Development Total required rights 1 =7,740 1 2 The Development R i g h t s Program f o r c o n t r o l l i n g l a n d u s e d i s t r i b u t i o n and development b u l k i s v e r y i m p o r t a n t f o r t h e h i s toric preservation concerns i n the Waterfront. F i r s t , any development r i g h t s n o t u t i l i z e d by h i s t o r i c s t r u c t u r e s have v a l u e to the owners o f h i s t o r i c p r o p e r t i e s . S e c o n d l y , because of the uniform d i s t r i b u t i o n of development r i g h t s over the lands i n t h e Development D i s t r i c t , l a n d v a l u e f o r purposes of taxation i s also uniform i n the beginning, discounting the f a c t o r o f l o c a t i o n a l a d v a n t a g e . The l o c a t i o n a l f a c t o r , i f i t i s a f a c t o r , w o u l d be a s s e s s e d i n t h e manner o f c u r r e n t c u s t o m in this area. When a p r o p e r t y o w n e r d i s p o s s e s o f s u r p l u s d e velopment r i g h t s , then the assessed value of that land should be r e d u c e d b e c a u s e o f t h e l o s s i n d e v e l o p m e n t p o t e n t i a l . Tax r e d u c t i o n s on l a n d on w h i c h an h i s t o r i c b u i l d i n g i s l o c a t e d c a n be an i m p o r t a n t c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f t h e owner i n r e g a r d t o i t s r e t e n t i o n and r e s t o r a t i o n . Once t h e s u r p l u s d e v e l o p m e n t r i g h t s a r e d i s p o s e d o f on h i s t o r i c s i t e s , t h a t l a n d c a n o n l y s u p p o r t new d e v e l o p m e n t b a s e d o n t h e e x i s t i n g f l o o r s p a c e i n t h e h i s toric structure. I n such a s i t u a t i o n , t h e economic p r e s s u r e for redevelopment i s reduced. The Development R i g h t s Program p r o p o s e d h e r e f o r t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t w o u l d be a p p l i c a b l e i n o t h e r a r e a s o f t h e D i s t r i c t . F o r any proposed Development D i s t r i c t t h e f o l l o w i n g i s needed: 1 . E s t a b l i s h t h e d e v e l o p m e n t r i g h t u n i t s p e r 1000 s q u a r e f e e t o f l a n d a r e a and t h e d e v e l o p m e n t r i g h t u n i t s r e q u i r e d p e r 1000 square f e e t of f l o o r space. 2. S e l e c t t h a t e x i s t i n g l i s t of permitted areas 3. P r e p a r e a map a. The b. on w h i c h w o u l d be Development The h e i g h t Zoning D i s t r i c t which would i n c l u d e the d e s i r e d i n t h e Development D i s t r i c t . shown: D i s t r i c t Boundaries zones and land coverage zones 4. A l l o t h e r a p p l i c a b l e p o r t i o n s o f t h e Z o n i n g R e g u l a t i o n s would apply t o the Development D i s t r i c t : non-conformance; Recommend t h e D i s t r i c t a l l o c a t e t h e s e the program back i n t o e q u i l i b r i u m . 2 rights as used to place T o t a l available rights are i n excess of t o t a l required rights (8125 v s 7740) i n t h a t a l l e x c e s s p r i v a t e r i g h t s a r e assumed as a v a i l a b l e f o r use. I n r e a l i t y t h i s w i l l n o t be l i k e l y ( s e e t e x t ) . -7- �parking-loading; quirements . signs; yards; special exceptions; general re- The Development D i s t r i c t - D e v e l o p m e n t Rights technique t r e a t s a l l properties w i t h i n the d i s t r i c t equitably i n regards to e x i s t i n g and f u t u r e d e v e l o p m e n t r i g h t s . I t f u r t h e r has the advantage o f being l e g a l l y and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e l y i n c o r p o r a t e d into the e x i s t i n g zoning s t r u c t u r e . One m i g h t a r g u e w i t h t h e t o t a l development l e v e l w i t h i n t h e Development D i s t r i c t , the b a s i s f o r a r r i v i n g a t the development p o t e n t i a l , and/or the r e l a t i v e t r a f f i c g e n e r a t i o n a s s i g n e d t o e a c h 1000 s q u a r e f e e t o f f l o o r s p a c e by u s e . Once t h e s e q u e s t i o n s a r e r e s o l v e d , t h e t e c h n i q u e i t s e l f a p p e a r s t o be v e r y w o r k a b l e and f a i r i n t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f development r i g h t s . This factor alone i s the strength of the proposal. The o t h e r b e n e f i t s o f t h i s c o n c e p t , such as: aiding h i s t o r i c preservation e f f o r t s ; providing f o r a new l e v e l o f f l e x i b i l i t y i n t h e u s e o f l a n d , a n d a c h i e v i n g t h e p l a n n i n g o b j e c t i v e s f o r t h e a r e a w i t h a minimum o f c o n t r o l s are secondary b e n e f i t s . An e q u a l l y c r u c i a l f a c t o r i n r e g a r d t o f u t u r e d e v e l o p m e n t i n t h e Waterfront area i s the matter of timing—the staging of future development. B e c a u s e t h e D i s t r i c t G o v e r n m e n t owns s u c h a l a r g e amount o f l a n d i n t h e W a t e r f r o n t and t h e r e f o r e t h e s i n g l e b i g g e s t number o f d e v e l o p m e n t r i g h t s , i t i s i n a p o s i t i o n t o c o n t r o l t h e t i m i n g o f d e v e l o p m e n t on m o s t o f t h e s i t e s s u s c e p t i b l e to development. I f the r e l e a s e of development r i g h t s were keyed to the p r o v i s i o n of p u b l i c improvements—such as the r e c o n s t r u c t e d K S t r e e t — t h e n t h e a r e a w o u l d be a s s u r e d o f n o t b e i n g o v e r - b u i l t p r i o r t o t h e n e e d e d f a c i l i t i e s t o s u p p o r t new development. T h e f o l l o w i n g e x a m p l e s o f how t h e d e v e l o p m e n t r i g h t s p l a n w o u l d be a p p l i e d t o s p e c i f i c s i t e s w i t h i n t h e W a t e r f r o n t a r e a a r e i n c l u d e d t o c l a r i f y t h e P r o g r a m a n d i l l u s t r a t e some o f t h e advantages p r e v i o u s l y discussed. DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS EXAMPLES New Development .Dodge C e n t e r , ( c o m m e r c i a l ) . T e l e p h o n e Co., 1 1 0 1 2 9 t h S t . , (residential) . R e s i d e n t i a l Apt., 3261 K S t . . R e s i d e n t i a l Townhouse -8- C-3-A R-5-B R-5-A R-4 �Existing to Remain and Reuse Development .Major e x i s t i n g s t r u c t u r e , 3259 K S t . on Potomac S t . , ( c o n t r i b u t i n g v a l u e ) .Grace S t . C a n a l Warehouse -(major value) .Bumford M i l l ( e x c e p t i o n a l v a l u e ) . C o l u m b i a G l a s s Co., 3232 M S t . , (row h o u s e c o m m e r c i a l , e x c e p tional) . 3 1 3 4 - 3 6 S o u t h S t . , ( r o w .house residential, exceptional) R e u s e v s new @ C-3-A R e u s e v s new @ C-2-A Remain a s i s p u b l i c use v s r e u s e v s new @ C-2-A Remain a s i s v s r e u s e @ C-2-A Remain a s i s v s new R-4 New Development Maloney Concrete Company, Dodge Center (commercial) E x i s t i n g s i t e 45,000 E x i s t i n g zoning M D e v e l o p m e n t c r e d i t s 45 x 6 = 270 Proposed zoning C-3-A P e r m i t t e d development 125,000 s q . f t . c o m m e r c i a l Required development c r e d i t s : 50-50 o f f i c e / r e t a i l = 135 x 4 = 540 D e f i c i t -270 c r e d i t s Washington Gas Light Company, 1101 29th St. (residential apartments) E x i s t i n g s i t e 63,500 E x i s t i n g zoning C-M-2 Development c r e d i t s 63.5 x 4 = 254 P r o p o s e d z o n i n g R-5-B P e r m i t t e d development 190,500 s q . f t . residential o r a p p r o x i m a t e l y 190 a p a r t m e n t s ( 1 0 0 0 e a c h ) R e q u i r e d d e v e l o p m e n t c r e d i t s : 190 x 2 = 280 D e f i c i t -26 c r e d i t s Note: Dodge C e n t e r o f f i c e space. This credits resulting i no l o n g e r a v a i l a b l e i s u n d e r c o n s t r u c t i o n §200,000 s q . f t . o f w o u l d r e q u i r e 200 x 3 = 600 d e v e l o p m e n t n a d e f i c i t o f - 3 3 0 . (Now t o b e c o n s i d e r e d f o r f u t u r e development.) A l l e x i s t i n g d e v e l o p m e n t , i f a c t i v e , r e p r e s e n t s some d e v e l o p m e n t c r e d i t s now u s e d . I f on s i t e w i t h e x i s t i n g d e v e l o p m e n t , t h i s i s r e p l a c e d b y new d e v e l o p m e n t . The a v a i l a b l e development c r e d i t s a r e f o r s i t e a r e a a n d i n a d d i t i o n , t h o s e now u n - u s e d d e v e l o p m e n t c r e d i t s of the r e p l a c e d development. Where t h i s i s s i g n i f i c a n t i n the f o l l o w i n g a n a l y s i s i t has been n o t e d . -9- �Hamilton Investment Company, 3261 K Street (residential apartments) E x i s t i n g s i t e 40,000 E x i s t i n g zoning M D e v e l o p m e n t c r e d i t s 40 x 6 = 240 Proposed zoning R-5-A P e r m i t t e d development 40,000 s q . f t . a p p r o x i m a t e l y 25 t o w n h o u s e s D e v e l o p m e n t c r e d i t s r e q u i r e d = 25 S u r p l u s c r e d i t s +245 residential or Existing to Remain and for Reuse Development D.C. Paper Manufacturing Company, 3259 K Street on Potomac Street, (old warehouse of contributing value) E x i s t i n g s i t e 25,000 E x i s t i n g zoning M D e v e l o p m e n t c r e d i t s 25 x 6 = new development 150 (commercial) Proposed zoning C-3-A P e r m i t t e d development 75,000 Required development c r e d i t s D e f i c i e n c y -150 c r e d i t s reuse (50-50 o f f i c e / r e t a i l ) 75 x 4 = 300 (commercial) E x i s t i n g s t r u c t u r e 150,000 P e r m i t t e d development 150,000 (50-50 o f f i c e / r e t a i l ) R e q u i r e d d e v e l o p m e n t c r e d i t s 150 x 4 = 600 D e f i c i e n c y -450 c r e d i t s The i n c e n t i v e i n m a i n t a i n i n g t h i s s t r u c t u r e i s i n t h a t i becomes n o n - c o n f o r m i n g and a l l o w s c o n s i d e r a b l y more dev e l o p m e n t s q . f t . t h a n a new b u i l d i n g w o u l d b e p e r m i t t e d However, f o r t h i s r e n o v a t e d d e v e l o p m e n t c r e d i t s w i l l be r e q u i r e d a s i f i t w e r e new c o n s t r u c t i o n . Grace Street Canal Grace Street Estates, of major value Warehouse, Inc., E x i s t i n g s i t e 25,000 E x i s t i n g zoning C-M-2 D e v e l o p m e n t c r e d i t s 25 x 4 = 100 -10- �new development (commercial) P r o p o s e d z o n i n g C-2-A P e r m i t t e d d e v e l o p m e n t 50,000 Required development c r e d i t s D e f i c i e n c y -100 reuse (50-50 o f f i c e / r e t a i l ) 50 x 4 = 2 0 0 (commercial) Existing structure 30,000 P r o p o s e d d e v e l o p m e n t 30,000 (50-50 o f f i c e / r e t a i l ) R e q u i r e d d e v e l o p m e n t c r e d i t s 30 x 4 = 1 2 0 D e f i c i t -20 I n c e n t i v e w i l l h a v e t o be i n t h e n a t u r e o f t h e s p a c e , e a s e of renovation, e t c . A minor i n c e n t i v e i n terms o f l e s s r e q u i r e d development c r e d i t s . I f the proposed reuse i si n c o n f o r m a n c e w i t h t h e s e c t i o n a l d e v e l o p m e n t p l a n , i t may b e p o l i c y f o r d i s t r i c t government t o g i v e d e v e l o p e r e x t r a development c r e d i t s required. Bomford Mill, Potomac Street, of exceptional value E x i s t i n g s i t e 10,000 E x i s t i n g Zoning M D e v e l o p m e n t c r e d i t s 10 x 6 = new development 60 (commercial) P r o p o s e d z o n i n g C-2-A P e r m i t t e d development 20,000 Required development c r e d i t s D e f i c i t -20 reuse (50-50) 20 x 4 = 80 (commercial) Existing Proposed Required Deficit reuse (public building 30,000 development 30,000 (50-50) d e v e l o p m e n t c r e d i t s 30 x 4 = 1 2 0 -60 museum) Required development c r e d i t s 25 t h u s S u r p l u s +35 -11- t o be d e t e r m i n e d c o u l d be �F o r s u c h a n e x i s t i n g b u i l d i n g n o t m u c h i s g a i n e d b y new c o n s t r u c t i o n ( l e s s s q . f t . i s p e r m i t t e d and development c r e d i t s i n a d d i t i o n t o t h o s e e x i s t i n g may b e r e q u i r e d t o be p u r c h a s e d ) . However, r e n o v a t i o n g i v e s a g r e a t e r than permitted (now n o n - c o n f o r m i n g ) s q . f t . a n d w i t h s u c h a n e x c e p t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e the a d d i t i o n a l r e q u i r e d development c r e d i t s would e i t h e r i n p a r t o r f u l l be g i v e n f o r t h e r e t e n t i o n o f t h e s t r u c t u r e . The e x t r e m e i s j u s t s h o r t o f p u b l i c o w n e r s h i p a n d w o u l d be where t h e b u i l d i n g i s p u t t o p u b l i c u s e ( s a y a museum) w h e r e i t i s r u l e d f e w i f a n y development c r e d i t s a r e r e q u i r e d . T h i s would allow a s a l e of t h e s u r p l u s c r e d i t s a t market value and i n t u r n lower the taxes (assessed value) o f t h e property which would s t i l l be w h o l l y p r i v a t e l y owned a n d i n c o m e p r o d u c i n g . Columbia Glass Company, 3232 M Street, of exceptional value E x i s t i n g s i t e approximately E x i s t i n g zoning C-M-2 Development c r e d i t s 3 x 6 = remain as existing 3,000 18 use E x i s t i n g development 3,000-9,000 c o m m e r c i a l r e t a i l / o f f i c e R e q u i r e d d e v e l o p m e n t c r e d i t s i f new 1 2 - 3 6 S u r p l u s +6 i f o n l y 12 r e q u i r e d ( g r o u n d f l o o r o n l y ) D e f i c i t - 1 8 i f 36 r e q u i r e d ( a l l 3 f l o o r s ) b u t n o t a d e f i c i t t h a t h a s t o b e made u p A good i n c e n t i v e i n t h a t : 1. I f presently operating a t less than required developm e n t c r e d i t s may s e l l o f f s u r p l u s a t m a r k e t v a l u e a n d a l s o reduce taxes. 2. I f presently operating a t greater than e x i s t i n g and/or even permitted development c r e d i t s still may c o n t i n u e a s n o n - c o n f o r m i n g w i t h o u t a d d e d a s s e s s m e n t a l t h o u g h may s e l l p r o p e r t y a t m a r k e t v a l u e . 3134 South Street of exceptional value E x i s t i n g s i t e approximately 2,200 E x i s t i n g zoning M D e v e l o p m e n t c r e d i t s 2.2 x 6 - 1 3 . 2 -12- �remain as existing use E x i s t i n g development - 1 townhouse Required development c r e d i t s 1 S u r p l u s c r e d i t s +12.2 Can s e l l a t m a r k e t v a l u e s u r p l u s c r e d i t s l o w e r t a x e s on p r o p e r t y ( a s s e s s e d v a l u e ) m a r k e t v a l u e on r e s i d e n c e . -13- and s i m u l t a n e o u s l y but certainly not ��Georgetown Waterfront Area Study Draft Sectional Development Plan Prepared for: N A T I O N A L C A P I T A L PLANNING COMMISSION D I S T R I C T O F COLUMBIA DEPARTMENT O F HIGHWAYS AND Prepared by: Richard F . Babcock and T o b i n M. Richter of Ross, Hardies, O ' K e e f e , Babcock and Parsons January 15, 1975 TRAFFIC ��CONTENTS Page 100.00 Introduction 1 200.00 Definitions 2 300.00 Description o f Plan Area 4 400.00 O v e r a l l Goals and S p e c i f i c Objectives 5 500.00 Plans and Maps 8 600.00 15 Development Control Standards 700.00 Amendments t o Zoning Map and Text 23 800.00 24 Plan Implementation Maps No. 1 Land Use 9 No. 2 10 Vehicular C i r c u l a t i o n No. 3 Pedestrian C i r c u l a t i o n 11 No. 4 S t r e e t Adjustment, 12 No. 5 Design Subareas 13 No. 6 14 Zoning Plan / ��100.00 Introduction 100.01 The Comprehensive P l a n d e s i g n a t e s Georgetown, i n a manner c o n s i s tent with the regional objectives o f t h e National C a p i t a l Planning Commission's "A P o l i c i e s P l a n f o r t h e Y e a r 2 0 0 0 , " ( 1 9 6 1 ) , a s a predominantly r e s i d e n t i a l community w i t h w a t e r r e c r e a t i o n opportun i t i e s on t h e w a t e r f r o n t and w i t h t h e W h i t e h u r s t Freeway removed. The f o r m u l a t i o n o f a S e c t i o n a l Development P l a n f o r Georgetown r e f l e c t s t h e needed t r a n s i t i o n from e x i s t i n g i n d u s t r i a l uses t o p r o posed r e s i d e n t i a l , r e c r e a t i o n a l and commercial l a n d u s e s . 100.02 I t I s a p p r o p r i a t e t o adopt a S e c t i o n a l Development P l a n f o r t h e Georgetown W a t e r f r o n t because i t i s a l o c a t i o n where development g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s have n o t been a d e q u a t e l y r e a l i z e d . Large t r a c t s o f l a n d a r e a p p r o p r i a t e f o r development o r redevelopment, a major new highway i s proposed f o r t h e a r e a , a major e x i s t i n g h i g h way I s proposed t o be removed and t h e r e a r e p r e s s u r e s i n a d j a c e n t r e s i d e n t i a l and commercial communities t o seek space i n w h i c h t o expand. The a r e a i s p a r t o f t h e O l d Georgetown H i s t o r i c D i s t r i c t and c o n t a i n s many h i s t o r i c s t r u c t u r e s ; i t h a s been d e s i g n a t e d a R e g i s t e r e d N a t i o n a l Landmark. The a r e a I s o f g r e a t v i s u a l import a n c e t o t h e N a t i o n ' s C a p i t a l C i t y because o f i t s prominence on t h e Potomac R i v e r bank. The a r e a i s l o c a t e d between downtown Washington, D.C. and r i v e r c r o s s i n g p o i n t s t o V i r g i n i a ; t h e r e f o r e , I t must accommodate heavy r u s h hour t r a f f i c f l o w s i n a d d i t i o n t o i n t e r n a l l y generated t r a f f i c . 100.03 T h i s P l a n e s t a b l i s h e s o b j e c t i v e s , p r o s p e c t i v e l a n d u s e s , zoning d i s t r i c t s and c i r c u l a t i o n p a t t e r n s f o r t h e P l a n A r e a . The P l a n s e t s f o r t h proposed amendments* t o t h e Zoning Map c o v e r i n g t h e P l a n A r e a and t o t h e t e x t o f t h e zoning r e g u l a t i o n s , and s e t s f o r t h r e g u l a t i o n s g o v e r n i n g t h e a p p r o v a l o f Planned U n i t Development a p p l i c a t i o n s i n t h e P l a n A r e a pursuant t o S e c t i o n 7 5 0 1 . * (N.B. o r "hereby amends" t h e Zoning Map. See a l s o S e c t i o n 7 0 0 , i n f r a . C o u n s e l t o t h e Commission should determine whether adoption o f t h e P l a n a c t u a l l y c o n s t i t u t e s a n amendment o f t h e zoning r e g u l a t i o n s o r whether s e p a r a t e a c t i o n I s r e q u i r e d by way o f amendment t o t h e r e g u l a t i o n s t o implement a d o p t i o n o f t h e P l a n . ) �200.00 Definitions 210.00 Except as otherwise defined below, terms used i n t h i s Plan s h a l l have the same meaning as t h a t s e t f o r t h i n Section 1202 o f the Zoning Regulations. 220.00 The following terms, whenever used i n t h i s Plan s h a l l , unless a d i f f e r e n t meaning c l e a r l y appears from the context, be construed to have the following meaning: 220.01 "Board" means the Board o f Zoning Adjustment of the D i s t r i c t of Columbia. 220.02 "Canal" means the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal and i t s right-of-way owned by the National Park S e r v i c e . 220.03 "Commission" means the Zoning Commission of the D i s t r i c t of Columbia. 220.04 "Comprehensive Plan" means the Comprehensive Plan f o r the National C a p i t a l prepared and adopted pursuant t o the National C a p i t a l Planning Act o f 1952, as amended. 220.05 "Development Program means the l i s t o f p u b l i c improvements r e commended i n t h i s Plan and included i n the Plan Appendix. 220.06 " H i s t o r i c Landmark" means a d i s t r i c t or s i t e or a b u i l d i n g , s t r u c t u r e , or o b j e c t , i n c l u d i n g i t s surroundings, l i s t e d on the National Register o f H i s t o r i c Places or designated f o r i n c l u s i o n on the D i s t r i c t of Columbia inventory of h i s t o r i c s i t e s by the J o i n t Corrmittee on Landmarks o f the National C a p i t a l . 220.07 "Old Georgetown H i s t o r i c D i s t r i c t " means that area created by a c t of Congress, D.C. Code 5 - 8 0 1 , 64 S t a t . 903 (Appendix J t o the Zoning R e g u l a t i o n s ) , which i s bounded on the east by Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway from the Potomac R i v e r t o the north boundary of Dumbarton Oaks Park, Whitehaven S t r e e t and Whitehaven Parkway t o T h i r t y - f i f t h S t r e e t , south along the middle of T h i r t y - f i f t h S t r e e t to Reservoir Road, west along the middle of Reservoir Road t o Archbold Parkway, on the west by Archbold Parkway from Reservoir Road to the Potomac R i v e r on the south by the Potomac R i v e r t o the Rock Creek Parkway. 220.08 "Pedestrian Way" means an improved walkway e x c l u s i v e l y f o r pedest r i a n use. 220.09 "Plan" means t h i s S e c t i o n a l Development Plan. u �220.10 " P l a n Appendix" means t h e appendix s e c t i o n o f t h i s P l a n w h i c h i n c l u d e s e x p l a n a t o r y and s u p p o r t i v e m a t e r i a l . The appendix i s a t t a c h e d h e r e t o and made a p a r t h e r e o f . 220.11 " P l a n A r e a " means t h e a r e a r e g u l a t e d by t h i s P l a n . 220.12 " P l a z a " means an a r e a open t o t h e p u b l i c h a v i n g a s p e c i a l q u a l i t y w i t h r e s p e c t t o l a n d s c a p i n g , t h e d e s i g n o f and m a t e r i a l s used i n p e d e s t r i a n ways, and o t h e r a m e n i t i e s ; and p r o v i d i n g a s e t t i n g f o r any b u i l d i n g a d j a c e n t t o o r s u r r o u n d i n g such a r e a . 220.13 "Potomac R i v e r Freeway" means an underground expressway f a c i l i t y e x t e n d i n g from t h e P a l i s a d e s Parkway on t h e west t o beyond Rock Creek on t h e e a s t . 220.14 " S c e n i c V i s t a " means a d i s t a n t v i e w t h r o u g h o r a l o n g a roadway o r o t h e r p u b l i c r i g h t - o f - w a y , o r from a p o i n t o f u n o b s t r u c t e d v i s i bility. 220.15 "Zoning R e g u l a t i o n s " means t h e Zoning R e g u l a t i o n s o f t h e D i s t r i c t o f Columbia. �300.00 Description of Plan Area 300.01 The boundaries o f t h e P l a n A r e a a r e shown on Map No. 1 , Land Use P l a n , NCPC Map F i l e No. , a t t a c h e d h e r e t o and made a p a r t hereof. 300.02 The P l a n A r e a I s bounded by t h e c e n t e r l i n e o f M S t r e e t , N.W., t h e c e n t e r l i n e o f Rock C r e e k , t h e n o r t h bank o f t h e Potomac R i v e r , and t h e c e n t e r l i n e o f Key B r i d g e . �400.00 Overall Goals and Specific Objectives 410.00 OVERALL GOALS 410.01 I t i s the purpose o f the Zoning Commission i n adopting t h i s Plan t o guide new development and accomplish, w i t h i n the Plan Area the four O v e r a l l Goals upon which the Plan i s based i n a manner consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the best i n t e r e s t s of the National C a p i t a l and o f the c i t i z e n s o f the D i s t r i c t o f Columbia. 4.10.02 Four O v e r a l l Goals have been established f o r the public and p r i v a t e development o f the Plan Area; the O v e r a l l Goals are t o seek: a. The preservation and strengthening o f Georgetown as a v i a b l e community w i t h i n the D i s t r i c t of Columbia; b. The more e f f i c i e n t accommodation o f t r a f f i c moving through the Plan Area; c. The preservation and enhancement o f those q u a l i t i e s o f Georgetown which j u s t i f y i t s designation as a Registered National Landmark. d. The enhancement o f scenic v i s t a s o f the Potomac R i v e r and of parks and monuments o f the National C a p i t a l as viewed from Georgetown and o f the Georgetown Waterfront as viewed from the R i v e r and the a f o r e s a i d parks and monuments. 420.00 SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES 420.01 To achieve the O v e r a l l Goals the following Specifc Objectives a r e hereby adopted. Actions taken by the Zoning Commission, the Board of Zoning Adjustment, and other a u t h o r i t i e s i n the approval of a p p l i c a t i o n s f o r Planned Unit Developments, s p e c i a l exceptions, and other requests f o r p r i v a t e development approval not permitted as a matter o f r i g h t s h a l l be consistent w i t h the S p e c i f i c Objectives o f the Plan. The references herein t o p u b l i c Improvements s h a l l serve as guidelines f o r public agencies t o Insure achievement o f the a f o r e s a i d goals. 421.00 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT 421.01 Development I n the Plan Area s h a l l be designed t o cause minimum adverse environmental Impact and s h a l l be so planned as t o minize the detrimental e f f e c t s , i f any, of each element o f the Plan on each other element. �421.02 Development containing dwelling u n i t s s h a l l be designed so as to minimize the hazard of construction and l o c a t i o n of dwelling u n i t s below the e l e v a t i o n of the 50-year combined Potomac F i v e r and t i d a l flood. 422.00 LAND USE AND 422.01 Height and bulk r e s t r i c t i o n s are hereby e s t a b l i s h e d to achieve the O v e r a l l Goals of the Plan and s p e c i f i c a l l y to regulate development so t h a t the n a t u r a l topography of the Plan Area s h a l l not be obscured. 422.02 The height and bulk controls are designed to encourage the compat i b l e development of commercial and r e s i d e n t i a l uses i n close prox i m i t y to each other. 422.03 Design guidelines f o r s c a l e , t e x t u r e , m a t e r i a l s and landscape t r e a t ment s h a l l be developed by The Fine A r t s Commission to extend i n t o the Plan Area the general s c a l e , v a r i e t y , and character of t h a t portion of The Georgetown H i s t o r i c D i s t r i c t , already established north of the center l i n e of M S t r e e t i n t o the Plan Area. 422.04 The Canal s h a l l be protected and r e s t o r e d ; scenic v i s t a s s h a l l be maintained or improved along i t s length. 422.05 Development and r e s t o r a t i o n of properties abutting the south side of M S t r e e t s h a l l conform to the s c a l e and character of the e x i s t i n g buildings. 422.06 A l l p r i v a t e l y owned land, included w i t h i n each Planned Unit Development a p p l i c a t i o n not occupied by b u i l d i n g s , s h a l l be appropriately landscaped i n accordance w i t h guidelines to be e s t a b l i s h e d by 423.00 COMMUNITY FACILITIES 423.01 The development program f o r the Plan Area s h a l l Incorporate those public f a c i l i t i e s required by expected increases i n population d e n s i t i e s and commercial a c t i v i t y , and s h a l l coordinate the p r o v i sion of these f a c i l i t i e s w i t h the o v e r a l l development of the Plan Area i n such a manner t h a t e x i s t i n g and proposed p u b l i c s e r v i c e s w i l l not be overloaded. 423.02 I n high-density r e s i d e n t i a l areas the required open space s h a l l i n clude p u b l i c r e c r e a t i o n f a c i l i t i e s . 423.03 A waterfront park and promenade along the Potomac R i v e r s h a l l be developed w i t h a design compatible w i t h the configuration and a l i g n ment of the proposed Potomac R i v e r Freeway. DESIGN �423.04 The r e c r e a t i o n p o t e n t i a l of the Canal s h a l l be developed by the National Park S e r v i c e . 424.00 CIRCULATION 424.01 The t o t a l development c a l l e d f o r by the Plan i s intended to be l i m i t e d by the ultimate capacity of the c i r c u l a t i o n system c a l l e d for by the Plan. 424.02 The Plan I s designed to encourage development which w i l l minimize the adverse environmental e f f e c t s of t r a f f i c movement through the Plan Area. 424.03 Major t r a f f i c - g e n e r a t i n g land uses s h a l l be located on K or M S t r e e t s t o avoid v e h i c u l a r congestion I n r e s i d e n t i a l neighborhoods. 424.04 Protected storage f a c i l i t i e s f o r b i c y c l e s s h a l l be provided i n m u l t i - f a m i l y , r e t a i l and o f f i c e b u i l d i n g s . 424.05 The use of p u b l i c t r a n s i t s h a l l be encouraged I n the Plan Area. 424.06 There s h a l l be a system of pedestrian ways and bikeways. T h i s system s h a l l be continuous, convenient and safe and s h a l l l i n k a l l portions of the Plan Area w i t h the R i v e r . Pedestrian c i r c u l a t i o n paths s h a l l cross major s t r e e t s a t I n t e r s e c t i o n s or on grade s e parated s t r u c t u r e s a t mid-block. -7I 1 �500.00 510.00 Plans and Maps LAND USE PLAN Map No. 1 , NCPC F i l e No. , attached hereto and made a part hereof, shows the boundaries of the Plan Area and the l o c a t i o n and extent o f land use categories i n the Plan Area upon which the development controls applicable t h e r e t o , s e t f o r t h i n Section 6 0 0 , are predicated. 520.00 VEHICULAR CIRCULATION PLAN Map No. 2, NCPC F i l e No. , attached hereto and made a part hereof, shows the l o c a t i o n and extent of a r t e r i a l s and s t r e e t s . 530.00 PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION PLAN Map No. 3 , NCPC F i l e No. , attached hereto and made a part hereof, shows the Pedestrian Ways, Plazas and bikeways. Development controls a p p l i c a b l e t o Pedestrian Ways a r e s e t f o r t h i n Section 600. 540.00 STREET ADJUSTMENTS PLAN Map No. 4, NCPC F i l e No. , attached hereto and made a part hereof, shows e x i s t i n g s t r e e t s and a l l e y s t o be closed, new s t r e e t s and a l l e y s t o be opened, and Pedestrian Ways t o be e s t a b l i s h e d by easement i n the Plan Area. 550.00 DESIGN SUBAREAS Map No. 5 , NCPC F i l e No. , attached hereto and made a part hereof, shows the design subarea boundaries r e f e r r e d t o I n the Subarea Design Requirements i n Section 610.00 560.00 ZONING PLAN Map No. 6 , NCPC F i l e No. , attached hereto and made a part hereof, shows the l o c a t i o n and extent o f zoning d i s t r i c t s proposed f o r the Plan Area. / -8- �1 MAP No. jffgiM M X 1 RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL-LOW DENSITY COMMERCIAL-MEDIUM DENSITY COMMERCIAL-RESIDENTIAL-LOW DENSITY COMMERCIAL- RESIDENTIAL - MEDIUM DENSITY H233 PARK RECOMMENDED •lllll PLAN A R E A B O U N D A R I E S LAND USE PLAN 0 100 200 300 400 500 �MAP No. 2 �> V ��MAP No. 5 ��600.00 Development Control Standards The following development c o n t r o l standards s h a l l be applied to Planned Unit Development Applications w i t h i n the Plan Area. The following standards s h a l l apply i n addition to those standards set f o r t h i n Subparagraph 7501.24 of the Zoning Regulations; however, where the f o l l o w i n g standards are more r e s t r i c t i v e than those standards set f o r t h i n Subparagraph 7501.24 of the Zoning Regulat i o n s , the f o l l o w i n g standards s h a l l govern. An a p p l i c a t i o n f o r a Planned Unit Development i n the Plan Area s h a l l not be approved by the Commission or the Board unless the Commission or Board, r e s p e c t i v e l y , has e x p r e s s l y determined t h a t s a i d a p p l i c a t i o n i s i n f u l l conformance w i t h the f o l l o w i n g development c o n t r o l standards. A Planned Unit Development i n the Plan Area must conform to the O v e r a l l Goals, the S p e c i f i c Objectives and the Development Control Standards i n c l u d i n g Subarea Design Requirements. 600.01 HEIGHT, FLOOR AREA RATIO AND PERCENT LOT OCCUPANCY STANDARDS District R-4 R-5-A R-5-B C-2-A C-3-A T7 2/ 3/ 4/ 5/ Floor Area Ratio 1.0 1.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 % of Lot Occupancy 2/ ^ Height 40 40 3/ 60 75 4/ 75 V 40 5/ 60 Each of the three standards must be compiled w i t h . Except as s p e c i f i e d herein the l o t occupancy standards s p e c i f i e d i n Subparagraph 7501.24 c. of the Zoning Regulations s h a l l control. See recommended zoning r e g u l a t i o n t e x t changes I n Section 700.00 of t h i s Plan. T h i s standard a p p l i e s only to r e s i d e n t i a l development I n these d i s t r i c t s . Commercial development i s s t i l l permitted 100$ l o t occupancy. An amendment to the zoning t e x t i s required to permit 75% l o t occupancy by r e s i d e n t i a l development i n these d i s t r i c t s ; see recommended zoning r e g u l a t i o n t e x t changes i n Sect i o n 700.00 of t h i s Plan. T h i s height l i m i t i s l e s s than t h a t allowed as a matter of r i g h t I n the C-2-A d i s t r i c t ; however, bulk i s not r e s t r i c t e d because a higher percent of l o t occupancy i s permitted. See note 4 above. ^15- �600.02 OFF-STREET PARKING LOADING 600.03 A l l o f f - s t r e e t parking spaces f o r n o n - r e s i d e n t i a l uses s h a l l be located w i t h i n s t r u c t u r e s . The required number of spaces s h a l l be as shown i n the following schedule: District 600.04 Minimum Required Maximum Allowed RESIDENTIAL R-4 D i s t r i c t two spaces per dwelling u n i t A l l other Residential Districts 600.05 one space per dwelling u n i t one space per dwelling u n i t one space per dwelling u n i t one space per 1,200 square f e e t of gross f l o o r area 1 / one space per 400 square f e e t of gross f l o o r area one space per 200 square f e e t of gross f l o o r area 1 / one space per 200 square f e e t of gross f l o o r area OFFICE All Districts 600.06 RETAIL All Districts 600.07 ALL OTHER PERMITTED USES All Districts 17 Same as required i n the e x i s t i n g r e s p e c t i v e D i s t r i c t Zoning Regulations There s h a l l be no minimum parking space requirements f o r o f f i c e or r e t a i l uses located w i t h i n an e x i s t i n g b u i l d i n g even i f the use i s new and involves r e h a b i l i t a t i o n o f the b u i l d i n g provided that the b u i l d i n g i s one f o r which design standards a r e s e t f o r t h i n the Subarea Design Requirements and f u r t h e r provided that the e x t e r i o r of the b u i l d i n g i s restored and maintained i n accordance w i t h s a i d Subarea Design Requirements. �600.08 A l l loading platforms and loading berths s h a l l be located w i t h i n s t r u c t u r e s . The number and s i z e o f such platforms and berths s h a l l be as s p e c i f i e d i n Section 7302 o f the Zoning Regulations. 610.00 SUBAREA DESIGN REQUIREMENTS The Plan Area has been divided i n t o s e v e r a l subareas f o r purposes of s e t t i n g f o r t h design requirements t a i l o r e d t o the e x i s t i n g design character of each subarea. (Map No. 5 i d e n t i f i e s the bound a r i e s o f each design subarea.) T h i s i s more convenient than prov i d i n g design requirements applicable t o the e n t i r e Plan Area because many design requirements r e l a t e t o s p e c i f i c buildings and are consequently r e l e v a n t only i n a p a r t i c u l a r subarea. The subarea boundaries are based on concentrations of h i s t o r i c landmarks, property l i n e s , development proposals, v i s u a l r e c i p r o c i t y w i t h i n the subarea, and the r e l a t i o n s h i p of public f a c i l i t i e s , such as the Canal and the Potomac R i v e r Freeway, t o adjacent areas. The Subarea Design Requirements are designed t o advance the goal o f h i s t o r i c preservation and are intended t o provide g u i dance t o p r i v a t e property owners t o the National Commission o f Fine A r t s and the J o i n t Committee on Landmarks o f the National C a p i t a l i n making recommendations t o the Mayor of the D i s t r i c t o f Columbia concerning r e s t o r a t i o n or preservation of h i s t o r i c landmarks i n the Old Georgetown H i s t o r i c D i s t r i c t . Compliance w i t h the following h i s t o r i c preservation design requirements s h a l l be a mandatory condition f o r approval of a Planned Unit Development a p p l i cation w i t h i n the Plan Area which may a f f e c t any b u i l d i n g l i s t e d herein. 611.00 AREA A, THE UPPER CANAL T h i s area i s bounded by the center l i n e s of Key Bridge on the west, M S t r e e t on the North, 33rd S t r e e t on the east and K S t r e e t on the south. 611.10 P r i v a t e Sector Design Requirements 611.11 The F o r r e s t Marbury House s h a l l be preserved and i t s e x t e r i o r s h a l l be restored t o i t s appearance c i r c a 1800-1810. 611.12 The buildings abutting the southern side o f M S t r e e t , between 33rd and 3^th S t r e e t s , s h a l l be preserved. 611.13 The b u i l d i n g abutting the north bank of the Canal between 33rd and 34th S t r e e t s s h a l l be preserved. 611.14 Development adjacent to or of the Potomac E l e c t r i c and Power Company transformer s i t e s h a l l include a masonry screening w a l l and landscaped b u f f e r zone between the s i t e and the r e s i d e n t i a l development =17- �t o the west. 611.15 R e s i d e n t i a l Development s o u t h o f t h e C a n a l s h a l l be a p p r o p r i a t e l y r e l a t e d t o t h e s c e n i c v i s t a o f t h e Potomac R i v e r and t h e C a n a l . 611.20 PUBLIC SECTOR RECOMMENDATIONS 611.21 The C a n a l and t h e f o o t b r i d g e and ramps a t t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n o f t h e C a n a l and 34th S t r e e t s h a l l be p r e s e r v e d by t h e N a t i o n a l P a r k Service. 611.22 The r i g h t s - o f - w a y o f 33rd and 34th S t r e e t s s h a l l remain u n o b s t r u c t ed from M S t r e e t t o t h e Potomac R i v e r t o p r e s e r v e r e c i p r o c a l s c e n i c vistas. 611.23 A P e d e s t r i a l Way and a P l a z a s h a l l be e s t a b l i s h e d on 34th S t r e e t a s shown on t h e P e d e s t r i a n C i r c u l a t i o n P l a n , Map No. 3. 611.24 The F r a n c i s S c o t t Key House s h a l l be r e c o n s t r u c t 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 on a s i t e n e a r t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n o f 34th S t r e e t and M Street. 612.00 AREA B, POTOMAC STREET T h i s a r e a i s bounded by t h e c e n t e r l i n e s o f K S t r e e t on t h e s o u t h , 33rd S t r e e t on t h e w e s t , M S t r e e t on t h e n o r t h and on t h e e a s t , a l i n e r u n n i n g s o u t h on t h e c e n t e r l i n e o f Warehouse P l a c e t o t h e c e n t e r l i n e o f t h e C a n a l , thence e a s t t o t h e e a s t e r n boundary o f t h e C a n a l Warehouse P r o p e r t y ; s o u t h a l o n g t h e e a s t boundary o f t h e C a n a l Warehouse P r o p e r t y , thence west a l o n g t h e s o u t h e r n boundary o f t h e C a n a l Warehouse t o t h e c e n t e r l i n e o f C e c i l P l a c e , t h e n c e south t o K S t r e e t . 612.10 PRIVATE SECTOR DESIGN REQUIREMENTS 612.11 Any b u i l d i n g c o n s t r u c t e d a s p a r t o f a Planned U n i t Development e a s t o f t h e Georgetown Market on p r o p e r t y , p r e s e n t l y p r i v a t e l y owned, bounded by M S t r e e t , Potomac S t r e e t , t h e C a n a l and Warehouse P l a c e , s h a l l p r o v i d e a minimum o f 125 o f f - s t r e e t p a r k i n g spaces and c o n t a i n shops f a c i n g M S t r e e t and Potomac S t r e e t . 612.12 The J o s e p h C a r l t o n House a t 612.13 The Potomac M a n u f a c t u r i n g Company B u i l d i n g a t s h a l l be p r e s e r v e d . 1052-54 Potomac S t r e e t s h a l l be p r e s e r v e d . 1050 Potomac Street 612.14 The c a r b a r n a t 3222 M S t r e e t and i n p a r t i c u l a r i t s f a c a d e f a c i n g t h e C a n a l s h a l l be p r e s e r v e d . -18- �612.15 The Bomford M i l l on Potomac S t r e e t s h a l l be preserved and restored to i t s o r i g i n a l appearance. 612.16 The facade o f 1043 Warehouse Place which faces the Canal s h a l l be preserved. 612.17 The b u i l d i n g a t 1046 Potomac S t r e e t s h a l l be preserved. 612.18 The b u i l d i n g a t 1048 Potomac S t r e e t s h a l l be preserved. 612.19 The b u i l d i n g s abutting the south side of M S t r e e t , from 3278 t o 3282, s h a l l be preserved. 612.19a The Canal Warehouse on Grace S t r e e t s h a l l be preserved. 612.19b The D i s t r i c t o f Columbia Paper Manufacturing Company b u i l d i n g a t 3259 K S t r e e t s h a l l be preserved. 612.19c A footbridge s h a l l be constructed from Warehouse Place across the Canal as part o f any p r o j e c t t o r e s t o r e the Canal Warehouse. 612.20 PUBLIC SECTOR RECOMMENDATIONS 612.21 The Georgetown Market s h a l l be preserved and restored t o i t s o r i g i n a l appearance by the National Park S e r v i c e . 612.22 The Canal and the footbridge a t the i n t e r s e c t i o n of the Canal and Potomac S t r e e t and the r e t a i n i n g w a l l p a r a l l e l t o and north o f the Canal s h a l l be preserved. 612.23 A Pedestrian Way s h a l l be e s t a b l i s h e d between the Canal towpath and the public square a t the i n t e r s e c t i o n o f the Canal and Potomac S t r e e t as shown on the Pedestrian C i r c u l a t i o n P l a n , Map No. 3. 612.24 Plazas s h a l l be established on the Potomac S t r e e t right-of-way, both north and south o f the Canal, as shown on the Pedestrian C i r c u l a t i o n P l a n , Map No.3. 613.00 AREA C, LOWER WISCONSIN AVENUE T h i s area i s bounded by the center l i n e s of M S t r e e t on the north, K S t r e e t on the south, 31st S t r e e t on the east and on the west by the boundary o f Area B. 613.10 PRIVATE SECTOR DESIGN REQUIREMENTS 613.11 The Dodge Warehouse a t 1000-1006 Wisconsin Avenue s h a l l be preserved. �613.12 The b u i l d i n g a t 3205 K S t r e e t s h a l l be preserved. 613.13 The b u i l d i n g a t 3134-3136 South S t r e e t s h a l l be preserved. 613.14 The Grace Episcopal Church and grounds a t 1041 Wisconsin Avenue s h a l l be preserved. 613.15 The V i g i l a n t F i r e House b u i l d i n g a t 1066 Wisconsin Avenue s h a l l be preserved. 613.16 The C i t y Tavern a t 3206-3208 M S t r e e t s h a l l be preserved. 613.20 PUBLIC SECTOR RECOMMENDATIONS 613.21 The e x i s t i n g bridge over the Canal a t Wisconsin Avenue s h a l l be preserved by D.C. Department o f T r a f f i c and Highways. 614.00 AREA D, LOWER CANAL T h i s area i s bounded by the center l i n e o f M S t r e e t on the north, west t o the center l i n e o f Pennsylvania Avenue, thence southeast to the center l i n e o f Rock Creek, thence south t o the center l i n e of K S t r e e t , thence east t o 31st S t r e e t , thence north t o M S t r e e t . 614.10 PRIVATE SECTOR DESIGN REQUIREMENTS 614.11 The DuVall Foundary B u i l d i n g a t 1050 30th S t r e e t s h a l l be preserved. 614.12 The b u i l d i n g s a t 1057-1071, 1060-1068 and 1072-1074 Thomas J e f f e r son S t r e e t s h a l l be preserved. 614.13 The b u i l d i n g s on the west side of 30th S t r e e t from 1058 t o 1072 s h a l l be preserved. 614.14 The sandstone facades, f a c i n g the Canal and Rock Creek Park, o f the b u i l d i n g a t 1101 2 9 t h S t r e e t , located north of the Canal, s h a l l be preserved. 6 l 4 . 1 5 . The o r i e n t a t i o n o f w a l l s o f new constructions abutting the Canal s h a l l be p a r a l l e l t o or a t r i g h t angles t o the edge o f t h e Canal. 614.16 A l l buildings on the south side o f M S t r e e t between 2 9 t h S t r e e t and 30th S t r e e t s h a l l be preserved. 614.17 A l l b u i l d i n g s on the south side o f Pennsylvania Avenue between 29th S t r e e t and the e x i t from Rock Creek Parkway s h a l l be preserved. 614.20 PUBLIC SECTOR RECOMMENDATIONS 614.21 The Canal, the locks and the barge landing s h a l l be preserved by �the National Park S e r v i c e . 614.22 A pedestrian bridge over the Canal s h a l l be constructed by the National Park S e r v i c e at the eastern end of the Plan Area leading to a path along the west bank of Rock Creek. 614.23 A masonry w a l l s h a l l be constructed around the Western Heating Plant by the General S e r v i c e s Administration. 615.00 AREA E, M STRFET-PENNSYLVMIA AVENUE INTERSECTION T h i s area i s bounded by the center l i n e of Rock Creek on the e a s t , thence northwest on Pennsylvania Avenue to the center l i n e of M S t r e e t , thence east to Rock Creek. 615.10 PRIVATE SECTOR DESIGN REQUIREMENTS (NONE) 615.20 PUBLIC SECTOR RECOMMENDATIONS 615.21 The s e r v i c e s t a t i o n located east of the M Street-Pennsylvania Avenue I n t e r s e c t i o n , north of Pennsylvania Avenue and south of M S t r e e t , should be acquired by the National Park S e r v i c e and Incorporated i n t o Rock Creek Park. 616.00 AREA F, THE WATERFRONT T h i s area i s bounded by the center l i n e of K S t r e e t on the north, the center l i n e of Key Bridge on the west, the north bank of the Potomac R i v e r on the south and by the center l i n e of Rock Creek on the e a s t . 616.10 PRIVATE SECTOR DESIGN REQUIREMENTS 616.11 A l l buildings located south of K S t r e e t and bordering the Waterfront Park (see Section 616.21) s h a l l have a maximum height of 40 f e e t , measured from the surface of the deck covering the Potomac R i v e r Expressway, and s h a l l have a facade f a c i n g the Potomac R i v e r which conforms to the f o l l o w i n g design s p e c i f i c a t i o n s : the facade s h a l l r i s e , perpendicular to the deck to a cornice l i n e at an e l e v a t i o n of 30 f e e t above the deck; above the 30 foot cornice l i n e the facade s h a l l slope away from the r i v e r at a 45 degree angle r e l a t i v e to the deck to a height of 40 feet above the deck; see Figure 1: -21- / �K »0' AO BO DECK . ELEVATION 19' RIVER LEVEL Figure 1 6l6.12 Buildings adjacent t o the P l a z a on the Potomac R i v e r a t Wisconsin Avenue (see Section 6l6.24) s h a l l follow the setback l i n e e s t a b l i s h e d on the Land Use P l a n , Map No. 1 , t o avoid obstruction of the scenic v i s t a from Wisconsin Avenue looking south. 616.20 PUBLIC SECTOR RECOMMENDATIONS 616.21 A waterfront park, 50 f e e t wide, s h a l l be established by the National Park Service adjacent t o the Potomac R i v e r . The park s h a l l Include a promenade from Rock Creek t o Palisades Park, west of Key Bridge. 616.22 A Pedestrian Way and Plazas s h a l l be established l i n k i n g the waterfront park and the walkway system shown on the Pedestrian C i r c u l a t i o n Plan, Map No. 3 . 616.23 The area south o f K S t r e e t , between Wisconsin Avenue and Key Bridge, s h a l l remain open t o provide a r i v e r view from development immedia t e l y north of K S t r e e t . 616.24 A Plaza s h a l l be developed a t the southern end o f Wisconsin Avenue between K S t r e e t and the Potomac R i v e r . B u i l d i n g l i n e s adjacent to t h i s P l a z a s h a l l be established as shown on the Land Use Plan, Map No. 1 , t o provide a broad scenic v i s t a o f the Potomac R i v e r from the P l a z a and from Wisconsin Avenue. -22- �700.00 Amendments to Zoning Map and Text 710.00 The Zoning Map, a part of the Zoning Regulations, i s proposed t o be amended* as shown on Map No. 6 , Zoning Plan, NCPC Map F i l e No. , annexed hereto and made a part hereof. 720.00 RECCMMENDED ZONING TEXT AMENDMENTS 720.10 Subparagraph 7501.24 b. i s proposed t o be amended t o permit a F.A.R. of 3 . 0 I n the R-5-B D i s t r i c t , t o read, i n p a r t , as follows: Zone D i s t r i c t C-2-A R-5-B, C-M-l 720.20 F.A.R. 3.0 2.0 • Subparagraph 7501.24 c. i s proposed t o be amended t o permit any r e s i d e n t i a l b u i l d i n g or any b u i l d i n g , which has a portion thereof devoted t o r e s i d e n t i a l use, t o occupy the l o t upon which i t i s located t o a maximum of 75$ of l o t occupancy, provided s a i d b u i l d i n g i s located i n a planned u n i t development. The amended subparagraph would read as follows: c. The maximum permitted percentage of l o t occupancy s h a l l be as otherwise prescribed i n these regulations w i t h the exception of C-2-A and C-3-A D i s t r i c t s i n which 75$ l o t occupancy s h a l l be permitted f o r any r e s i d e n t i a l b u i l d ing or any b u i l d i n g , which has a portion thereof devoted to r e s i d e n t i a l use. The percentage l o t occupancy f o r a l l other buildings i n the a f o r e s a i d D i s t r i c t s s h a l l be as otherwise prescribed i n these regulations. 720.30 Subparagraph 7 5 0 2 . 6 1 I s proposed t o be amended t o eliminate the p o s s i b i l i t y of the Zoning Commission p e t i t i o n i n g i t s e l f t o amend the Zoning Regulations. Subparagraph 7 5 0 2 . 6 1 would read as follows: 7502.61 Amendments t o the zoning maps or regulations i n a Section Development Plan area may be proposed by any agency or person authorized t o propose amendments by A r t i c l e 9 of the Zoning Regulations. A proposed amendment s h a l l include a d e t a i l e d statement explaining the impact o f the proposed amendment upon the S e c t i o n a l Development Plan. * (N.B. See footnote on page 3 . ) �800.00 Plan Implementation 810.00 Development As A Matter of Right. Pursuant to Subparagraph 7502.71 of the Zoning Regulations, any property may be developed to the maximum extent allowed as a matter of r i g h t under the applicable Zone D i s t r i c t s . No processing of property before the Zoning Commission or the Board of Zoning Adjustment i s necessary f o r such development unless such processing i s required by the applicable Zoning Regulations. 820.00 APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS A l l of the procedures, requirements and standards f o r a p p l i c a t i o n s f o r Planned Unit Developments i n a S e c t i o n a l Development Plan Area under Section 7501, as amended, s h a l l be followed. The owner or owners of property i n the Plan Area may, pursuant to Paragraph 7 5 0 1 . 3 , submit an a p p l i c a t i o n f o r a Planned Unit Development to the Zoning Commission. An applicant whose Planned Unit Development has been approved by the Zoning Commission may, pursuant to Paragraph 7501.4 of the Zoning Regulations, f i l e f o r " f u r t h e r process*: ing" of the Planned Unit Development before the Board of Zoning Adjustment. Pursuant to Subparagraph 7501.53 of the Zoning Regul a t i o n s , a l l conditions imposed by the Zoning Commission or the the Board of Zoning Adjustment, including those the performance of which are conditions precedent to the issuance of any permit necessary f o r the development of any part of the e n t i r e s i t e , i n c l u d i n g compliance w i t h the requirements of t h i s S e c t i o n a l Development P l a n , s h a l l run with the land and s h a l l not lapse or be waived as a r e s u l t of any subsequent change i n the tenancy or ownership of any or a l l of s a i d area. Such conditions s h a l l be a part of any c e r t i f i cate of occupancy issued f o r any use or s t r u c t u r e i n such development. 830.00 Amendments t o Zoning I n S e c t i o n a l Development Plan Areas. Pursuant to proposed, amended Subparagraph 7 5 0 2 . 6 1 of the Zoning Regulations, amendments t o zoning i n a S e c t i o n a l Development Plan area may be proposed by the Zoning Commission, the National C a p i t a l Planning Commission, the Redevelopment Land Agency, the National C a p i t a l Housing Authority or any other department of the Government of the D i s t r i c t of Columbia or of the Federal Government or by the owner of property f o r which amendments s h a l l include a d e t a i l e d statement explaining the impact of the proposed amendment upon the S e c t i o n a l Development Plan. (See recommended zoning t e x t changes Section 700. 00 of t h i s Plan.) 840.00 Pursuant to Public Law 808, 8 l s t Congress; D.C. Code 5 - 8 0 1 , 64 S t a t . 903 (Appendix J to the Zoning Regulations) before any permit f o r the construction, a l t e r a t i o n , r e c o n s t r u c t i o n , or r a z i n g of any b u i l d i n g w i t h i n the Old Georgetown H i s t o r i c D i s t r i c t (the D i s t r i c t includes -24- �the e n t i r e Plan Area) I s Issued, the Council of the D i s t r i c t o f Columbia s h a l l r e f e r the plans t o the National Conmlssion of Fine Arts f o r a report as t o the e x t e r i o r a r c h i t e c t u r a l f e a t u r e s , height, appearance, c o l o r , and texture o f the materials of e x t e r i o r construction which a r e subject t o public view. 840.10 The Subarea Design Requirements a r e appropriate f o r use by the National Commission of Fine Arts i n i t s a r c h i t e c t u r a l review, pursuant t o Paragraph 7513.1 o f the Zoning Regulations, of plans for any b u i l d i n g or s t r u c t u r e i n the Plan Area. 850.00 Ol'O Pursuant t o D i s t r i c t of Columbia Regulation 73-25; Section 109.10 of the B u i l d i n g Code of the D i s t r i c t of Columbia, no permit t o demolish or a l t e r the e x t e r i o r of a b u i l d i n g , structure or place located w i t h i n the Old Georgetown H i s t o r i c D i s t r i c t s h a l l be Issued without compliance with the requirement o f t h i s regulation which provides f o r review of the permit a p p l i c a t i o n by the D i s t r i c t of Columbia P r o f e s s i o n a l Review Committee f o r nominations t o the National Register of H i s t o r i c Places. 688-233 "25- ��� 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 Georgetown waterfront area study : recommended plan and program Subject The topic of the resource Georgetown (Washington, D.C.) Georgetown Waterfront (Washington, D.C.) City planning--Washington (D.C.) Neighborhoods Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource The Georgetown Planning Group Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource January 15, 1975 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource National Capital Planning Commission District of Columbia. Department of Highways and Traffic 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 Prints https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/a4a8d9452899c6ceff32166e53e57ac7.pdf?Expires=1782345600&Signature=KdrEm5kxxLtF%7EfgvobfUhz08kVu7Y1lc4VmsbPV8eqiEW7w9mNX3XrY0pp%7EcmTfUtBodVCi9dqDj-TN-SVSNxrwOH34ftLaDancOU3kxofRnwn9MBG1i8QBtdGeyczrnPhJorM6dRPnDBzCnoW4ws08ZmRBl44uy1ka74BhtAX8-cFNr4nD0648X7YzbrrniX03kiSXY2f72XGvaFcxYcRPzhLQJop55BpBIQnPI7RyQojTjZg4HRwC9Ttm2qyersE%7EhvLD%7EPCzl%7Ea3iCF9NK6DIuc9vO91AA6BHXK326IB-EcPdUr9MJVF-gcyOnA5e%7ExD4nL4y5f8TUSA8TJ-8Zg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM eff6a028e6baea304ec34c254339321d PDF Text Text CAMPUS 1. EXISTING 2. IMMEDIATE 3. FIVE 4. LONG DEVELOPMENT PLAN YEAR RANGE PLAN PLAN PLAN GEORGETOWN Washington, PLAN UNIVERSITY district of Columbia 1977 �C A M P U S PRECEDING D E V E L O P M E N T P L A N PAGE: A E R I A L P H O T O OF 1 9 7 7 CAMPUS APRIL 1977 O F F I C E OF T H E V I C E P R E S I D E N T FOR P L A N N I N G A N D P H Y S I C A L P L A N T GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY WASHINGTON, D,C. 20057 �GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION — H I S T O R Y , O B J E C T I V E S , AND PLANNING OF GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY 1 SECTION I — T H E E X I S T I N G CAMPUS . , 8 SECTION I I — P R O J E C T S PLANNED FOR IMMEDIATE CONSTRUCTION SECTION I I I —CAMPUS DEVELOPMENT: 1977-1982 SECTION I V —CAMPUS DEVELOPMENT AFTER 1982 . , , . , 20 24 f . . ,i A CLOSING NOTE 32 , , . . . a f t e r page I L L U S T R A T I V E DRAWINGS #1 Existing Campus 1977 #2 Campus B u i l d i n g s — C o m p l i a n c e W i t h Z o n i n g #3 Immediate #4 Campus Development 1977-1982 #5 I l l u s t r a t i v e S i t e P l a n a t Maximum Development Beyond 1982 #6 Vehicular T r a f f i c Plan #7 V e h i c u l a r T r a f f i c P l a n Beyond 1982 #8 Land Use P l a n #9 E a s t e r n P o r t i o n o f t h e Campus — B Z A A p p r o v a l s a n d U s e s #10 E a s t e r n P o r t i o n o f t h e Campus — O w n e r s h i p Regulations Construction 1977-1982 ii 51 51 �TABLE OF ATTACHMENTS I Copy o f Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y F i l i n g — S t u d e n t Recreation Project i n BZA A p p l i c a t i o n #12302 II Copy o f Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y F i l i n g —Heating/Cooling Plant Addition i n BZA A p p l i c a t i o n #12316 i III S k e t c h e s o f S t u d e n t R e s i d e n c e V i l l a g e "B" IV P i c t u r e s o f O l d Georgetown V Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y E x t e r i o r S i g n Manual VI Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y D i r e c t o r y VII History VIII Use D a t a f o r S q u a r e s 1 2 2 2 , 1 2 2 3 , 1 2 2 6 , 1248 o f Community o f Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y Campus P l a n iii Involvement Filings �t BEFORE THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY Campus Development P l a n A p r i l 1977 (Update o f t h e 1973 Campus Plan) i Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y h a s submitted o f §3101.46 o f t h e Z o n i n g R e g u l a t i o n s . paragraph (c) of s3101.46. The f u t u r e campus d e v e l o p m e n t and i n t e n t and p u r p o s e s o f t h e Introduction reviews T h i s P l a n s a t i s f i e s t h e Campus P l a n r e q u i r e m e n t for individual s p e c i a l exceptions of (c) sub- g e n e r a l l y i n keeping with the Plan. r t h e P l a n i s d i v i d e d i n t o an t h e h i s t o r y , o b j e c t i v e s , and p l a n n i n g e x a m i n e s t h e p r e s e n t campus and i n t r o d u c t i o n and S e c t i o n s I I I and long-term development p l a n s of the U n i v e r s i t y . four s e c t i o n s . o f Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y . i t s compliance w i t h the Zoning R e g u l a t i o n s . p r o j e c t s p l a n n e d f o r immediate c o n s t r u c t i o n . and to sub-paragraph P l a n , a s p r e s e n t l y f i l e d o r amended, i s a g e n e r a l g u i d e f o r For the convenience of the Board The i t s Campus Development P l a n p u r s u a n t Section I Section I I discusses IV examine, r e s p e c t i v e l y , near-term �INTRODUCTION HISTORY, O B J E C T I V E S , AND PLANNING OF GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y was founded i n 1789 and was i n c o r p o r a t e d by a n A c t o f C o n g r e s s It i n 1844. i s a p r i v a t e u n i v e r s i t y , a f f i l i a t e d w i t h t h e S o c i e t y o f J e s u s , b u t i s n o n - s e c t a r i a n i n admis- s i o n s and employment. I t h a s b e e n on i t s p r e s e n t s i t e s i n c e i t s founding, 1789. ! A. ORGANIZATION AND PROGRAMS OF THE UNIVERSITY The University i s divided into tenschools: ' C o l l e g e o f A r t s and S c i e n c e s , Graduate S c h o o l o f F o r e i g n S e r v i c e , S c h o o l o f Languages and L i n g u i s t i c s , School Law f o r Summer and C o n t i n u i n g E d u c a t i o n , N u r s i n g Center. I t c o n f e r s undergraduate, Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y M e d i c a l graduate, S c h o o l , D e n t a l S c h o o l , and and p r o f e s s i o n a l d e g r e e s . Additionally, the C e n t e r o f f e r s h e a l t h c a r e t o t h e D i s t r i c t o f Columbia l o c a t e d on t h e main campus a t 3 7 t h a n d c e n t e r e d a t 600 New J e r s e y Avenue, B. School of Business Administration, School, Medical a s w e l l a s p r o v i d i n g m e d i c a l , d e n t a l , and n u r s i n g t r a i n i n g . "0" S t r e e t s , School, community These a c t i v i t i e s a r e p r i n c i p a l l y NW; however, t h e Law C e n t e r a c t i v i t i e s a r e NW. GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY'S O B J E C T I V E S Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y ' s m i s s i o n i s t h e e d u c a t i o n o f c r e a t i v e and r e s p o n s i b l e l e a d e r s - young men and women w i t h a f i r m s e n s e o f t r a d i t i o n a l , -1- s p i r i t u a l , moral, and i n t e l l e c t u a l v a l u e s . �Georgetown deems t h i s c o n c e p t o f " l e a d e r s h i p are to p r e v a i l . world The U n i v e r s i t y with values" seeks t o serve e s s e n t i a l i f the nation and o u r s o c i e t y t h e D i s t r i c t o f Columbia, t h e f i f t y s t a t e s , and t h e community. C o n s e q u e n t l y , t h e t h r u s t o f Georgetown's r i g o r o u s "competent p r o f e s s i o n a l s . " academic program i s n o t s i m p l y t o t u r n o u t Our a i m i s h i g h e r - t o e q u i p o u r s t u d e n t s w i t h a b r o a d e r v i e w and f u l l e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f s o c i e t y , and h o p e f u l l y d e t e r m i n e d t o b u i l d on i t s C a t h o l i c a commitment t o i t s b e t t e r m e n t . t r a d i t i o n and t o c o n t r i b u t e The U n i v e r s i t y i s t o t h e c o n t i n u e d e x i s t e n c e and enrichment o f the t r a d i t i o n . Georgetown h a s a l w a y s been a n a t i o n a l and i t s history. Situated u n i v e r s i t y - proud o f i t s l o c a t i o n i n the nation's c a p i t a l , the University a s w e l l a s f r o m e v e r y s t a t e . Today i t s r e p u t a t i o n States; the i t i s an i n t e r n a t i o n a l u n i v e r s i t y . i n W a s h i n g t o n , D.C. s e e k s l o c a l s t u d e n t s and f a c u l t y r e a c h e s w e l l beyond t h e b o r d e r s o f t h e U n i t e d F o r Georgetown t o p e r f o r m i t s expanded r o l e c r e a t i v e l y , U n i v e r s i t y must be l a r g e enough - b u t n o t t o o l a r g e - t o embrace a w e a l t h o f a c t i v i t i e s , a b r e a d t h o f d i s c i p l i n e s , and a r i c h v a r i e t y o f p e r s o n a l backgrounds. The University metropolitan area has s t r i v e n t o contribute as well. Georgetown's o r c h e s t r a l o c a l a u d i e n c e s f o r many y e a r s . v a n c e d human knowledge. Lecture t o t h e c u l t u r a l and i n t e l l e c t u a l Scholarly research and c h o r a l l i f e o f t h e Washington and d r a m a t i c g r o u p s h a v e of professors entertained and m e d i c a l p e r s o n n e l h a v e a d - The S p e a k e r ' s B u r e a u p r o v i d e s spokesmen t o c i v i c and c h u r c h g r o u p s . S e r i e s welcomes n a t i o n a l and i n t e r n a t i o n a l l e a d e r s -2- t o use the U n i v e r s i t y The as a platform �for presenting t h e i r v i e w s on c u r r e n t issues. S p e c i a l s e m i n a r s open t o t h e p u b l i c p r o b l e m s r a n g i n g from t h e A t l a n t i c A l l i a n c e and i n t e r n a t i o n a l f i n a n c e analyze t o t h e meaning o f meaning. L a u i n g e r L i b r a r y , t h e l a r g e s t u n i v e r s i t y l i b r a r y i n t h e D i s t r i c t o f Columbia, p r o v i d e s and i n t e r - l i b r a r y loan services. The F i n e A r t s D e p a r t m e n t h o l d s e x h i b i t i o n s o f t h e U n i v e r s i t y ' s a r t c o l l e c t i o n and o f r e c e n t p r o d u c t i o n s by t h e s t u d e n t s a n d f a c u l t y . a p p e a r on r a d i o The reference and t e l e v i s i o n and a c t a s " e x p e r t s " University personnel also f o r t h e m e d i a on t o p i c s o f t h e i r c o m p e t e n c i e s . M e d i c a l S c h o o l h a i l s a s g r a d u a t e s a Surgeon G e n e r a l o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s , t h e Founder and D i r e c t o r o f P r o j e c t HOPE, and 2 5 % o f t h e p h y s i c i a n s i n the metropolitan area. p r o u d t h a t more t h a n 5 0 % o f t h e d e n t i s t s and o v e r one q u a r t e r of the attorneys Georgetown i s a l s o i n the area a r e alumni. C. THE UNIVERSITY AS AN ECONOMIC FORCE I N WASHINGTON, In addition nomic f o r c e After industry, to i t s social and i n t e l l e c t u a l D.C. i n f l u e n c e , Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y i s a m a j o r e c o - i n the city. government and t o u r i s m , e d u c a t i o n i s W a s h i n g t o n ' s l a r g e s t i n d u s t r y . t h e U n i v e r s i t y h a s t r a d i t i o n a l l y been one o f t h e t o p t h r e e w i t h a 1976 t o t a l U n i v e r s i t y p a y r o l l o f $67,000,000. i n that p r i v a t e employers i n Washington I t p r o v i d e s on t h i s campus a t o t a l o f o v e r 4,600 j o b s , o v e r 5 0 % o f w h i c h a r e h e l d by W a s h i n g t o n , D.C. r e s i d e n t s . gram h a s p r o v i d e d a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1,300 j o b s As a l e a d e r t o members o f m i n o r i t y I t s affirmative action g r o u p s , and Georgetown pro- University �f u l l y s u b s c r i b e s t o t h e Washington P l a n f o r h i r i n g o f m i n o r i t i e s i n t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y a t t r a c t s money i n t o t h e W a s h i n g t o n a r e a . g r a d u a t e s come t o D.C. from o t h e r p a r t s o f t h e c o u n t r y Nearly and t h e w o r l d . 90% o f our under- They n o t o n l y money f o r t u i t i o n and b o o k s , b u t t o p u r c h a s e f o o d , h o u s i n g , c l o t h e s , e n t e r t a i n m e n t , like from l o c a l b u s i n e s s e s . loans Of c o u r s e , Georgetown o b t a i n s from t h e p u b l i c and p r i v a t e s e c t o r s . trades. bring and t h e s u b s t a n t i a l amounts o f g r a n t s and A l l o f t h i s money m i g h t n o t be i n t h e W a s h i n g t o n economy i f Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y were n o t i n D.C. Georgetown p a y s p r o p e r t y purposes. I n f i s c a l year t a x e s on i t s l a n d h o l d i n g s 1977, i t p a i d n o t d i r e c t l y used f o r e d u c a t i o n a l $209,526 i n p r o p e r t y t a x e s t o t h e D i s t r i c t o f Columbia. F i n a l l y , many Georgetown a l u m n i c h o o s e t o r e m a i n i n t h e D i s t r i c t . percentage o f the p r o f e s s i o n a l s i n the D i s t r i c t a r e Georgetown-trained, business while l e a d e r s and l o c a l government o f f i c i a l s h a v e r e c e i v e d e d u c a t i o n Georgetown i s h e l p i n g local business, D. high F u r t h e r m o r e , many a t Georgetown, Thus, t o s u p p o r t t h e e x i s t i n g economy, i t i s t r a i n i n g f u t u r e l e a d e r s o f government, and t h e p r o f e s s i o n s , UNIVERSITY PLANNING E f f e c t i v e planning i s an i n c r e a s i n g l y i m p o r t a n t k e y t o c o n t i n u i n g n a t i o n a l , n a t i o n a l , and community s e r v i c e . will As n o t e d a b o v e , a i n c r e a s e , r a t h e r than decrease factors w i l l this tradition of inter- I n d e e d , t h e p r o b l e m s f a c i n g Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y i n t h e coming y e a r s . a f f e c t Georgetown's d e v e l o p m e n t i n t h e coming U n i v e r s i t y planners years. expect that several �• First, inflation will c o n t i n u e and w i l l c a u s e o p e r a t i n g and c a p i t a l g r o w t h c o s t s t o r i s e ; a l o n g w i t h a r e s u l t i n g need t o c a u s e t u i t i o n t o r i s e t o meet t h e s e i n c r e a s e d c o s t s . • S e c o n d , t h e end o f t h e p o s t World War I I baby boom i s a n e s t a b l i s h e d number o f c o l l e g e - a g e d p e o p l e such, higher education w i l l programs o r l e s s e f f i c i e n t • c o n t i n u e t o drop f o r the f o r e s e e a b l e f u t u r e . become a " b u y e r ' s m a r k e t , " and s c h o o l s w i t h As unattractive a d m i n i s t r a t i o n s may w e l l be f o r c e d t o c l o s e . T h i r d , government s u p p o r t o f h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n , t h r o u g h and • will f a c t and t h e student t u i t i o n assistance, w i l l supported research, grants, loans, decline. F o u r t h , t h e t u i t i o n d i f f e r e n t i a l between p u b l i c and p r i v a t e h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n w i l l become increasingly greater. Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y w i l l s u r v i v e and p r o s p e r a s a p r i v a t e u n i v e r s i t y a s l o n g a s p r o s p e c - t i v e s t u d e n t s j u d g e t h a t i t s o f f e r i n g s p r e s e n t a v a l u a b l e , though e x p e n s i v e , a l t e r n a t i v e t o low cost p u b l i c higher education. the world and still Recent data prove t h a t persons i n t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s and s e e k t h e q u a l i t y e d u c a t i o n f o s t e r e d a t Georgetown. throughout Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y i s a l i v e well. But, t o s u r v i v e and p r o s p e r f o r t h e r e m a i n d e r o f t h e 1 9 7 0 ' s and t h r o u g h o u t the 1980's, Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y must c a p i t a l i z e on i t s s t r e n g t h s and e r a d i c a t e i t s weak s p o t s . graduates c h o o s e Georgetown b e c a u s e Under- of i t s r e s i d e n t i a l c h a r a c t e r , i t s reputation f o r high p e r s o n a l i z e d a c a d e m i c o f f e r i n g s , and i t s r e l i g i o u s l y - b a s e d v a l u e s y s t e m . -5- quality, I t s residential character �therefore c o n t r i b u t e s to i t s uniqueness students r e j e c t u n i v e r s i t i e s which campuses w h i c h fields appeal to students. to t e n people " l i v i n g " context. - t o l i v e and Green spaces, n a t u r a l beauty study t o g e t h e r enhance the r e s i d e n t i a l U n i v e r s i t y f r o m e v e r y s t a t e i n t h e u n i o n and They seek and p l a y i n g P r o v i s i o n of housing p e r m i t t i n g s m a l l groups - P e r s o n a l i z e d i n s t r u c t i o n of a v e r y h i g h academic versity, I n an e r a o f p e r s o n a l i s m , o p e r a t e a c c o r d i n g t o computer c a r d a n o n y m i t y . combine l i v i n g / l e a r n i n g p o s s i b i l i t i e s . compose t h e e x t e r n a l from two and "living" context. q u a l i t y h a s drawn s t u d e n t s t o Georgetown f r o m 90 f o r e i g n c o u n t r i e s . Georgetown, a s a u n i - i s almost unique i n c l a i m i n g t h a t 95% of undergraduate c l a s s e s a r e t a u g h t by full-time c o n t i n u a t i o n and s u c c e s s o f Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y w i l l h i n g e on i t s a b i l i t y t o faculty. The students. They w i l l c h o o s e t o pay Georgetown's h i g h e r t u i t i o n a s l o n g a s i t h i g h l i g h t s i t s r e s i - d e n t i a l c h a r a c t e r , i t s e x c e l l e n t academic its l o c a t i o n i n W a s h i n g t o n , D.C. c o n s t r u c t i o n needs, These campus. and attract r e p u t a t i o n , i t s r e l i g i o u s l y - b a s e d v a l u e system, T h i s Campus P l a n o f t h e U n i v e r s i t y b l e n d s a c a d e m i c d e s i r e d a e s t h e t i c m i l i e u , and f i n a n c i a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s must be c o n t i n u a l l y examined and and programs, parameters. c o n s i d e r e d when m a s t e r - p l a n n i n g a As s u c h , campus p l a n n i n g i s an o n g o i n g p r o c e s s r a t h e r t h a n a t a s k w i t h s e t b e g i n n i n g ending p o i n t s . The U n i v e r s i t y h a s been d e v e l o p i n g t h i s p l a n i s t h e f i f t h t o be s u b m i t t e d t o the Board -6- f o r m a l m a s t e r p l a n s s i n c e b e f o r e 1964, o f Zoning Adjustments (BZA). Each p l a n and has �evolved and from i t s p r e d e c e s s o r , suggestions and criticisms Thus, t h i s p l a n i s the r e s u l t However, due as the U n i v e r s i t y responded to r e f i n e d needs, changing from w i t h i n , from i t s n e i g h b o r s , of over process of plan evoking f r o m government a d o z e n y e a r s o f c r i t i c i s m and t o i t s v e r y n a t u r e , one minates t h i s evolutionary process. and s h o u l d n o t b e l i e v e t h a t BZA Rather, comment e v o k i n g technology, agencies. response. review of t h i s p l a n this plan represents a single point i n this a new plan. -7- ter- on-going �Section I THE E X I S T I N G CAMPUS The plan. e x i s t i n g campus o f Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y i s d e p i c t e d on I l l u s t r a t i v e D r a w i n g #1 o f t h i s I t c o v e r s 1 0 1 a c r e s and c o n t a i n s s c o r e s o f s t r u c t u r e s whose d a t e s o f c o n s t r u c t i o n r a n g e from 1 7 9 1 t o 1977. The t a b l e s f o l l o w i n g t h i s n a r r a t i v e d e p i c t campus s i z e , b u i l d i n g s , l a n d u t i l i z a t i o n , p o p u l a t i o n , c a p a c i t y , and p a r k i n g , The campus b o u n d a r y a s shown on t h e a t t a c h e d d r a w i n g s was a p p r o v e d by t h e N a t i o n a l P l a n n i n g Commission i n 1966 and r e a f f i r m e d i n 1 9 7 1 and 1 9 7 3 . R e s e r v o i r Road, NW; property l i n e , t o t h e w e s t by G l o v e r A r c h b o l d extending eastward Park; I t i s bordered a l o n g P r o s p e c t S t r e e t , NW, t o 3 6 t h S t r e e t , NW, t o t h e n o r t h by t o t h e s o u t h by t h e U n i v e r s i t y ' s t o 3 5 t h S t r e e t , NW, e x c l u s i o n o f t h e s o u t h e r n f r o n t a g e o f S q u a r e 1223; and b o r d e r e d "N" S t r e e t , NW, Capital with the t o t h e e a s t by 3 5 t h 3 6 t h S t r e e t t o "P" S t r e e t , NW, Street, with the e x c l u s i o n of the e a s t e r n f r o n t a g e o f S q u a r e 1248, and t h e p r o p e r t y o f t h e S i s t e r s o f t h e V i s i t a t i o n , A l l o f t h e u s e s p r e s e n t l y on t h e campus a r e p e r m i t t e d u n d e r t h e z o n i n g r e g u l a t i o n s a s shown by I l l u s t r a t i v e D r a w i n g #2. They a r e e i t h e r : • • approved a s s p e c i a l e x c e p t i o n s , o r • As allowed a s a matter o f r i g h t under the r e g u l a t i o n s , antedate t h e r e g u l a t i o n s and a r e t h u s p e r m i t t e d such, the impact to continue. o f a l l o f t h e s e u s e s have b e e n p r o p e r l y and c o m p l e t e l y -8- reviewed p r i o r to �the f i l i n g of this plan. presented Therefore, while t h e s e u s e s may be r e l e v a n t t o t h i s p l a n , t h e y a r e n o t t o the Board f o r s p e c i f i c approval as these a r e a l l l e g a l l y e s t a b l i s h e d e x i s t i n g uses. IMPROVEMENTS SINCE 1973 The U n i v e r s i t y h a s made a number o f improvements s i n c e i t s p l a n was l a s t b e f o r e of Zoning Adjustments. t h e Board T h e s e improvements marked t h e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f t h e c o n c e p t s o f t h a t p l a n , and a l s o s i g n a l e d an e f f o r t t o r e s p o n d t o t h e o b j e c t i o n s r a i s e d by o u r n e i g h b o r s and t o become a g r e a t e r a s s e t t o t h e community, on the next to preserve S i g n i f i c a n t r e s t o r a t i o n was a c c o m p l i s h e d Chapel, and H e a l y H a l l . b e a u t y and f u n c t i o n The allow. i n White Gravenor c l a s s r o o m b u i l d i n g , Dahlgren The a r c h i t e c t s o f t h e s e p r o j e c t s were c h a r g e d w i t h p r e s e r v i n g t h e u s e and i m p o r t a n c e t o t h e campus. S i n c e 1973, t h e U n i v e r s i t y has a l s o and r e s t o r e d s i x t o w n h o u s e s , w i t h two more p r e s e n t l y u n d e r r e s t o r a t i o n . U n i v e r s i t y h a s engaged i n a c o n c e r t e d stricter t h e U n i v e r s i t y ' s 2 0 0 - y e a r h e r i t a g e was c o n t i n - o f t h e s e o l d e r b u i l d i n g s ; w h i l e , a t t h e same t i m e , u p g r a d i n g t h e f a c i l i t i e s to i n s u r e t h e i r continued renovated s i n c e 1971 i s provided page. A r e s t o r a t i o n program, d e s i g n e d ued. A summary o f BZA a p p r o v a l s r e g u l a t i o n s enacted e f f o r t t o bring i t s b u i l d i n g s i n compliance with the by t h e F e d e r a l a n d D i s t r i c t U n i v e r s i t y campus l a n d s c a p i n g F i n a l l y , the p l a n i s being governments, implemented a s q u i c k l y a s f u n d s and w e a t h e r The p a s t f o u r y e a r s h a v e s e e n g r e a t e r and g r e a t e r p l a n t i n g o f t r e e s , shrubs, and t h e l i k e . The d u a l p u r p o s e s o f campus b e a u t i f i c a t i o n and s c r e e n i n g a r e b e i n g met by t h i s a g g r e s s i v e and will continue t o be met i n t h e coming year. program, �SUMMARY OF BZA ACTION S I N C E CAMPUS PLAN WAS F I L E D WITH BZA ON MAY 7, 1 9 7 1 Date o f Order Relief 10708 April A d d i t i o n o f 1,980 s q u a r e f e e t and change from d o r m i t o r y t o m e d i c a l o f f i c e s i n Kober-Cogan a s p a r t o f p r o g r a m t o i n c r e a s e m e d i c a l t r a i n i n g by 50%, 10783 A u g u s t 5, 1 9 7 1 11044 May 22, 1972 11349 A u g u s t 24, 1973 11350 August 1 , 11544 F e b r u a r y 1 3 , 1974 A d d i t i o n a l s t o r a g e a r e a o f 260 s q u a r e f e e t t o t h e rear of the h o s p i t a l . 11768 O c t o b e r 16, 1974 S t u d e n t H o u s i n g f o r 475 s t u d e n t s on campus. R e d u c e s t r a f f i c , noise, etc, No i n c r e a s e i n e n r o l l m e n t . 11910 June 20, 1975 Parking 11911 J u n e 20, 1975 Construct c a f e t e r i a addition to Darnall H a l l to serve campus m e a l s t o m e d i c a l c e n t e r s t a f f , 12039 March. 10, 1976 A d d i t i o n t o B l e s B u i l d i n g , R e l o c a t e d 100 b e d s from H o s p i t a l a r e a needed- f o r s u p p o r t f a c i l i t i e s . No i n c r e a s e i n s t a f f o r patients, BZA C a s e Number 15, 1971 Granted Three s t a i r w a y towers r e q u i r e d s a f e t y on Med-Dent B u i l d i n g . for fire egress E r e c t i o n of Concentrated Care Center t o provide emergency c a r e f o r m a j o r c a t a s t r o p h e s and h i g h e r l e v e l of care. P o r c h a d d i t i o n t o h o s p i t a l , no i n c r e a s e i n number of p a t i e n t s o r s t a f f . 1973 M e c h a n i c a l t o w e r t o r e a r o f White G r a v e n o r . -10- garage - gets c a r s o f f s t r e e t s . �New construction i s continuing t h i s c o n s t r u c t i o n has p u r s u a n t t o BZA. s p e c i a l e x c e p t i o n s n o t been q u a n t i t a t i v e b u t t h a n e x p a n s i o n i n t o new areas. I n the Hospital areas. Henle S t u d e n t R e s i d e n c e V i l l a g e marks the a p p r o v e d by on surgical suites, - apartments r a t h e r than d o r m i t o r i e s , campus r a t h e r t h a n commute t o and t h e BZA but awaiting the s t a r t o f a new The on-campus h o u s i n g more s t u d e n t s to live D a r n a l l H a l l C a f e t e r i a Expansion, f u n d i n g , w i l l p e r m i t more e m p l o y e e s and visitors to eat campus r a t h e r t h a n d r i v e o f f campus f o r m e a l s . The U n i v e r s i t y has taken the Its 679 s i g n i f i c a n t measures to minimize i t s p a r k i n g surrounding neighborhoods. car capacity w i l l University Transportation Most n o t i c e a b l e i s t h e new s i g n i f i c a n t l y reduce congestion Society (G,U.T.S ) h a s t parking off-campus p o p u l a t i o n live, been i n o p e r a t i o n as w e l l as connect the r i d e r s h i p v a r i e s , i t p r e s e n t l y a v e r a g e s 725-75Q p e r from f o u r i n 1974 to nine today. Also, day, s e v e r a l of our -11- Law and f a c i l i t y on traffic and The for three years. Georgetown I t s nine t h e Main Campus, number o f b u s e s h a s l o t s have been r e d e s i g n e d on Road. t h e D i s t r i c t where most C e n t e r and The impact Reservoir i n the H o s p i t a l a r e a . s m a l l twenty-passenger buses s e r v i c e those a r e a s of A r l i n g t o n our the a s w e l l a s renew t h e e x i s t i n g I t a l s o a l l o w s n e a r l y 500 from t h e U n i v e r s i t y , final programs r a t h e r i t s Emergency Room t o b e t t e r s e r v e replace i t s antiquated on t h r u s t of H o s p i t a l , t h e C o n c e n t r a t e d Care C e n t e r has p e r m i t t e d W a s h i n g t o n a r e a , and lifestyle However, t h e q u a l i t a t i v e ; improvement o f p r e s e n t U n i v e r s i t y t o upgrade i t s i n t e n s i v e c a r e u n i t s , e n l a r g e The 4 been of While increased t o accommodate �the s m a l l e r c a r s t h a t a r e becoming more p o p u l a r t o d a y . toward meeting our code r e q u i r e m e n t s , t h e y h a v e r a i s e d o u r program i s c o n t i n u i n g i s vigorously Notably, c o n t r o l gates entering the and enforcing c o n s e r v e s our parking its traffic regulations h a v e b e e n i n s t a l l e d on facilities f o r the use Finally, and the illicit Administration. The c o r r i d o r s i n t o the will examine t h e central city. transportation u n i v e r s i t i e s i n the m e t r o p o l i t a n Georgetown was r e q u i r e m e n t s and n a t i v e methods o f commuting t o t h e I t has installed finalizing the "short cut" a $100,000 g r a n t to address the critical i n obtaining parkers. This traffic from through from s t u d y i s t o d e t e r m i n e and instrumental the meet Georgetown another grant area which recommend s o l u t i o n s t o a l l o f t h e c o l l e g e s encouraged i t s s t u d e n t s one-person, one-car d r i v i n g h a b i t o v e r 500 l o c k i n g b i c y c l e stands s o p h i s t i c a t e d r a c k s e n c o u r a g e b i c y c l i n g t o campus by Furthermore, working i n cooperation with t r i b u t e s and of or to This University campus. discourages counted and area. F u r t h e r m o r e , Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y h a s American l i f e . free parking t h r u s t of Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y ' s t r a n s p o r t a t i o n r e q u i r e m e n t s and and the to authorized l a r g e l o t i n the r e a r of the of U n i v e r s i t y t r a f f i c to use s p a c e s c a n n o t be Additionally, i s r e s t r i c t i n g parking the U n i v e r s i t y i s i n the process Urban Mass T r a n s p o r t a t i o n smaller a c t u a l c a p a c i t y t o 3,708 c a r s . should r e s u l t i n a d d i t i o n a l i n c r e a s e s . t h r o u g h t h e Georgetown d i s t r i c t campus. While the t h e D.C, c o l l e c t s computerized carpool virtually Council and e m p l o y e e s t o adopt t h a t has throughout the e l i m i n a t i n g the so l o n g d o m i n a t e d campus. These t h r e a t of t h e f t . of Governments, i t p e r i o d i c a l l y d i s - r e g i s t r a t i o n f o r m s t o b o t h i t s s t a f f and -12- alter- students, �To d a t e t h i s p r o g r a m h a s n o t b e e n e x c e e d i n g l y s p o n s o r t h i s program. fruitful, Georgetown m a i n t a i n s and i m p r o v e s m e t r o - b u s s t o p s make w a i t i n g b o t h more c o m f o r t a b l e and s a f e r . companies t o p r o v i d e c a b s t a n d s cab use. vides Also, but i t i s the i n t e n t i o n to continue to I t h a s made w o r k i n g a g r e e m e n t s w i t h and d i r e c t l i n e s , f o r t h e campus t o d i s p a t c h e r s , the U n i v e r s i t y has s u b s t a n t i a l l y increased parking parking and t r a f f i c short distance from home t o t h e U n i v e r s i t y . c i r c u l a t i o n p l a n may be found on I l l u s t r a t i v e -13- s e v e r a l cab thus r a t e s on campus. f u n d s f o r t h e improvements o u t l i n e d above and a c t i v e l y d i s c o u r a g e s would d r i v e t h e i r c a r a v e r y s e r v i n g t h e campus t o encouraging This pro- c a s u a l commuters who The U n i v e r s i t y ' s D r a w i n g #6. recent �TABLE I UNIVERSITY CAMPUS LAND AREA The f o l l o w i n g i s a c o m p i l a t i o n o f t h e t o t a l campus a r e a owned b y t h e U n i v e r s i t y : Total L o t 1 , S q u a r e 1321 T o t a l W i t h i n 1966 N.C.P.C. Boundary Campus 4,049,521 Square Feet 4,049,521 Square Feet 4,372,401 S q u a r e o r 100,4 A c r e s Feet D.C. T r a n s i t Right-of-Way R e c o n v e y a n c e , P l a t s 27/102, and 27/96 55,430 55,430 S q u a r e 1248 77,478 67,188 S q u a r e 1226 85,041 85,041 S q u a r e 1223 60,466 43,746 S q u a r e 1222 71,475 71,475 GRAND TOTAL 4,399,411 S q u a r e or 101 Acres Feet �TABLE I I COMPILATION OF E X I S T I N G BUILDING AREAS CORRELATED TO D,C, Building Height Building Healy H a l l Maguire H a l l Ryan H a l l Mulledy Gervase H a l l Old North New N o r t h Dahlgren Chapel Ryan A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Copley H a l l White G r a v e n o r Garage McSherry O'Gara Poulton H a l l Coleman-Nevils Loyola Hall Xavier Hall New S o u t h Walsh O b s e r v a t o r y and R e l a t e d McDonough Gym G a t e h o u s e #1 G a t e h o u s e #2 Reiss Science Harbin H a l l Lauinger Library Ryder H a l l 74 65 65 65 58 54 66 34 36 59 60 12 12 32 45 53 53 43 66 53 Bldgs. 45 12 12 68 67 46 44 feet ZONING REGULATIONS Gross F l o o r Area Building Area Coverage HQ, 043 S q u a r e F e e t 16,092 27,60.Q 20,661 17,964 28,048 56,786 . 5,464 20,286 95,621 67,664 1,097 440 7,313 31,822 68,116 44,816 12,060 113,996 42,188 4,646 74,489 175 175 127,380 101,023 175,580 9,124 19,324 S q u a r e F e e t 4,212 5,792 5,233 4,068 6,604 10,810 5,464 5,796 17,621 13,889 1,097 440 3,750 11,759 17,716 9,562 4,020 40,170 4,065 3,747 50,251 175 175 20,520 24,847 30,280 4,294 -15- �TABLE I I (.continued) Building Area Coverage * Building Building Height Heating/Cooling Plant 45 F e e t 30 Animal R e s e a r c h 57 Med-Dent S c h o o l 86 Hospital 47 S a i n t Mary's H a l l 40 Gorman D i a g n o s t i c 61 Kober-Cogan 80 Darnall Hall • . 35 P a r k i n g Garage I 38 Dahlgren L i b r a r y 42 B l e s B u i l d i n g , CDDC 40 Basic Science 42 Dental C l i n i c P r e c l i n i c a l S c i e n c e Podium 90 Concentrated Care Center 37 Henle S t u d e n t V i l l a g e D a r n a l l C a f e t e r i a Expansion 34 P a r k i n g Garage I I CCC P h a s e I I Varies 1324 3 6 t h S t . (Alumni House) o 1326 3 6 t h S t . CAlumni House) 1328 3 6 t h S t . (Alumni House) 1322 3 6 t h S t . (Woodstock T h e o l o cr- 5 i c a l Center) 1316 3 6 t h S t . ( I n t e r n a t i o n a l P r e> H (N grams) 1236 3 6 t h S t . ( E c o n . O f f i c e ) M 3605 " 0 " S t . (American Language 0) Institute) •-( 3619 " 0 " S t . B l a c k S t u d e n t A l l i u ance) rd 1300 3 6 t h S t . ( B o o k s t o r e A n n e x ! > R e s i d e n t i a l Campus Townhouses C - l Conforming Uses - TOTAL Gross F l o o r Area 8,840 S q u a r e Feet 16,308 126 22Q . 235,874 65,568 57,800 44,864 91,184 17,574 35,360 49,120 75,700 88,020 fl ' • 8,840 S q u a r e 11,214 26,930 39,764 17,605 20,648 8,044 25,266 42,909 33,490 23,510 16,990 25,200 Feet - - 162,332 95,125 8,500 41,280 76,610 1,674 1,694 2,514 1,405 51,319 25,122 2,400 800 1,800 3,440 600 1,200 1,770 600 1,400 83,500 10,500 2,689,045 S q u a r e -16- - 49,420 487 595 847 1,255 616 Feet 700 33,000 4,500 797,152 S q u a r e Feet �TABLE I I I CURRENT LAND U T I L I Z A T I O N - 1977 TOTAL LAND WITHIN N.C.P.C. BOUNDARY 4 ,372 ,401 TOTAL GROSS FLOOR AREA 2 ,689 ,045 S q u a r e F e e t (TABLE I I ) 1977 FLOOR TO AREA RATIO (F.A.R,) 2,689,045 •/• 4,372,401 Square F e e t .615 ALLOWABLE F.A.R. 1.8 TOTAL LOT COVERAGE 797 ,152 S q u a r e F e e t PERCENTAGE OF LOT COVERAGE 18. 2% ALLOWABLE LOT COVERAGE 60.0% -17- �TABLE I V CAMPUS POPULATION - 1977 STUDENT 8,791 FACULTY 831 STAFF 3,832 TOTAL 13,454 TABLE V CAMPUS CAPACITY - 1977 CLASSROOM SEATS 6,818 STUDENT RESIDENCE BEDS 2,818 HOSPITAL BEDS 535 -18- �TABLE V I PARKING ANALYSIS - 1977 Code R e q u i r e m e n t s 1 f o r e v e r y 10 c l a s s r o o m seats 1 X 6,818 = 682 2 f o r every 3 f a c u l t y .67 X 8 3 1 - 557 1 f o r e v e r y h o s p i t a l bed TOTAL R e q u i r e d 535 by Code Current Code-Sized Spaces 1,774 Provided 2,534* E x c e s s Over Code 760 A d d i t i o n a l Small Car Spaces 1,174 TOTAL P a r k i n g S p a c e s 3,708 * Provided I n c l u d e s P a r k i n g Deck " I I " - Open June 1977 -19- �SECTION I I PROJECTS PLANNED FOR IMMEDIATE CONSTRUCTION S p e c i a l E x c e p t i o n s Now Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y h a s pending before the BZA - the Cooling Plant Addition Plan, and two p r o j e c t s , e a c h an Student Recreation (Application on the no s i g n i f i c a n t increase #12316), p r o j e c t s are shown on Recreation Complex w i l l recreational f a c i l i t i e s of Title requires IX of be located the facilities Heating/ specifically indicated q u a l i t y of U n i v e r s i t y s e r v i c e , w i t h noted l o t c o v e r a g e , and i n T a b l e V I I below, b o t h F.A.R, r e q u i r e m e n t s . near the w e s t e r n border of e x i s t and These the f o r m a l e s and need o f University the females. of 1965 to b e t t e r campus, and University follow the a s amended i n 1972, L a s t l y , the i n t e r s c h o l a s t i c swimming m e e t s . -20- the shall facility i s not be for t h a t McDonough Gymnasium i s u n a b l e Secondary E d u c a t i o n Act s a v e f o r a few the #12302 not p r e s e n t l y E l e m e n t a r y and events, As presently #12302) and p r o j e c t s are I t i s d e s i g n e d t o meet a p r e s s i n g t h a t do this plan, #3, Furthermore, the p r o j e c t w i l l a l l o w equal a t h l e t i c for spectator (Application Both of these Project - Application e n t i r e l y underground. accommodate. Project height, I l l u s t r a t i v e Drawing Student Recreation nearly i n t e g r a l p a r t of i n campus p o p u l a t i o n o r a c t i v i t y . i n compliance w i t h b u i l d i n g The Sought b o t h s i g n a l s u b s t a n t i a l improvements i n t h e p r o j e c t s are The Being to mandate which planned �The National the N a t i o n a l to the By due C a p i t a l Planning C a p i t a l , and Commission the Municipal Planning i t s l o c a t i o n and i n enrollment design, due t h e complex w i l l number o f s t u d e n t s , to t h i s construction, s i n c e p e r s o n s u s i n g t h e f a c i l i t y may w e l l s t a y on impact of outdoor s p e c t a t o r events of the f a c i l i t y w i l l to the north and to neighboring The this project favorably be a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1/3 east. should mile owners. conditions." conditions w i l l be halved There w i l l likely campus beyond t h e i s being be no the p r o j e c t t o 3,000. T h u s , t h e t r a f f i c lessened as w e l l . The residents increase normal p e a k t r a f f i c t h a t the p r o j e c t w i l l More s p e c i f i c d a t a be improved by above-ground from t h e n e a r e s t n o n - U n i v e r s i t y Thus i t i s h i g h l y l i k e l y property n o t become o b j e c t i o n a b l e t o n e i g h b o r i n g or other Traffic F u r t h e r , t h e s e a t i n g c a p a c i t y o f Kehoe F i e l d of t h i s Office reported Landmarks o f Board. to i t s "noise, t r a f f i c , parking (NCPC), t h e J o i n t Commission on times. and portions residential uses, n o t become o b j e c t i o n a b l e f o r t h i s p r o j e c t may be found on A t t a c h m e n t I Plan. Heating/Cooling Plant Addition T h i s f a c i l i t y , a l s o t o be - Application l o c a t e d i n the f a r western a d d i t i o n t o t h e e x i s t i n g power p l a n t w h i c h was L i k e the e x i s t i n g b u i l d i n g , the a d d i t i o n w i l l t h e campus b u i l d i n g s . insure safe operation The #12316 a p p r o v e d i n BZA orders dormitories. provide be #8923, #9539, and c o n t a i n b o i l e r s to generate a d d i t i o n a l steam c a p a c i t y w i l l o f t h e H o s p i t a l and p o r t i o n o f t h e campus, w i l l steam to heat an #9941, and a d d i t i o n a l steam r e q u i r e d Furthermore, the p r o j e c t , which i s cool to �r e c e i v i n g s u b s t a n t i a l f i n a n c i a l s u p p o r t from t h e Administration As and such, the (ERDA), w i l l illustrate f a c i l i t y i s an the use important step Development of c o a l f o r f u e l i n g i n s t i t u t i o n a l - s i z e d b o i l e r s . i n our national t r a n s i t i o n f r o m o i l and gas to coal other a l t e r n a t i v e f u e l s . T h i s p r o j e c t has been f a v o r a b l y reported Commission, t h e F i n e A r t s Commission, and i n compliance w i t h the c o n d i t i o n s power p l a n t . Protection the U n i t e d S t a t e s E n e r g y R e s e a r c h and The D.C. the to the B o a r d by the National Landmarks Committee, s e t f o r t h by the BZA Planning Furthermore, the p r o j e c t i s i n i t s o r d e r s approving the o r i g i n a l D e p a r t m e n t o f E n v i r o n m e n t a l S e r v i c e s and Agency have b o t h been f u l l y b r i e f e d on Capital the U n i t e d S t a t e s t h e p r o j e c t and n e i t h e r has Environmental any objection to project. This students." facility i s not likely t o become o b j e c t i o n a b l e to "noise, traffic, I t i s l o c a t e d w e l l away from n e i g h b o r i n g r e s i d e n t i a l u s e s . minimal - approximately ten t r u c k s per campus v i a C a n a l Road. There w i l l o n l y s i x employees w i l l be t o r i n g i s a key data f i l e d due be day no s e r v i c e the increase added t o s e r v e e l e m e n t o f t h e p r o j e c t and i n support of the will the f a c i l i t y and insure preservation a p p l i c a t i o n f o r s p e c i a l e x c e p t i o n may -22- will i n s t u d e n t p o p u l a t i o n due automated e q u i p m e n t . will Traffic Finally, of be o r number of impacts w i l l enter and leave to t h i s p r o j e c t , be the and e n v i r o n m e n t a l moni- the p r e s e n t ecology. found i n A t t a c h m e n t I I , The �TABLE V I I PROPOSED LAND U T I L I Z A T I O N - PROJECTS BEFORE THE BZA Building Height 1977 E x i s t i n g Recreation Complex Heating/Cooling 797,152 s q . f t . 50' Plant Addition 77,970 559 51' 11,998 9,216 2,779,013 s q . f t . TOTAL T o t a l land Floor Building Lot Coverage 2,689,045 s q . f t . Totals Gross Floor Area area within t o Area Ration 4,372,401 s q . f t . NCPC boundary .636 (F.A.R.) 1.8 A l l o w a b l e F.A.R. Percentage 18.5% o f L o t Coverage 60.0% A l l o w a b l e L o t Coverage -23- 806,927 s q . f t . �SECTION I I I CAMPUS DEVELOPMENTi In t h e n e x t f i v e y e a r s , Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y p l a n s t o c o n s t r u c t f i v e a d d i t i o n a l Each w i l l c o n t i n u e t h e t r e n d s o u t l i n e d above; t h a t i s q u a l i t a t i v e expansion, decreasing borhoods. traffic Student V i l l a g e campus l i b r a r y . students. I tw i l l s u r r o u n d i n g neighborhoods site Student V i l l a g e former campus. than D r a w i n g #4. D r a w i n g #4 o f the t e n n i s c o u r t s immediately c o n s i s t o f c l u s t e r s o f townhouses and f l a t s and w i l l be r e p l a c e d i n t h e s t u d e n t r e c r e a t i o n this project will neigh- a l l o w more s t u d e n t s t o l i v e house west of the approximately complex. on campus. Therefore, i t v o l u m e s w i l l d e c r e a s e and t h a t t h e p r e s s u r e s p l a c e d on h o u s i n g i n t h e will a l s o be r e l i e v e d . I tw i l l l e a d t o no i n c r e a s e s i n e n r o l l m e n t and i s w e l l away f r o m any r e s i d e n t i a l u s e s . Student Residence V i l l a g e of be l o c a t e d on t h e s i t e The t e n n i s c o u r t s w i l l i s expected that t r a f f i c projects. c o n g e s t i o n , and r e d u c i n g a d v e r s e i m p a c t s on s u r r o u n d i n g "A" - "84" On I l l u s t r a t i v e "A" w i l l L i k e Henle V i l l a g e , the improvements r a t h e r E a c h o f t h e s e p r o j e c t s i s i n d i c a t e d on t h e a t t a c h e d I l l u s t r a t i v e Student Residence V i l l a g e 500 19.77 - 1982 academic I tw i l l "B" - " 8 5 " On I l l u s t r a t i v e D r a w i n g #4 "B" w i l l be l o c a t e d a c r o s s from t h e main g a t e o f t h e U n i v e r s i t y on t h e s i t e b u i l d i n g s w h i c h were r a z e d when t h e i r f u n c t i o n s were moved i n t o t h e c e n t r a l c o n s i s t o f townhouses p l a c e d i n p l e a s a n t c l u s t e r s , w i t h i n f o r m a l w a l k s and -24- �g a r d e n s p r o f e s s i o n a l l y m a i n t a i n e d by or even as i n s t i t u t i o n a l be b r i c k and the i n appearance as the frame r o w h o u s e s , u s i n g Georgetown t o w n h o u s e s . 360 the new Henle S t u d e n t V i l l a g e . a r c h i t e c t u r a l s t y l e s and upper-class area and and w i l l b l e n d i n t o the graduate students. a m i n i m a l d e c r e a s e i n campus p a r k i n g c a p a c i t y lead However, t h e s e While c o n s t r u c t i o n not be "dorms" Rather, these of the I t will will familiar townhouses w i l l nieghborhood. ( l e s s t h a n 30 will materials I t i s the U n i v e r s i t y ' s i n t e n t i o n t h a t these e x i s t i n g homes i n t h e imately the U n i v e r s i t y s t a f f . serve duplicate approx- of t h i s p r o j e c t w i l l spaces) i t s construction cause should t o a marked d e c r e a s e i n p a r k i n g demand. O n l y one protect i t . l o t owned by Further, the d i r e c t e d away from t h e become o b j e c t i o n a b l e result layout of the community and due to noise from t h i s p o j e c t . The a p e r s o n o t h e r than the or t r a f f i c . No of residents s h a l l bring the be Thus, t h e u s e changes i n s t u d e n t or sketches of this -25- the d e s i g n noise i s not will likely will be to faculty population will housing. the U n i v e r s i t y shall a u t o m o b i l e s t o Georgetown d u r i n g t h e i r t e r m this s t u d e n t ' s occupancy. s i t e and s u c h t h a t any r e s i d e n t s o f t h i s p r o j e c t and furthermore, t h a t v i o l a t i o n of immediate t e r m i n a t i o n University, Attachment I I I c o n t a i n s s t i p u l a t e t h a t none o f t h e o c c u p a n c y ; and, i n d i v i d u a l houses w i l l toward the o c c u p a n c y a g r e e m e n t between t h e U n i v e r s i t y abuts the stipulation shall c o n s t i t u t e cause for of �Academic B u i l d i n g - "86" A new c l a s s r o o m and On Illustrative i n S q u a r e 1222, #4 f a c u l t y o f f i c e b u i l d i n g w i l l be w e s t o f White G r a v e n o r B u i l d i n g , functions Drawing and constructed n o r t h of Copley H a l l T h i s f a c i l i t y i s d e s i g n e d t o h o u s e many o f thereby r e l i e v e severe overcrowding i n these T h i s p r o j e c t w i l l p r o v i d e s e v e r a l b e n e f i t s t o t h e U n i v e r s i t y and o f f i c e s and classrooms w i l l time t h e r e w i l l campus. be be consolidated a s u b s t a n t i a l reduction There w i l l be no noise eastern face of Vincent T. but the be campus, a s s u r e There w i l l l o s s w i l l be facility and be community. i n the not of t h i s below become o b j e c t i o n a b l e same the On Illustrative Drawing to the due to spaces, of r e m a i n i n g this #4 south of the r e c e n t l y completed C o n c e n t r a t e d Care resemble i t i n e x t e r i o r I t i s not -26- Center, which i s There w i l l a m i n i m a l i n c r e a s e i n s t a f f and facility. Center design, i n t e n d e d t o be d e v o t e most o f i t s s p a c e t o r e s e a r c h a c t i v i t y . construction t o be the r e d e s i g n will and the i t s placement, s p a c e s due substandard space. or f a c u l t y population, and f o r most a c t i v i t i e s that i t w i l l Academic e a s t e r n p a r t of to t h i s c o n s t r u c t i o n , calling At a l o s s o f a b o u t 50 p a r k i n g o f f s e t by located d i r e c t l y i n a d e q u a t e and will student from t h e be buildings. s t r u c t u r e w i l l p r o v i d e a permanent home f o r t h e a c t i v i t i e s o f t h e presently using the a design c o n n e c t e d t o t h a t b u i l d i n g , and The in and academic i n high q u a l i t y q u a r t e r s . in University activity Lombardi C a n c e r R e s e a r c h C e n t e r - "88" This project w i l l will the o r number o f s t u d e n t s . construction, placed i n c r e a s e s i n e n r o l l m e n t due w e l l away from a l l p r o p e r t y l i n e s , l e v e l o f the and the the and a patient be no care increases h o s p i t a l beds r e s u l t i n g �A n i m a l R e s e a r c h C e n t e r - "87" On I l l u s t r a t i v e The has care Drawing #4 e v o l u t i o n o f Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y H o s p i t a l i n t o a n a t i o n a l l y known m e d i c a l increased the requirement f o r vivarium for laboratory animals, quarters, More s p a c e i s r e q u i r e d a d e q u a t e work s p a c e and i s o l a t i o n facilities, center to provide humane and t h e h i g h e s t q u a l i t y s a n i t a r y and d i s p o s a l equipment. The students, p r o p o s e d s t r u c t u r e w i l l do a l l o f t h i s w i t h o u t l e a d i n g s i g n i f i c a n t s t a f f g r o w t h , o r more n o i s e o r t r a f f i c , of the p r e s e n t objectionable due to this facility i n the f a r northwestern corner conditions to the neighboring r e s i d e n t s . to increases of f a c u l t y or I t w i l l be l o c a t e d n e a r t h e s i t e o f t h e campus and w i l l About 20 p a r k i n g not present spaces will be lost construction. Other* P r o j e c t s In a d d i t i o n to these dwellings f i v e m a j o r p r o j e c t s , t h e U n i v e r s i t y may b e g i n c o n s t r u c t i o n o f R-3 on s e v e r a l v a c a n t lots i t owns i n t h e f o u r b l o c k s e a s t o f 37th S t r e e t , l e a s e d i n t h e same manner a s t h e e x i s t i n g homes; t h a t i s , open t o f a c u l t y , s t a f f , the general p u b l i c . of these F u r t h e r m o r e , r e s t o r a t i o n and l a n d s c a p i n g a c t i v i t i e s r e q u i r e BZA a c t i o n . -27T activities will T h e s e w i l l be s t u d e n t s , and continue. None �The f o l l o w i n g tables reflect t h e a n t i c i p a t e d e f f e c t on t h e campus from t h i s five-year plan: TABLE UNIVERSITY VIII CAMPUS LAND AREA - 1982 Total 1977 4,399,411 S q u a r e F e e t Total Anticipated Within lybb NCPC Boundary 4,372,401 S q u a r e F e e t 0 Q Change 4,399,411 S q u a r e F e e t GRAND TOTAL - P r o p o s e d 1982 4,372,401 S q u a r e F e e t TABLE I X COMPILATION OF PROPOSED BUILDING AREAS - 1982 CORRELATED TO D C . ZONING REGULATIONS r Building -1977 T o t a l s ( i n c l u d i n g p r o j e c t s now b e f o r e BZA) - R e s i d e n c e V i l l a g e "A" - R e s i d e n c e V i l l a g e "B" -Academic B u i l d i n g Building Height Gross F l o o r Area 2,779,013 60' 30' 60* 125,000 81,000 15Q 0.Q0 f -28- Sq, F t . B u i l d i n g Area Coverage 806,927 41,000 27,.000 80,QQQ �TABLE I X ( C o n t i n u e d ) Building Building Height 1 -Lombard! C a n c e r C e n t e r -Animal R e s e a r c h Center -Demolition o f Present Vivarium 4Q 30' Gross F l o o r Area B u i l d i n g Area Coverage 26,800 Sq. F t . 12,000 (11,214) 3,205,705 Sq, F t , TOTALS - P r o p o s e d 1982 51,000 S q , F t , 36,000 (16,308) 982,513 Sq. F t . TABLE X PROPOSED LAND U T I L I Z A T I O N - 1982 T o t a l Land W i t h i n NCPC Boundary 4,372,401 T o t a l Gross F l o o r Area 3,205,705 1932 Proposed (Table I I ) F l o o r t o Area R a t i o A l l o w a b l e F.A.R. T o t a l L o t Coverage Percentage (F.A.R.) .733 1,8 (Table I I ) o f L o t Coverage Allowable L o t Coverage 982,513 22.5% 60,0% �TABLE X I CAMPUS POPULATION - 1982 STUDENTS 8,930 FACULTY 845 STAFF 3,980 TOTAL 13,755 TABLE X I I CAMPUS CAPACITY - 1982 CLASSROOM SEATS 7,000 STUDENT RESIDENCE BEDS 3,678 HOSPITAL BEDS 571 -30- �TABLE XIII PARKING ANALYSIS - 1982 Code R e q u i r e m e n t s 1 f o r e v e r y 10 c l a s s r o o m seats 700 2 f o revery 3 f a c u l t y 563 1 571 f o r e v e r y h o s p i t a l bed TOTAL REQUIRED BY CODE Spaces 1977 Net Provided Code Spaces 2,534 L o s s e s o f Code S p a c e s by 1982 1982 Total Code S p a c e s Required Provided by Code EXCESS OVER CODE 1982 1,834 Code (100) 2,434 1,834 600 Spaces 2,434 A d d i t i o n a l Small C a r Spaces 1,174 TOTAL PARKING 3,608 SPACES PROVIDED �SECTION I V CAMPUS DEVELOPMENT AFTER 1982 Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y ' s p l a n s f o r d e v e l o p m e n t a f t e r that prevent e i t h e r great s p e c i f i c i t y or great assurance, • the e f f e c t of d r a s t i c decreases i n college-aged • t h e changing population impact w i l l h a v e on e d u c a t i o n t h e g e n e r a l s t a t e o f t h e economy, and t h e w i d e n i n g public Some o f t h e s e f a c t o r s a r e : n e e d s o f Georgetown e d u c a t o r s , e s p e c i a l l y i n l i g h t o f t h e d r a m a t i c c o m p u t e r s and o t h e r t e c h n o l o g y • 1982 a r e s u b j e c t t o a number o f f a c t o r s gap between t h e c o s t s o f p r i v a t e and education • the accelerating increases i n construction costs • the changing d e s i r e s and e x p e c t a t i o n s o f c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s and t h e a n t i c i p a t e d t h e number o f a d u l t s s e e k i n g c o n t i n u i n g education • t h e u n c e r t a i n e f f e c t o f on-going energy s h o r t a g e s and c o n s e r v a t i o n programs • t h e impact surge i n of t h e changing W a s h i n g t o n m e t r o p o l i t a n community, e s p e c i a l l y c e n t r a l city r e d e v e l o p m e n t and m e t r o r a i l o p e r a t i o n s • t h e improvement i n h e a l t h c a r e methods and t h e change i n e m p h a s i s t o h e a l t h m a i n t e n a n c e I n l i g h t o f t h e s e and o t h e r f a c t o r s , Georgetown p l a n n e r s have d e c i d e d t o adopt a maximum growth a n a l y s i s r a t h e r than a s c h e d u l e o f s p e c i f i c p r o j e c t s o c c u r i n g w i t h i n a s p e c i f i c W h i l e t h i s method o f p l a n n i n g h a s a g r e a t d e a l o f u n c e r t a i n t y , i t i s t h e -most p r a g m a t i c time period. approach �available. I t a l l o w s a l l p o s s i b l e g r o w t h t o be shown and p l a n n e d , w h i l e a l s o a l l o w i n g any l e s s e r l e v e l o f growth a s w e l l . I t would, however, be i n a c c u r a t e t o assume t h a t t h e t o t a l development shown i n I l l u s t r a t i v e D r a w i n g s #5, #7, and #8 w i l l b e a c h i e v e d by a p a r t i c u l a r d a t e , o r i n t h e s p e c i f i c design each i n d i c a t e d i n the drawing. framework p r o v i d e d by t h i s Rather, future use s h a l l f i t into the general study, ACADEMIC PLANNING O B J E C T I V E S The 1. p l a n was d e v e l o p e d t o meet c e r t a i n a c a d e m i c p l a n s and o b j e c t i v e s : Increases i n student population will be s e v e r e l y l i m i t e d w i l l p r i n c i p a l l y f o c u s on u p g r a d i n g s e r v i c e s . not q u a n t i t a t i v e growth f a c i l i t i e s . The p l a n A u t o m o b i l e and t r u c k t r a f f i c should Student and f a c u l t y h o u s i n g be improved, must be p r o v i d e d i n a society of scholars. t o i n s u r e a r e s i d e n t i a l campus r a s e l f - c o n t a i n e d T h i s concept of education Georgetown and i s a c r u c i a l e l e m e n t o f i t s e d u c a t i o n a l 4. F u r t h e r c o n s t r u c t i o n must be p l a c e d on a f l e x i b l e t o p r o g r a m c h a n g e s and f i n a n c i a l flexibility and l e a r n i n g a r e a s o f t h e " l i v i n g / l e a r n i n g c e n t e r , " where s t u d e n t s and t e a c h e r s may l i v e , t o g e t h e r another improvement, and t o t h u s r e m a i n u s e f u l i n t h e coming y e a r s , be e l i m i n a t e d from t h e l i v i n g campus, and i t s f l o w a r o u n d t h e campus s h o u l d 3. i s t o f o c u s on q u a l i t a t i v e F u r t h e r m o r e , t h e new f a c i l i t i e s must h a v e i n b u i l t t o respond t o changing c u r r i c u l u m requirements 2. i n t h e f u t u r e , and new c o n s t r u c t i o n contingencies. -33- and i n t e r a c t w i t h one through l i v i n g i s a tradition at philosophy, schedule t o a l l o w the U n i v e r s i t y t o respond The U n i v e r s i t y must n o t be committed t o b u i l d what i t �e i t h e r does not r e q u i r e or cannot a f f o r d , 5. The h u m a n - s c a l e d , h i s t o r i c e n v i r o n m e n t o f t h e Georgetown d i s t r i c t possible, 6. must be p r e s e r v e d , and, if enhanced. Functions and operations should be consolidated t o p r o d u c e maximum e f f i c i e n c y . PLANNING SOLUTIONS These academic o b j e c t i v e s w i l l 1. Obsolete f a c i l i t i e s w i l l flexibility will be be met be p h a s e d - o u t and t o r e s p o n d t o p r o g r a m c h a n g e s and success with and effect Often, these s t r e s s i n g renovation renovation The the and e f f o r t s and t h e o l d may new built-in facilities o v e r new con- historic U n i v e r s i t y has expects t h e b u i l d i n g s i n S q u a r e 1222. t h a t t h e new the experienced to continue T h i s program i s h a r m o n i z e and interact l e a r n i n g environment, University w i l l p o r t a t i o n and By r e s t o r i n g the e x t e r i o r s . Q u a d r a n g l e , C o p l e y H a l l , and a p r i m e example o f G e o r g e t o w n ' s e x p e c t a t i o n t o p r o d u c e an up-to-rdate f a c i l i t i e s w i t h t e c h n o l o g i c a l advances. and p r a i s e i n i t s p a s t r e s t o r a t i o n and t h i s program i n the The replaced c o n s t r u c t i o n t i m e i s s u b s t a n t i a l l y r e d u c e d , and a t m o s p h e r e i s m a i n t a i n e d by p r e s e r v i n g 2. creative solutions: l o c a t e d i n remodeled space i n e x i s t i n g b u i l d i n g s . s t r u c t i o n , c o s t s a r e k e p t low, great with continue carpooling. and i n t e n s i f y i t s e f f o r t s t o i n c r e a s e r e l i a n c e on mass t r a n s - P a r t i c u l a r l y when t h e METRO i s f i n i s h e d i t i s hoped t h a t t h i s s e r v e a s t h e p r i m e mover o f i t s p e o p l e . will Notably, the U n i v e r s i t y i s p r e s e n t l y completing p l a n s r e g u l a r G.U.T.S, b u s e s t o t h e n e a r e s t m e t r o - r a i l s t a t i o n s when t h e -34- system reaches the campus to area. run �With t h i s , a u t o m o b i l e and t r u c k t r a f f i c f o r c i n g the bulk o f the t r a f f i c narrow r e s i d e n t i a l concentrated 3. toward t h e s o u t h e r n s t r e e t s to the e a s t . t o p e d e s t r i a n s and Future housing and n o r t h e r n campus b o r d e r s Furthermore, will will p a r k i n g and l o a d i n g a r e a s . bicyclists, be i n t h e p o p u l a r r e q u i r e d t o make a " u n i v e r s i t y " w i l l townhouse p a t t e r n . be c o n t a i n e d T h i s s t y l e h a s been v e r y given the e x i s t i n g Thus, e v e r y t h i n g T h i s tendency toward a s e l f - c o n t a i n e d t o o b v i a t e t h e need f o r f r e q u e n t off-campus zoning regulations. Drawing #5, shows maximum p o s s i b l e d e v e l o p m e n t on t h e s i t e , However, a l l o f t h e new c o n s t r u c t i o n i s t o be s t a g e d i n s m a l l b l o c k s - t h e v i l l a g e s - which a r e each T h u s , d e v e l o p m e n t c a n be t e r m i n a t e d w e a k e n i n g t h e whole p l a n . i n d e p e n d e n t and c o m p l e t e w i t h o u t or delayed Furthermore, development, t h e p l a n has s u f f i c i e n t traffic and s u p p o r t commuting t o t h e campus t o a minimum, The p l a n , a s shown i n I l l u s t r a t i v e without popular advantages t o the i n s t i t u t i o n as w e l l . on campus. campus i s n o t o n l y a c a d e m i c a l l y wholesome, b u t t e n d s tion. be l i m i t e d T h u s , t h e s u r f a c e o f t h e campus w i l l be f u n c t i o n s , w i t h e x t e r i o r s and d e s i g n s t o complement t h e e x i s t i n g a r c h i t e c t u r e . 4. and away from t h e be s c a t t e r e d i n l i v i n g / l e a r n i n g v i l l a g e s o f mixed a c a d e m i c , r e s i d e n t i a l , t r i p s and r e d u c e by once on campus, t h e s e v e h i c l e s w i l l be w i t h Georgetown s t u d e n t s and h a s s u b s t a n t i a l f i n a n c i a l They be e n h a n c e d and r e d u c e d i n t h e c e n t e r o f t h e campus, away from r e s i d e n t i a l u s e s , and w i l l p r i m a r i l y to below-surface left f l o w i n t h e campus a r e a w i l l flexibility c o n d i t i o n s so d i c t a t e , -35- while a t any p o i n t less Illustrative Drawing #7 shows maximum p a r k i n g t o a l l o w a reduced than any f u r t h e r c o n s t r u c full development amount o f p a r k i n g should future �The a) a t m o s p h e r e o f h i s t o r i c Georgetown w i l l R e s t r i c t i n g new c o n s t r u c t i o n and replacing on t h e campus e a s t o f 3 7 t h S t r e e t t o f i l l i n g while, a t t h e same t i m e , p r e s e n t i n g grouped i n s m a l l , p e r s o n - o r i e n t e d v i l l a g e s . University w i l l obtain This the space i t r e q u i r e s under t h e zoning t h e i m p r e s s i o n o f human-scaled structures s h a l l be a c c o m p l i s h e d by p l a c i n g t h e b u l k o f t h e d e v e l o p m e n t a t t h e low e l e v a t i o n o f t h e c e n t e r imposing lots and t h e p o s s i b l e r e m o d e l i n g i n S q u a r e 1222. U s i n g l a n d w e s t o f 3 7 t h S t r e e t i n t h e most e f f i c i e n t manner p o s s i b l e regulations; vacant s t r u c t u r e s e c o n o m i c a l l y beyond r e p a i r by u s e o f R-3 h o u s i n g , R-3 town- h o u s e s on t h e P o u l t o n H a l l s i t e , b) be p r e s e r v e d and e n h a n c e d by: by b u i l d i n g o f t h e campus. i n small Thus, t h e v i l l a g e s rather than skyscrapers. c) L a n d s c a p i n g t h e campus t o p r o v i d e b o t h v i s u a l and n o i s e d) C o n t i n u i n g t o r e s t o r e and m a i n t a i n a r c h i t e c t u r a l l y and h i s t o r i c a l l y e) R e d u c i n g t h e a d v e r s e i m p a c t s t h e U n i v e r s i t y may h a v e on t h e n e i g h b o r h o o d by t u r n i n g t h e campus i n w a r d a s much a s p o s s i b l e ; w h i l e , n e i g h b o r s t o come o n t o t h e campus t o p l a y , concerts, f) alteration, reconstruction, p u b l i c v i e w from a p u b l i c street, -36- significant structures. to i n v i t e i t s w a l k , u s e t h e l i b r a r i e s and c l i n i c s , attend and t h i n k . w i t h t h e O l d Georgetown A c t w h i c h r e q u i r e s F i n e of any c o n s t r u c t i o n , a s w e l l a s beauty, a t t h e same t i m e , c o n t i n u i n g l e c t u r e s and p l a y s , o r s i m p l y t o r e f l e c t Complying f u l l y screening, A r t s Commission o r r a z i n g o f any b u i l d i n g approval subject to �6. on A c t i v i t i e s w i l l be consolidated i n t h e c e n t r a l p o r t i o n o f t h e campus, w i t h t h e p e r i p h e r y p u l l e d i n w a r d t o t h e c e n t r a l c o r e , away from r e s i d e n t i a l Board of Zoning A d j u s t m e n t s a p p r o v a l t h e s e key The f e a t u r e s and t o be p r e p a r e d EASTERN PORTION OF The THE t h e e a s t e r n , c e n t r a l , and northern f o r a n a l y t i c a l purposes, they are must be v i e w e d a s p o r t i o n s of the interdependent such, CAMPUS campus l o c a t e d e a s t o f 3 7 t h S t r e e t i s a s i g n i f i c a n t e l e m e n t o f t h e Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y t r a d i t i o n and s t y l e of e d u c a t i o n , T h i s i s shown i n I l l u s t r a t i v e I t provides and will t o be so i n the f u t u r e under the M a s t e r the s c h o o l . As such, House, t h e A m e r i c a n Language I n s t i t u t e , f o r Theological Research certain activities i n t h i s area to allow easy Notably, the School Plan. #10. a v a l u a b l e t r a n s i t i o n between t h e W a s h i n g t o n community and w e l l as the U n i v e r s i t y are p l a c e d t h e c i t y and continue D r a w i n g s #9 and i n t h e c e n t r a l p o r t i o n o f t h e campus. Center implement t o meet t h e c h a l l e n g e s o f t h e coming y e a r s . While they are separated p a r t s o f a whole campus and property. a l l o w Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y t o b e g i n t o P l a n a n a l y z e s growth i n t h r e e a r e a s : U n i v e r s i t y campus. THE will functions presently f o r Summer and i n t e n s i v e uses t h a t s e r v e t h e community a c c e s s and f r e e interchange Continuing Education, t h e Kennedy I n s t i t u t e are a l l i n t h i s p o r t i o n of the -37- the f o r B i o e t h i c s , and campus. the as between Alumni t h e Woodstock �The campus e a s t o f 3 7 t h S t r e e t p r o v i d e s t h e b e s t example o f Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y ' s to p r o v i d e and an i n t e g r a t e d , l i v i n g / l e a r n i n g e n v i r o n m e n t . H e r e , s t u d e n t s , members o f t h e s t a f f , and members o f t h e g e n e r a l p u b l i c i n t e r a c t and atmosphere. l e a r n from e a c h o t h e r i n an T h u s , t h i s a r e a s e r v e s a s a model f o r t h e f u t u r e d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e efforts faculty informal living/learning villages. Finally, t h e r e a r e e c o n o m i c and in these blocks. As one its reasons f o r the U n i v e r s i t y ' s continued o f t h e D i s t r i c t ' s o l d e s t and shares with her neighbors district. environmental a concern I t s a c q u i s i t i o n and largest landowners, Georgetown f o r c o n t i n u e d r e s t o r a t i o n and p r e s e r v a t i o n o f t h e ownership of p r o p e r t y has provided a stabilizing presence University historic i n f l u e n c e , and e x t e n s i v e program of r e s t o r a t i o n has i n s u r e d t h a t the c h a r a c t e r of the neighborhood will continue. A f t e r examining these f a c t o r s , economic, e n v i r o n m e n t a l , ter o f t h e a r e a , and i t became c l e a r t o U n i v e r s i t y p l a n n e r s t h a t o r programmic s e n s e t o d e m o l i s h b u i l d massive have c a l l e d f o r v e r y l i t t l e classroom b u i l d i n g s . the townhouses, d e s t r o y the unique c h a r a c As s u c h , b o t h t h i s p l a n and f u t u r e d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h i s p o r t i o n o f t h e campus. o u t l i n e d above, P o u l t o n H a l l would be a r e a on be renewed w i t h c o n f o r m i n g s t r u c t u r e s and 3 6 t h S t r e e t may townhouses w i l l as more and continue. There w i l l r a z e d and l i k e l y be r e p l a c e d w i t h R-3 some r e m o d e l i n g i t s predecessor Beyond t h e townhouses, the l i t t l e u s e s , and activity commercial r e s t o r a t i o n of of the b u i l d i n g s i n Square more o f t h e e x i s t i n g u s e s a r e moved t h e t h e c e n t r a l campus. -38- i t would not make While U n i v e r s i t y the 1222 uses �w i l l remain i n t h i s block, i n t e n s i t y of use. t h e r e w i l l be no i n c r e a s e , and Finally, from t i m e to time, t h e U n i v e r s i t y may t h e p a s t , f o r U n i v e r s i t y u s e s i n some o f t h e e x i s t i n g The permitted zoning to unreasonably expand i n t o l o w - d e n s i t y University disagrees with t h i s contention. t o i n c l u d e t h i s l a n d w i t h i n t h e campus was f o r u s e o f t h i s l a n d d o e s n o t c o n s t i t u t e an T h i s c o n c l u s i o n i s based on i n the seek p e r m i s s i o n , as i t has i n townhouses, improved d i s t r i c t s , The expansion I t h a s n e i t h e r low d e n s i t y nor low 2. I t i s not a r e s i d e n t i a l d i s t r i c t , 3. Georgetown i s n o t I t h a s been a e a s t of 37th contention Street. n o t an u n r e a s o n a b l e one, and The the U n i v e r s i t y ' s p l a n expansion. characteristics: bulk, but a mixed-use neighborhood, " e x p a n d i n g " i n t o t h e s e b l o c k s ; r a t h e r , i t h a s owned and i n t h e s e b l o c k s s i n c e t h e e a r l y 1 8 0 0 ' s and p r e s e n t u s e s came t o t h e be N a t i o n a l C a p i t a l P l a n n i n g Commission's d e c i s i o n f o u r s e p a r a t e neighborhood 1. The a s u b s t a n t i a l decrease, r e g u l a t i o n s (§3101,46(b)) e x p r e s s an i n t e n t i o n t h a t u n i v e r s i t y campuses n o t o f some t h a t t h i s p l a n r e p r e s e n t s s u c h an u n r e a s o n a b l e 4. likely dominated the a r e a w e l l b e f o r e used any property of the neighborhood. uses proposed f o r t h e s e b l o c k s a r e not unreasonable and the nature of these b l o c k s . A t t a c h m e n t I V c o n t a i n s p i c t u r e s s u b s t a n t i a t i n g t h e above -39- facts. are e n t i r e l y consistent with �1. The Neighborhood h a s N e i t h e r Low B u l k Nor Low D e n s i t y The campus a r e a i s a t i g h t l y compact n e i g h b o r h o o d o f r o w h o u s e s , many o f w h i c h conforming under today's zoning r e g u l a t i o n s . bulk b u i l d i n g s i n the a r e a . of which Church I n a d d i t i o n t o t h e s e v e r a l Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y b u i l d i n g s , S c h o o l , C o n v e n t , and R e c t o r y ; t h e C a p i t a l gardens, t h e r e a r e a g r e a t number o f h i g h d a t e f r o m t h e t u r n o f t h e c e n t u r y , t h e a r e a i s d o m i n a t e d by t h e H o l y T r i n i t y Convent and S c h o o l . 2. Furthermore, a r e non- most Parish T r a n s i t O f f i c e B u i l d i n g ; and t h e V i s i t a t i o n Thus, r a t h e r than b e i n g a uniform a r e a o f low d e n s i t y townhouses and t h e n e i g h b o r h o o d i s a n u r b a n m i x o f h i g h and low d e n s i t y u s e s . The Neighborhood i s a Mixed-Use A r e a , R a t h e r Than a " R e s i d e n t i a l " A b r i e f w a l k a r o u n d t h e campus boundary w i l l commercial uses. S t a r t i n g a t the f a r northwest i n d i c a t e t h e h i g h l e v e l o f i n s t i t u t i o n a l and c o r n e r o f t h e campus, on R e s e r v o i r Road 4 6 t h S t r e e t , and w a l k i n g e a s t , one s e e s t h e A r c h b o l d e a s t , one p a s s e s t h e p r o p o s e d District E s t a t e and f e d e r a l p a r k l a n d . Proceeding F r e n c h Embassy c h a n c e r y s i t e w h i c h w i l l p r o v i d e o f f i c e o v e r 4 0 0 e m p l o y e e s , t h e Duke E l l i n g t o n S c h o o l f o r t h e A r t s ' athletic field, B u r l e i t h r o w h o u s e s , t h e C o n v e n t o f t h e Good S h e p h a r d , and t h e E l l i n g t o n c o r n e r o f 3 5 t h S t r e e t and R e s e r v o i r Road. side of the street. The V i s i t a t i o n s t r e e t w i t h i t s over 30 a c r e s . space f o r a b r i e f block of School b u i l d i n g a t the T u r n i n g s o u t h on 3 5 t h S t r e e t , one i m m e d i a t e l y a c a r r y - o u t r e s t a u r a n t , a f i r e h o u s e on Dent P l a c e , and t h e V o l t a B u r e a u -40- notices f o r t h e Deaf on t h e e a s t High S c h o o l and C o n v e n t d o m i n a t e s t h e w e s t C o n t i n u i n g down 3 5 t h S t r e e t , near side of the t h e 1300 and 1200 b l o c k s c o n t a i n �a number c o n f o r m i n g and neighborhood. Behind s c h o o l s , convent, residential and flavor. non-conforming shops, them, on 36th S t r e e t , r e c t o r y ; and b r i n g i n g a s t r o n g commercial i n f l u e n c e to the Holy T r i n i t y p a r i s h the l i t t l e s t o r e s i n t h e 1200 T u r n i n g w e s t on P r o s p e c t S t r e e t , one may Park which completes Zoning Adjustments i n i t s 1974 and r e s t a u r a n t s , i s o n l y f i v e b l o c k s away. "M" Street Virginia, campus b o r d e r s . opinion, Wisconsin Perhaps Key Bridge. to the Furthermore, Avenue, w i t h a l l o f and evolved Glover-ArchboId as the Board of i t s shops, taverns, Many o f t h e townhouses i n Georgetown a r e The melange o f i n s t i t u t i o n a l , commercial, investment, Georgetown was i n a f a s h i o n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the needs of i t s i n h a b i t a n t s . The R a t h e r , he came t o t h e a r e a b e c a u s e t h e l a n d was available u p p e r c l a s s r e s i d e n t i a l homes a r e b u t t h e l a t e s t u s e t o come t o t h e d i s t r i c t , r e a l l y dominated i t . -41- not l a n d l o r d s r e n t i n g to groups a and seafaring, Bishop C a r r o l l d i d n o t come t o Georgetown t o found h i s c o l l e g e i n a n e i g h b o r h o o d o f f i n e g a r d e n s p r e s t i g i o u s townhouses. the the h i g h - r i s e development i n R o s s l y n , and r e s i d e n t i a l u s e s i s n o t a r e c e n t c o n d i t i o n f o r t h e Georgetown a r e a . w o r k i n g town and the A f t e r p a s s i n g some rowhouses i n u s e d t o house t h e f a m i l i e s o f t h e i r o w n e r s , b u t a r e r a t h e r h e l d by o f s t u d e n t s o r young w h i t e - c o l l a r w o r k e r s . non- e v e n a s t r o n g e r i n f l u e n c e i s e x e r t e d by " s t r i p " o f b a r s , l i q u o r s t o r e s , and b o u t i q u e s a s h o r t walk a c r o s s congested high Next t o t h e P r o s p e c t House, continue along the o l d t r o l l e y c a r r i g h t - o f - w a y t h e s o u t h e r n and w e s t e r n noted block r e i n f o r c e t h i s use. C a p i t a l T r a n s i t O f f i c e b u i l d i n g houses four f l o o r s of o f f i c e s . 3600 b l o c k , one c h u r c h , grammar and p a s s e s t h e P r o s p e c t House, a l a r g e s t r u c t u r e o f t e n c o n s i d e r e d f o r an embassy o r o t h e r o f f i c i a l the the and and inexpensive. have never �3. The U n i v e r s i t y has The 1805, U n i v e r s i t y has and i t i s not boundaries. the Been a Landowner and owned and buying out o c c u p i e d p r o p e r t y e a s t o f what i s now Furthermore, i t has dominated the d i s t r i c t t h o s e who no one it i s c l e a r that property values it s h o u l d be can say t h a t he i n the o r she unique, v i b r a n t came t o t h e a r e not noted t h a t t h i s p l a n and 1973 there w i l l be construction very little on the be a r e n o v a t i o n of the d e p r e s s e d by to the beyond the Board of i n these campus. The bulk of the Campus. b o u n d a r i e s the I n any case, National and reaffirmed are Entirely and Capital by the Zoning Adjustments. the U n r e a s o n a b l e and Annex s i t e and blocks. s t r u c t u r e s i n S q u a r e 1222 a n t i c i p a t e d a f t e r the Certainly U n i v e r s i t y ' s presence, s e t o f p u b l i c h e a r i n g s i n 1966, o f townhouses on activity the being c l o s e to the a l t e r o r go University, i n t e r n a t i o n a l school. Specifically, to a l l o w R-3 townhouses may campus c o r e , -42- and be will c o n t i n u e t o be above, built there them t o b e t t e r accommodate the a c a d e m i c u s e s a r e moved t o t h e townhouses w i l l r e m a i n and Consistent v a c a n t l o t s as d i s c u s s e d s i t e o f P o u l t o n H a l l a f t e r i t s a c a d e m i c u s e s a r e moved t o t h e i n t e n s i t y of a c t i v i t y since t h e homes a r o u n d a l u m n i o f Georgetown a t m o s p h e r e o f an F i n a l l y , the U s e s P r o p o s e d f o r T h e s e B l o c k s a r e Not W i t h t h e Mixed-Use N a t u r e o f T h e s e B l o c k s Beyond t h e the reports and a r e a w i t h o u t knowing o f does n o t P l a n n i n g Commission a d o p t e d a f t e r a f u l l NCPC i n 1971 37th S t r e e t i n t h a t many o f U n i v e r s i t y have t r a d i t i o n a l l y h o u s e d f a c u l t y , s t a f f , wish to l i v e 1789 e x i s t i n g l a n d o w n e r s a s p a r t o f a sudden scheme t o expand i t s or 4. Dominant F o r c e i n t h e A r e a S i n c e may lesser central portion of maintained as r e s i d e n t i a l �uses. T h u s , no m a j o r c o n s t r u c t i o n w i l l o c c u r and t h e r e w i l l be no en masse r a z i n g o f what i s p r e s e n t l y on t h e s e b l o c k s . In s h o r t , the proposed uses w i l l f a m i l y rowhouses, o r w i l l has c o n s i s t e n t l y allowed be e i t h e r a l l o w e d as a matter of r i g h t , such a s s i n g l e - c l o s e l y r e s e m b l e t h e low i n t e n s i t y u n i v e r s i t y u s e s t h a t t h e BZA the U n i v e r s i t y to place i n these blocks, The U n i v e r s i t y h a s a b s o l u t e l y no i n t e n t i o n o f p u t t i n g u s e s i n t h e s e b l o c k s t h a t m i g h t become o b j e c t i o n a b l e due t o t r a f f i c , n o i s e , o r number o f s t u d e n t s , o v e r s h a d o w t h e p r e s e n t l i t t l e c h a r a c t e r o f t h e neighborhood. Rather, t h e U n i v e r s i t y p l a n s t o move h i g h - i n t e n s i t y u s e s o u t o f t h e s e b l o c k s and i n t o t h e c e n t r a l campus c o r e . that are p a r t i c u l a r l y o f u s e s and b u i l d i n g s t y l e s ; borhood and i m p o r t a n t The o n l y f u n c t i o n s t h a t w i l l s u i t e d t o a t r a n s i t i o n a r e a by t h e i r T h u s , t h e e a s t e r n p o r t i o n o f t h e campus w i l l v i b r a n t mixture t o w n h o u s e s , o r damage t h e f r a g i l e remain a r e those s i z e and f u n c t i o n . r e m a i n l a r g e l y a s i t now a p p e a r s , a l l o w i n g both the h i s t o r i c a l with a nature of the neigh- U n i v e r s i t y functions to continue, THE CENTRAL PORTION OF THE CAMPUS Development i n t h e c e n t r a l campus s h a l l p r i n c i p a l l y t a k e t h e form o f f i v e villages. • These mixed-use complexes w i l l The l o w e r levels could each living/learning have s e v e r a l component p a r t s : f e a t u r e s u b s u r f a c e p a r k i n g and l o a d i n g f a c i l i t i e s , f o r c e v e h i c l e s o u t o f campus l i v i n g areas. -43- T h e s e would �• Each v i l l a g e may i n c l u d e podium l e v e l s o f academic space designed a l l o w maximum a d a p t a b i l i t y t o c h a n g i n g • Finally, villages r e s i d e n c e s , a c a d e m i c s p a c e , and s t u d e n t s e r v i c e s w i l l be facility to block facilities o f s t u d e n t s and f a c u l t y built. a r e p r o p o s e d t o be c o n s t r u c t e d above a m a j o r s u b s u r f a c e p a r k i n g " F " and on l a n d r e c l a i m e d from s u r f a c e p a r k i n g . A d d i t i o n a l l y , m a j o r r e n o v a t i o n and r e s t o r a t i o n work w i l l be done i n t h e h i s t o r i c as i t i s converted As a r e s u l t , space t o requirements, on t h e s u r f a c e o f e a c h podium, t o w n h o u s e - s t y l e Also, a t h l e t i c as flexible from r e s i d e n c e s t o o f f i c e s and o t h e r l e s s i n t e n s i v e Quadrangle uses. t h e c e n t r a l p o r t i o n o f t h e campus w i l l a b s o r b t h o s e a c t i v i t i e s moved from t h e e a s t e r n p o r t i o n o f t h e campus and a l s o house any f u t u r e g r o w t h . I n t h i s f a s h i o n , the center of campus a c t i v i t y w i l l be moved s e v e r a l h u n d r e d f e e t w e s t ; Campus L i b r a r y a x i s t o the p r e s e n t s i t e of the a t h l e t i c be p l a c e d a t a n e l e v a t i o n l o w e r than t h a t of the Healy s h i e l d e d by b o t h d i s t a n c e and d e p t h . t h a t i s , from t h e H e a l y - W h i t e fields. complex. Much o f t h e a c t i v i t y w i l l Thus, r e s i d e n t i a l areas. s p a c e s d e s i r e d by b o t h o u r s t u d e n t s and o u r n e i g h b o r s -44- vehicle- Thus, t h e maximum l a n d u s e r e q u i r e d o f t h e modern u r b a n u n i v e r s i t y w i l l be a c h i e v e d ; w h i l e a t t h e same t i m e green also u s e s w i l l be The s u r f a c e o f t h e campus s h o u l d become r e l a t i v e l y f r e e , p l a c i d and b e a u t i f u l , w i t h l a w n s , p a r k s , and a t h l e t i c Gravenor- are preserved. t h e open and �THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE CAMPUS Medically As oriented uses w i l l a comparison o f I l l u s t r a t i v e continue t o be c l u s t e r e d a t t h e n o r t h e r n end o f t h e campus, D r a w i n g s #4 and #5 i n d i c a t e s , t h e b u l k o f c o n s t r u c t i o n w i l l be c o m p l e t e d by 1 9 8 2 . Educational facilities o f t h e campus w i l l be expanded by t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a d d i t i o n a l f l o o r s o f t h e l i b r a r y and b a s i c s c i e n c e b u i l d i n g s . t i o n i s planned, but the c o n s t r u c t i o n w i l l and and or f a c u l t y popula- r e s p o n d t o a c c e l e r a t i n g growth i n m e d i c a l knowledge technology, as w e l l as a l l e v i a t e present Patient care No i n c r e a s e i n s t u d e n t space d e f i c i e n c i e s . s p a c e w i l l be i n c r e a s e d by a d d i t i o n a l f l o o r s b e i n g p l a c e d by a new a m b u l a t o r y p a t i e n t c a r e f a c i l i t y . This l a t t e r c a r e o f p e r s o n s p r e s e n t l y b e i n g s e e n on an i n p a t i e n t b a s i s A d d i t i o n a l l y , a n o t h e r b u i l d i n g may be p l a c e d structure w i l l on t h e D e n t a l allow Clinic outpatient only. south of the Medical School building. PARKING As n o t e d above, p a r k i n g w i l l be s h i f t e d from s u r f a c e l o t s t o p r i m a r i l y s u b s u r f a c e i s e x p e c t e d t h a t t h e s e w i l l be p r i m a r i l y s e r v e d Georgetown r e s i d e n t i a l n e i g h b o r h o o d w i l l course, reflect should the plan Road and t h a t a c c e s s be s e v e r e l y l i m i t e d . Drawing #7 f o r a r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t r a f f i c Of from C a n a l and p a r k i n g be o n l y p a r t i a l l y Please patterns -45- I t through the Illustrative f o r t h e maximum growth implemented, t h e p a r k i n g t h i s l e s s e r l e v e l o f growth. consult lots. plan. and v e h i c u l a r p l a n shall �TABLE X I V UNIVERSITY CAMPUS LAND AREA - MAXIMUM GROWTH Total Campus A r e a 4,399,411 S q u a r e F e e t 1982 P r o p o s e d T o t a l Anticipated Additions T o t a l W i t h i n 1966 N.C.P.C. Boundary 4,372,401 S q u a r e F e e t -0- -0- 4,399,411 S q u a r e F e e t 4,372,401 S q u a r e F e e t TABLE XV COMPILATION OF PROPOSED BUILDING AREAS - MAXIMUM GROWTH CORRELATED TO D.C. ZONING REGULATIONS Maximum B u i l d i n g Height 1982 P r o p o s e d T o t a l Maximum GFA Maximum BAC 3,205,705 982,513 338,000 5 " l i v i n g - l e a r n i n g v i l l a g e " podia 260' x 260''x 3 l e v e l s e a c h 40' 1,014,000 Assume v i l l a g e s o f 4 s t o r y townhouses a r e p l a c e d on e a c h podium w i t h 6 0 % l o t c o v e r a g e 50' 811,200 R e c r e a t i o n a l / p a r k i n g podium, a t 3 l e v e l s 40' 420,000 -0140,000 �TABLE XV (Continued) Maximum B u i l d i n g Height it Power p l a n t a d d i t i o n "B' L e s s O'Gara 51' Maximum GFA Maximum BAC 10,000 (7,313) demolition 12,000 (3,750) Addition of 3 floors t o Basic Science Building 40' 51,700 -0- Addition o f 2 f l o o r s t o Dental 30' 49,500 -0- 30' 20,500 -0- Ambulatory P a t i e n t C e n t e r 35' 65,000 U n a s s i g n e d B u i l d i n g "T" (assume 7 f l o o r s ) 90' 137,000 -0- 50' 86,700 -0- 40' 35,000 12,000 50' 270,000 90,000 50' 18,000 43,000 6,188,992 1,644,263 Clinic Addition o f 2 f l o o r s t o Dahlgren Library Medical A d d i t i o n o f 4 f l o o r s t o Lombardi Center Addition o f 3 f l o o r s t o Lauinger Library P a r k i n g Deck I I I (Kehoe F i e l d ) P a r k i n g Deck I V TOTAL MAXIMUM GROWTH . 32 ,500 �TABLE X V I MAXIMUM LAND UTILIZATION TOTAL LAND WITHIN N.C.P.C. BOUNDARY 4 ,370 ,240 Square F e e t TOTAL GROSS FLOOR AREA 6 ,188 ,992 Square F e e t MAXIMUM FLOOR TO AREA RATIO (F.A.R.) 1.42 ALLOWABLE F.A.R. 1.80 TOTAL LOT COVERAGE AT MAXIMUM GROWTH 1 ,644 ,263 Square F e e t PERCENTAGE OF LOT COVERAGE 37.6% ALLOWABLE LOT COVERAGE PERCENTAGE 60.0% TABLE XVII MAXIMUM CAMPUS POPULATION STUDENTS FACULTY 10,000 977 STAFF 4,925 TOTAL 15,902 �TABLE XVIII MAXIMUM CAMPUS CAPACITY ,600 7. CLASSROOM SEATS STUDENT RESIDENCE BEDS ,250 571 HOSPITAL BEDS . TABLE X I X PARKING ANALYSIS - MAXIMUM DEVELOPMENT Code R e q u i r e m e n t s 1 f o r e v e r y 10 c l a s s r o o m seats 760 2 f o revery 3 f a c u l t y 651 1 571 f o r e v e r y h o s p i t a l bed TOTAL REQUIRED BY CODE Spaces 1982 Net 1,982 Provided P r o p o s e d Code Spaces L o s s e s o f S u r f a c e Spaces 2,434 To C o n s t r u c t i o n (1,150) A d d i t i o n a l Code S p a c e s P r o p o s e d t o be C o n s t r u c t e d a t Maximum Development 4,843 MAXIMUM NUMBER OF CODE-SIZED SPACES TO BE PROVIDED 6,127 �TABLE X I X ( C o n t i n u e d ) Maximum Number o f Code-• S i z e d S p a c e s t o be P r o v i d e d 6,127 T o t a l R e q u i r e d by Code 1,982 EXCESS OVER CODE TO BE PROVIDED AT MAXIMUM DEVELOPMENT 4,145 SIGN MANUAL A t t a c h e d a s A t t a c h m e n t V i s Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y ' s s i g n manual i n a c c o r d a n c e g (c) o f s 3101.46 o f t h e Z o n i n g Regulations. -50- with sub-paragraph �A CLOSING NOTE On March 26, 1977, Timothy S. H e a l y , S . J . a t h i s i n s t a l l a t i o n a s Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y ' s 4 6 t h P r e s i d e n t , Reverend announced; T h e r e a r e , o f c o u r s e , i n u n i v e r s i t y l i f e e n d l e s s a p p l i c a t i o n s o f (The J e s u i t ) v i s i o n of r e a l i t y . The f i r s t t h a t m i g h t s t r i k e Georgetown c o n c e r n s t h e p l a c e i n w h i c h i t l i v e s and w o r k s . T h e r e i s no way t h a t Georgetown c a n a b s o l v e i t s e l f from t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y w h i c h man and God have g i v e n i t t o be o f s e r v i c e , o f u s e , and o f h e l p t o t h e c i t y w h i c h i s t a k i n g shape a r o u n d i t ... T h e r e o u g h t t o be s o m e t h i n g f a s c i n a t i n g t o a J e s u i t i n s t i t u t i o n a b o u t a c i t y t a k i n g shape on i t s d o o r s t e p . There c e r t a i n l y c a n be n o t h i n g n e u t r a l a b o u t t h e p o s i t i o n t h a t t h a t u n i v e r s i t y must t a k e . We have no c h o i c e a b o u t h e l p i n g , we have no c h o i c e a b o u t c a r i n g , and we b e t r a y t h e b e s t o f o u r s e l v e s i f o u r h e l p i s e i t h e r i n e f f e c t i v e , b e g r u d g i n g , o r n o t t h e r e when needed. I am aware t h a t i n o u r a d d r e s s t o t h e p r o b l e m s o f t h e D i s t r i c t we a r e g o i n g t o f e e l s t r a i n , s t r e s s , c o n f u s i o n , and a t t i m e s h u r t , b o t h f o r o u r s e l v e s and o t h e r s . T h e r e i s no way t h a t t h e human c o m p l e x i t y o f a g r e a t c i t y can a v o i d t h e s e unfortunate and b i t t e r c o n s e q u e n c e s . We f a i l o u r b e s t s e l v e s , i f we a r e n o t i n v o l v e d i n the p o l i t i c a l and economic e v o l u t i o n o f t h e c i t y , above a l l i f we a r e not r e a l l y o f one i n the d e v e l o p m e n t o f h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n , and a s much h e l p a s we c a n be t o a l l o t h e r forms o f e d u c a t i o n w i t h i n t h e D i s t r i c t . T h i s p l a n o u t l i n e s t h e U n i v e r s i t y ' s e f f o r t s t o b e g i n t o meet t h e m i s s i o n set. I t s e t s f o r t h a p a t t e r n of f u t u r e development t h a t w i l l a l e a d e r i n the c i t y . Yet a t the r e l i e v e and "strain, reduce the v i b r a n t i n s t i t u t i o n and same t i m e , t h e p l a n d e t a i l s stress, a community l i v e confusion, together. and i t s President a l l o w Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y t o the U n i v e r s i t y ' s e f f o r t s t o a t t i m e s h u r t " t h a t comes a b o u t when a has be �EXISTING FACILITIES & TOPOGRAPHY PLAN BUILDINGS fief. 1 TO REMAINS^ Building No HEALY Use HALL 1 RYAN 4 l-A-R MAGURE 3 MULLEDY J F 6 l-AR R R . . GERVASE OLD R NORTH 7 e 9 10 11 RYAN l-A-R NEW NORTH DAHLGREN CHAPEL R S ADMIN. A R COPLEY WHITE GRAVENOR GARAGE 12 I-A S 13 14 MC S H E R R Y O ' G A R A (to be removed) 24 s I-A POULTON 25 COLEMAN-NEVILS 1 30 LOYOLA 31 32 XAVIER RYDER 35 36 WALSH 41 OBSERVATORY NEW I 1 R R R SOUTH R 1 1 49 ANIMAL R E S E A R C H 51 52 MEDICAL-DENTAL HOSPITAL * M 53 56 MCDONOUGH GYM ST. M A R Y S S-l 57 GORMAN M 58 KOBER-COGAN MA 59 REISS 60 DARNALL HARBIN LAUINGER LIB. 1 61 62 63 POWER 65 M M SCH. 1 R R R I S M PLANT 66 DAHLGREN MED. L I B . BLES 67 BASIC 66 DENTAL CLINIC 69 PRECLINICAL SC. 71 72 MED. PARKING GAR. CONCENTRATED CARE 73 74 75 HENLE STUDENT VILLAGE R MED. P A R K I N G G A R . H, 76 AMER. LANG. 77 ALUHINI 78 79 WOODSTOCK 80 81 STUD. BOOKSTORE FACULTY OFFICES M SCIENCE M M M M CTRM BLACK STUDENT ALL. S INST. y. HOUSE s THEO. CTR INTERNATIONAL PODIUM I STUDIES I s i STRUCTURE LEGEND . CAMPUS --—-i-=^_L" IOUMDM* TOPOGRAPHIC CONTOUI LI H i A l 3 f « t IMTltVALS imt r u i i a i if*cu i i t i n i i = m i U S E code: I : I n s t r u c t i o n a l A administrative ort.other M med|csl.denta| W O WK VlCt R: r e s i d e n t i a l •" L O N G RANGT PMSIMMT tt|H|' G K > * G E rxirrrwo * : DEVELOPMENT -PLAN ««t«: APR 1977 OFFICi OF t H f " , K» FtAMHIWO AMfl PWVSXM I V^ftSV S;supp- : T O W N FACILITIES T0PG8XAPMY PtAMT ' UNiVERSfTY • f*UUi ^ �CAMPUS BUILDING - COMPLIANCE WITH ZONING REGULATIONS Re f . 1 2 3 4 5 6 ~7 / 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 24 25 30 31 32 35 36 41 49 51 52 53 56 57 58 59 No. Building Healy H a l l Maguire Ryan Mulledy Gervase Old N o r t h New N o r t h Dahlgren Chapel Ryan A d m i n i n s t r a t i o n Copley White G r a v e n o r Garage McSherry O'Gara Poulton Coleman-Nevils Loyola Xavier Ryder New S o u t h Walsh Observatory Animal Research Medical Dental School Hospital McDonough Gym S t . Mary's Gorman Kober-Cogan Reiss Year B u i l t Or Established 1879 1854 1904 1830 1831 1796 1926 1893 1906 1930 1933 1917 1840 1874 1948 1898-1912 1928 1944 1898 1959 1958 1844 1938 1930 1947 1951 1956 1959 1959 1962 Use P e r m i t t e d By E s t a b l i s h e d p r i o r t o § 3101.46 E s t a b l i s h e d p r i o r t o § 3101.46 E s t a b l i s h e d p r i o r t o § 3101.46 E s t a b l i s h e d p r i o r t o § 3101.46 E s t a b l i s h e d p r i o r t o § 3101.46 E s t a b l i s h e d p r i o r t o § 3101.46 E s t a b l i s h e d p r i o r t o § 3101.46 E s t a b l i s h e d p r i o r t o § 3101.46 E s t a b l i s h e d p r i o r t o § 3101.46 E s t a b l i s h e d p r i o r t o § 3101.46 BZA O r d e r 11350 E s t a b l i s h e d p r i o r t o § 3101.46 E s t a b l i s h e d p r i o r t o § 3101.46 E s t a b l i s h e d p r i o r t o § 3101.46 E s t a b l i s h e d p r i o r t o § 3101.46 E s t a b l i s h e d p r i o r t o § 3101.46 E s t a b l i s h e d p r i o r t o § 3101.46 E s t a b l i s h e d p r i o r t o § 3101.46 E s t a b l i s h e d p r i o r t o § 3101.46 E s t a b l i s h e d p r i o r t o § 3101.46 E s t a b l i s h e d p r i o r t o § 3101.46 E s t a b l i s h e d p r i o r t o § 3101.46 BZA O r d e r 939 5 BZA O r d e r 10783 BZA O r d e r s 11544, 11349, 9612 E s t a b l i s h e d p r i o r t o § 3101.46 E s t a b l i s h e d p r i o r t o § 3101.46 E s t a b l i s h e d p r i o r t o § 3101.46 BZA O r d e r 10708 E s t a b l i s h e d p r i o r t o § 3101.46 Page 1 o f 2 �CAMPUS BUILDING - COMPLIANCE WITH ZONING REGULATIONS > Ref. No. Building Year B u i l t Or Established Use P e r m i t t e d by 60 61 62 63 65 66 67 68 69 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 Darnall Harbin Lauinger Library Power P l a n t Dahlgren Medical L i b r a r y Bles Basic Science Dental C l i n i c P r e - C l i n i c a l Science M e d i c a l P a r k i n g Garage Concentracted Care Center Ilcnlc Student V i l l a g e M e d i c a l P a r k i n g Garage Black Student A l l i a n c e A m e r i c a n Lanaguage I n s t i t u t e Alumni House Woodstock T h e o l o g i c a l C e n t e r International Studies Student Bookstore Faculty Offices 1965 1965 1970 1970 1970 1969 1970 1970 1970 1968 1976 1976 1977 1962 1961 1950 1963 1962 1961 1965 BZA O r d e r 7408 BZA O r d e r 7380 BZA O r d e r 8678 BZA O r d e r s 8923, 9 9 4 1 , 9539 BZA O r d e r 8743 BZA O r d e r s 9009, 8 3 3 1 BZA O r d e r 8743 BZA O r d e r 8743 BZA O r d e r 8743 BZA O r d e r 8743 BZA O r d e r 11044 BZA O r d e r 11768 BZA O r d e r 11910 BZA O r d e r 6773 BZA O r d e r 6351 E s t a b l i s h e d p r i o r t o § 3101.46 BZA O r d e r 7132 BZA O r d e r 6869 BZA O r d e r 6392 M a t t e r o f R i g h t i n C - l Zone Page 2 o f 2 �EXISTING FACILITIES & TOPOGRAPHY PLAN W^HIM^EDUVT^CONSTRUC™OJ^10l^2«^3 BUILDINGS TO Building R e f No 1 HEALY HALL 2 3 RYAN 4 • 111*111 MULLEDY MAGURE • 6 l-AR R R NORTH 7 8 g 10 RYAN l-A-R NEW NORTH DAHLGREN CHAPEL R S ADMIN. A R COPLEY 11 WHITE GRAVENOR GARAGE 41 1 A s M SHERRY c 14 O ' G A R A (to be removed) P O U L T ON 24 25 30 COLEMAN LOYOLA 31 . 32 XAVIER RYDER 35 36 41 NEW SOUTH WALSH NEVILS 1 R R | UtTlllC 49 ANIMAL R E S E A R C H 51 MEDICAL DENTAL SCH. HOSPITAL 53 s l-A 1 IR R OBSERVATORY 52 l-A-R R GERVASE OLD R E M A I N S Use 1 M M M MCDONOUGH GYM ST. M A R Y S 56 57 1 R 51 58 GORMAN KOBEfi COGAN MA 59 REISS 60 61 | DARNALL HARBIN LAUINGER LIB. 62 M 63 POWER 65 R R 1 S M DAHLGREN MED. LIB. BLES 66 67 PLANT BASIC 66 M SCIENCE M 69 DENTAL CLINIC PRECLINICAL SC. 71 MED 72 CONCENTRATED M M M PARKING GAR. C A R E CTR M HENLE STUDENT VILLAGE R MED. P A R K I N G G A R . • 73 74 '75 BLACK STUDENT ALL. 76 77 AMER. LANG. 78 WOODSTOCK 79 INTERNATIONAL ALUMNI 80 INST. S THEO. CTR 1 STUDIES 1 s STUD. BOOKSTORE FACULTY OFFICES 81 PODIUM S | HOUSE 1 STRUCTURE LEGEND . " CAMPUS ' lOUHDARl TOPOGRAPHIC COHTOUt LI Ml A l 1 m i IMTi tVAlS TIT it. M i l l l l l I P I C l t E I I I T I I I - 1711 USE code: )• instructional ort.otrter fff SrT VtCl R:ra»ldentlal tORG I PMSIBaMT yfjS&V K i w H " © f l ^ a f A: administrative RANGT DEVELOPMENT ttole; APR 1977 OfFICI Of I H t KM PlAHMlHg AHB W H t l C M GEORGETOWN S-.supp- M; m e d i c a l , d e n t a l i PLAN PtAMI *'• UNiVERSJTY . 'VXltTP** TACtLlTlM a TOPOMAPHY > PLAH ^ % •< �EXISTING FACILITIES i BUILDINGS Ref. No " 1 TO R E M A I N S Building HEALV Use HALL t-AR IAR 2 MAGURE 3 4 5 RYAN MULLEDY 6 OLD NORTH 7 8 NEW NORTH DAHLGREN CHAPEL g 10 COPLEY ii 12 R R GERVASE RYAN R ADMIN. WHITE GRAVENOR GARAGE l-A* R S A R l-A S s 13 14 MCSHERRY 24 POULTON 25 30 COLEMAN NEVILS LOYOLA r 31 32 XAVIER RYDER R 35 36 NEW WALSH 41 OBSERVATORY O ' G A R A ( t o be r e m o v e d ) l-A I 1 R R R SOU i n 1 1 49 ANIMAL R E S E A R C H 51 52 MEDICAL-DENTAL SCH HOSPITAL M 53 56 MCDONOUGH GYM ST. M A R Y S 1 R 57 GORMAN M U S-l M 58 KOBER 59 REISS 60 61 62 DARNALL HARBIN LAUINGER L I B . COGAN MA 1 R R 1 s 63 POWER 65 DAHLGREN M E D L I B 66 67 BLES BASIC 68 DENTAL CLINIC 69 PRECLINICAL SC. 71 MED. 72 CONCENTRATED 73 74 75 HENLE STUDENT VILLAGE R MED. P A R K I N G G A R . M 76 AMER. LANG. 77 ALUMNI 78 WOODSTOCK 79 INTERNATIONAL 80 81 STUD. BOOKSTORE FACULTY OFFICES 62 83 PLANT M M SCIENCE M M M M C A R E CTR M PARKING GAR. BLACK STUDENT ALL. INST. HOUSE THEO. CTR s 1 S I STUDIES I s 1 POWER PLANT ADDITION S S T U D E N T R E C R E A T I O N CTR I �ILLUSTRATIVE SITE PLAN AT MAXIMUM DEVELOPMENT beyond 1 9 8 2 ref. A proposed development - ] B C --LIVING/LEARNING CENTERS D E - I F R E C R E A T I O N / PARKING PODIUM G CENTRAL PLANT ADDITION II H I J --VERTICAL A D D I T l O N S / e x i s t i n g bigs. J K MED/DENT L PRECLINICAL M AMBULANT N PARKING GARAGE O LAUINGER LIBRARY O VtCI LONG MtSIDtHI ^ | ^ ^ ^ RANGE ADDITION ADDITION PATIENT C A R E ADDITION ADDITION DEVELOPMENT APR.1977 omct Ot I H ( 104 PIAHH1M& AHb GEORGETOWN F-MTStCM UNIVERSITY PLAN HSWI �1 9 7 7 - 1 VEHICULAR TRAFFIC AND PARKING PLAN Ref No i Building HEALY HALL l-A-R 2 MAGURE IAR 3 4 5 MULLEDY 6 OLD NORTH his 7 8 NEW Use RYAN R R GERVASE DAHLGREN RYAN 9 10 11 R l-Afl n NORTH CHAPEL s ADMIN. A COPLEY R WHITE GRAVENOR GARAGE 12 l-A S 13 14 MC S H E R R Y O ' G A R A (to be r e m o v e d ) S l-A 24 POULTON 25 COLEMAN-NEVILS 1 30 LOYOLA 31 . 32 XAVIER RYDER 35 36 NEW SOUTH WALSH 41 OBSERVATORY 49 ANIMAL R E S E A R C H 51 52 MEDICAL-DENTAL 53 MCDONOUGH GYM SI 56 ST. M A R Y S 1 R 57 GORMAN M 1 IR R R R 1 1 M M SCH. HOSPITAL M 58 KOBER 59 REISS 60 62 DARNALL HARBIN LAUINGER L I B . 63 POWER 65 66 DAHLGREN MED. LIB. BLES 67 BASIC 68 DENTAL CLINIC PRECLINICAL SC. 61 69 71 COGAN M* 1 R R 1 S M PLANT M SCIENCE M M M M CTRM 72 MED. PARKING GAR. CONCENTRATED CARE 73 74 75 HENLE STUDENT VILLAGE R MED. PARKING G A R . M.. BLACK STUDENT ALL. S 76 AMER. LANG. I INST. 77 ALUMNI 78 79 WOODSTOCK 80 STUO. B O O K S T O R E FACULTY OFFICES THEO. CTR 1 INTERNATIONAL 81 s HOUSE PODIUM STUDIES 1 S I STRUCTURE m m LEGEND FL t FIRE LIRE BARRIER 0 LR MINI/IE H I M _ _ _ _ _ CAMPUS ~—-W—Ty" BOUNDARY TOPOGRAPHIC CONTOUR LIKE At 3 FECI IHTE1VA— TRIAL P i l l IN I SPICE) I X I S f l l l : USE codii:*| w ort.other rff : Instructional Residential '"TDTPTJ —TV I CWGC* date: J7II Administrative S.sopp- M;medlcet . d e n t a l OEV-LOPMENT PLAN OFFICE OF THE Y l C i PBESielWT FOa tlAPHRIF*w ApPB PMVUCAj yfjfflftk GEORGETOWN UNjVE»SITY . KTRRBW" '"-*'*Tn*» '?ACIUTUF,« ^jjjgjjf • ? APR 1977 WP09RAPHY P LA H PLAWI " . / " V k | ^ �VEHICULAR TRAFFIC AND PARKING PLAN BEYOND 1 9 8 2 �LAND USE ACADEMIC PLAN MIXED OCUPANCY (LIVING, AND EDUCATIONAL, RECREATIONAL SERVICE, FACILITIES) RECREATIONAL AREA MAINTENANCE AND SERVICE AREA MEDICAL 9 VICE LONG PRESIDENT RANGE DEVELOPMENT a p r i 1 1977 PLAN OFFICE Of THE FOR PLANNING AND PHYSICAL GEORGETOWN LAND U S E PLAN PLANT UNIVERSITY »| H CENTER �BUILDINGS LOTS & EAST O W N E D CURRENT PREVIOUS ADDRESSES ot by 3 7 th St. LOTS G.U. OCCUPANCY USES BUILDINGS O W N E D & B.Z.A. & EAST by ot ADDRESSES 37th G.U. APPROVALS St. �A P R I L 1977 1 0 �� 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 Campus development plan Subject The topic of the resource Georgetown (Washington, D.C.) Georgetown University (Washington, D.C.) Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Georgetown University Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1977 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/19ecb52381faea6223f17ebd8612fc51.pdf?Expires=1782345600&Signature=b2rjovTkEmYUpgvr0DY34B-QRrtoKiOtEzkdYfWAqZtg2kwZgjGRNzAoY4-mHAblmym2lturAvcR7VW1quzh67EXynjL0iQpJ%7EcVeUhek%7Ed6ZeSM4l8QvqBgOGARS-BfMdWGtHOC0ho7qo%7ErZu547MvDQPx%7ETB-47IbE59hrYTvdzAbS861j9Q0bkDLLdmq45etpZryOuI9OYp1fdIJ%7E30%7E5eVPsUWIaW7Ya1NvcYw4Mt6dPFC0zOntlOSAFtdXmpAlLTzM2MgbAWjmCND9WOa3VgNCFyHGUaTyAAmkQzl1Jtu63%7EVgeU1GxzgA%7EirXCGl8AtpjU%7Ey9%7EZgS%7EFmCo0g__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM 9a40177ca78eddfe42ce68b451502a76 PDF Text Text GEORGETOWN AREA A C C E S S ALTERNATIVES STUDY I O L E NO- PREPARED FOR DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PREPARED BY JHK AND ASSOCIATES MARCH 1979 Hl£7 / ir �ihk, GEORGETOWN AREA ACCESS A L T E R N A T I V E S TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM NO. THE 2 R E I N S T I T U T I O N OF GEORGETOWN TROLLEY STUDY S E R V I C E : AN OVERVIEW ^^.^ % cf\ o Prepared f o r D i s t r i c t Of C o l u m b i a D e p a r t m e n t o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P r e p a r e d by JHK & A s s o c i a t e s M a r c h 1979 The p r e p a r a t i o n o f t h i s t e c h n i c a l memorandum h a s been f i n a n c e d i n p a r t t h r o u g h a g r a n t f r o m t h e U. S. D e p a r t m e n t o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n , U r b a n Mass T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , u n d e r t h e U r b a n Mass T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A c t o f 1 9 6 4 , a s amended. �.jhL Table of Contents Page 1. INTRODUCTION 1 2. PRIOR STUDIES 6 3. THE FUNCTION OF A GEORGETOWN TROLLEY 9 4. REVIEW OF SELECTED NORTH AMERICAN LIGHT RAIL OPERATIONS 12 5. EXISTING TRANSIT CONDITIONS IN GEORGETOWN 16 6. CONDITION OF EXISTING TROLLEY TRACKS AND CONDUIT 22 ALTERNATIVE ALIGNMENTS 25 LOCAL SYSTEM EXTENDED SYSTEM 25 30 OPERATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS 34 LOCATION OF TRACK NUMBER OF TRACKS RESERVED RIGHT OF WAY VERSUS OPERATING I N MIXED TRAFFIC TYPE OF VEHICLE ELECTRIFICATION SYSTEM PLATFORM DESIGN STATION SPACING HOURS OF OPERATION HEADWAYS NUMBER OF VEHICLES FARES MAINTENANCE AND STORAGE F A C I L I T Y OPERATING AUTHORITY 34 34 35 37 39 40 40 41 42 42 43 44 45 SYSTEM IMPACTS 47 HISTORIC PRESERVATION IMPACTS ON BUSINESS ACCESSIBILITY TRAFFIC IMPACTS SAFETY NOISE A I R QUALITY NEIGHBORHOOD IMPACTS CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS ELDERLY AND HANDICAPPED ACCESS 47 47 48 49 50 50 51 51 51 52 7. 8. 9. �ihk. Table of Contents (continued) Page 11. ESTIMATED COSTS AND FUNDING SOURCES 53 C A P I T A L COSTS OPERATING COSTS FUNDING SOURCES 10. 53 56 57 SUMMARY AND 59 RECOMMENDATIONS 66 REFERENCES APPENDIX: L e t t e r f r o m C h a r l e s H. G r a v e s t o Mr. A l b e r t A. G r a n t �ihk. L i s t of Figures Figure No. Page 2 1 1943 D. C. S t r e e t c a r Network 2 Georgetown Metrobus and M e t r o r a i l Routes 17 3 GUTS Route Map 19 4 Cartrack Details 24 5 A l t e r n a t i v e Alignments f o r L o c a l Georgetown T r o l l e y S e r v i c e 27 A l t e r n a t i v e Alignments f o r Extended Georgetown T r o l l e y S e r v i c e 31 D e t a i l s of Single Track Operation 36 6 7 �jhk* L i s t of Tables Table No. Page Operating C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Selected N o r t h American LRT Systems 13 2 Georgetown Metrobus Routes 18 3 Light R a i l Vehicle Characteristics 38 4 Georgetown T r o l l e y 55 5 C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of P o t e n t i a l Georgetown Trolley Service 1 Estimated Costs 60 �l 1. I n J a n u a r y 1962, replaced The INTRODUCTION t h e l a s t t r o l l e y i n Washington, D.C. was by a bus and an e r a spanning two c e n t u r i e s came t o an end p r i v a t e l y o p e r a t e d t r o l l e y s e r v i c e was t h e v i c t i m o f a com- bination o f post-World War I I f a c t o r s i n c l u d i n g decreased r i d e r s h i p , s p i r a l i n g o p e r a t i n g c o s t s and t h e p u b l i c ' s d e s i r e t o remove o n - s t r e e t t r o l l e y s e r v i c e t o improve automobile o p e r a - tions . Georgetown was one o f t h e a r e a s w e l l s e r v e d by t h e t r o l l e y system. A map o f t h e C a p i t a l T r a n s i t Company showing i t s o p e r a t i o n s i n 1943 ( F i g u r e 1) d e p i c t s t r o l l e y l i n e s through Georgetown on P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue, M S t r e e t , W i s c o n s i n Avenue, 0 and P S t r e e t s and a c r o s s Key B r i d g e t o R o s s l y n . i n Georgetown t i e d i n t o an e x t e n s i v e The s e r v i c e network i n t h e remainder of t h e D i s t r i c t o f Columbia. Washington, D.C. was n o t unique i n abandoning t r o l l e y service. By t h e e a r l y 1960's most o t h e r s i m i l a r - s i z e d U.S. c i t i e s had a l s o r e p l a c e d t h e i r s t r e e t c a r o p e r a t i o n w i t h bus fleets. By t h e time t h e l a s t t r o l l e y p u l l e d transportation p l a n n e r s were a l r e a d y aimed a t d e v e l o p i n g a r a p i d r a i l into the barn, w e l l along i n t h e i r work system t h a t would be a b l e t o o p e r a t e on e x c l u s i v e r i g h t s o f way a t speeds and s e r v i c e l e v e l s s u b s t a n t i a l l y h i g h e r t h a n e i t h e r t h e t r o l l e y o r bus s e r v i c e could provide. Those p l a n n i n g t h e r a p i d r a i l system i n t h e 1960's had d i f f i c u l t decisions t o make c o n c e r n i n g r o u t e a l i g n m e n t and station locations. Many a l t e r n a t i v e s were r e v i e w e d and t h e f i n a l system t h a t emerged r e p r e s e n t e d a compromise which ered consid- many f a c t o r s i n c l u d i n g c o s t s , neighborhood impacts and e n v i r o n m e n t a l and s o c i a l f a c t o r s . The 19 60's a l s o saw a d r a m a t i c change i n how t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s viewed p u b l i c t r a n s p o r t a t i o n . F o r more t h a n ��_jhk six decades p u b l i c t r a n s p o r t a t i o n had private enterprise. l a r g e l y been a b a s t i o n Jc juociaccs of L a r g e sums of money were i n v e s t e d and made by e n t r e p e n e u r s i n the p u b l i c t r a n s i t i n d u s t r y . However, the growing domination of the automobile and the post-World War I I economy e s t a b l i s h e d a s e t of t h a t no l o n g e r a l l o w e d conditions a p r o f i t on p u b l i c t r a n s p o r t a t i o n o p e r a t i o n s . s o l d out to n e w l y - c r e a t e d p u b l i c a g e n c i e s and p o r t a t i o n began t o emerge and Private operators public trans- be viewed as a p u b l i c s e r v i c e , i n t h e same l i g h t as the p r o v i s i o n o f e d u c a t i o n a l , p o l i c e and fire s e r v i c e s . With p u b l i c f u n d i n g came a more u n d e r s t a n d i n g a s s e s s ment of the r o l e of m o b i l i t y needs of our public transportation in f i l l i n g the community. The opening of the f i r s t M e t r o r a i l l i n e i n the D i s t r i c t of Columbia and the e x t e n s i o n of the system a c r o s s the Potomac R i v e r has r e k i n d l e d t h e i n t e r e s t of people i n r a i l t r a n s p o r t a t i o n . Those a r e a s t h a t a r e not w e l l s e r v e d by M e t r o r a i l have been s t u d y i n g means of improving a c c e s s i b i l i t y to the system. Montgomery County, a n t i c i p a t i n g the d e s i r a b i l i t y of a c c e s s to the S i l v e r S p r i n g S t a t i o n developed a l o c a l i z e d bus a c c e s s s e r v i c e c a l l e d "Ride-On", which now c a r r i e s one i n f i v e of a l l p e r s o n s who use the S i l v e r S p r i n g s t a t i o n . The D i s t r i c t of Columbia i s p r e s e n t l y i n v e s t i g a t i n g a l t e r n a t i v e means to improve t r a n s i t a c c e s s to M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n s i n a number of a r e a s throughout t h e C i t y i n c l u d i n g Georgetown. The Georgetown A r e a A c c e s s A l t e r n a t i v e s Study, f o r which t h i s memorandum i s b e i n g p r e p a r e d , i s i n v e s t i g a t i n g a number of o p t i o n s f o r improving a c c e s s to Georgetown's t h r e e nearby M e t r o r a i l stations. Georgetown m a i n t a i n s a unique p o s t u r e i n the Washington a r e a w i t h i t s c o n c e n t r a t i o n of s p e c i a l t y shops, e n t e r t a i n m e n t c e n t e r s , o f f i c e b u i l d i n g s , r e s i d e n t i a l communities, Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y , and the Potomac W a t e r f r o n t , a l l s e t w i t h i n a h i s t o r i c a l environment. T h i s wide v a r i e t y of a c t i v i t i e s g e n e r a t e s s i g n i f i c a n t m o b i l i t y r e q u i r e m e n t s a t a l l t i m e s of the day, and e v e r y day of the week, i n c l u d i n g weekends. �_jhL Meeting t h e s e m o b i l i t y r e q u i r e m e n t s has n o t been easy and Georgetown i s plagued by a number o f t r a n s p o r t a t i o n problems i n cluding t r a f f i c congestion, inadequate parking l a r g e p e r c e n t a g e o f through t r a f f i c . s u p p l y , and a As Georgetown has emerged t o a p l a c e o f prominence i n t h e l a s t decade so have i d e a s t o improve transportation i n the area. One o f t h e s e s u g g e s t i o n s h a s f o c u s e d on t h e r e s t o r a t i o n o f t r o l l e y s e r v i c e i n the a r e a a s a means o f l i n k i n g Georgetown t o t h e M e t r o r a i l system. I n addition to i m p r o v i n g t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s e r v i c e , t h e r e i s a s t r o n g movement i n Georgetown and t h e r e g i o n for preservation. T h i s has r e s u l t e d i n t h e Georgetown H i s t o r i c D i s t r i c t b e i n g added t o t h e N a t i o n a l Register of H i s t o r i c Places. As p a r t o f t h i s emphasis s e v e r a l o f t h e s t r e e t s i n Georgetown have r e t a i n e d t h e i r original c o b b l e s t o n e s and s t r e e t c a r t r a c k s . The has p r o p o s a l t o r e i n s t i t u t e t r o l l e y s e r v i c e i n Georgetown come l a r g e l y from t h e p r i v a t e s e c t o r . The p r o p o s a l , p r e v i o u s l y r e c e i v e d f o r m a l a n a l y s i s by p u b l i c has not agencies, l a r g e l y because o f t h e f o c u s on t h e M e t r o r a i l system. However, w i t h t h e i n i t i a t i o n o f t h e Georgetown A r e a A c c e s s A l t e r n a t i v e s Study has come t h e o p p o r t u n i t y t o r e v i e w one the t r o l l e y proposal as means o f improving t h e a r e a ' s t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s e r v i c e . A d d i t i o n a l encouragement f o r t h i s r e v i e w t r o l l e y s e r v i c e has come from t h e Urban Mass Administration (UMTA). D i r e c t o r of Planning Transportation I n a l e t t e r from C h a r l e s H. G r a v e s , A s s i s t a n c e a t UMTA t o Mr. A l b e r t A. Grant of t h e M e t r o p o l i t a n Washington C o u n c i l Appendix), of r e i n s t i t u t i n g o f Governments ( s e e Mr. Graves i n d i c a t e d t h a t UMTA would be w i l l i n g t o p r o v i d e 100 p e r c e n t f u n d i n g o f a s t u d y s e r v i c e i n Georgetown. to investigate t r o l l e y Mr. Graves i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e study could have n a t i o n a l s i g n i f i c a n c e s i n c e " i t would demonstrate how t o p l a n an a t - g r a d e l i g h t r a i l f a c i l i t y w h i c h connects urban a c t i v i t y c e n t e r s and which may o p e r a t e w i t h o u t a d e f i c i t . " H i s l e t t e r a l s o i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e s t u d y s h o u l d n o t commence u n t i l �.jhk 5 the Georgetown A c c e s s Study had r e a c h e d a p o i n t where t h e a l t e r n a t i v e s have been narrowed and "at-grade l i g h t r a i l remains a promising option." The purpose o f t h i s memorandum i s t o p r o v i d e an o v e r v i e w a n a l y s i s t o determine i f the r e i n s t i t u t i o n of t r o l l e y s e r v i c e i n Georgetown i s a v i a b l e a l t e r n a t i v e which should be pursued i n more d e t a i l through t h e conduct o f t h e Georgetown T r o l l e y Study. I t should be r e c o g n i z e d t h a t t h e a n a l y s i s performed f o r t h i s memorandum does n o t r e p r e s e n t a f u l l instead f e a s i b i l i t y s t u d y , but s i m p l y r e p r e s e n t s a d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f whether i t i s w o r t h w h i l e t o pursue t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f t r o l l e y s e r v i c e a s a possible a l t e r n a t i v e f o r improving transportation i n Georgetown. T r o l l e y s e r v i c e i s o n l y one o f s e v e r a l a l t e r n a t i v e s b e i n g s e r i o u s l y c o n s i d e r e d f o r improving ultimate The d e t e r m i n a t i o n r e g a r d i n g t r o l l e y s e r v i c e must be made w i t h i n an e v a l u a t i o n possible a c c e s s w i t h i n Georgetown. framework which c o n s i d e r s t h e f u l l range o f a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r improving transportation i n Georgetown. However, i n o r d e r f o r t h e t r o l l e y o p t i o n t o be a d e q u a t e l y a s s e s s e d i t w i l l be n e c e s s a r y f o r a more d e t a i l e d study t o o c c u r so t h a t a c c u r a t e assessments of c o s t , i m p a c t s , and i n s t i t u t i o n a l i s s u e s c a n be used i n t h e f i n a l e v a l u a t i o n . Thus t h e f i n d i n g s o f t h i s r e p o r t r e p r e s e n t o n l y one s t e p i n t h e p r o c e s s w i l l ultimately lead to a decision which r e g a r d i n g whether o r n o t t r o l l e y s e r v i c e w i l l be brought back t o Georgetown. �_jhk 6 2. PRIOR STUDIES Although the r e i n s t i t u t i o n of t r o l l e y s e r v i c e i n Georgetown has been d i s c u s s e d two f o r a number of y e a r s , i t was independent r e p o r t s by c i t i z e n s consideration region. 1 the i s s u a n c e groups t h a t t r i g g e r e d of serious of such an o p t i o n by t r a n s p o r t a t i o n o f f i c i a l s i n the These r e p o r t s r e p r e s e n t a t t e m p t s by concerned c i t i z e n s of t h e Washington a r e a t o shed l i g h t on a t r a n s p o r t a t i o n o p t i o n w h i c h t h e y f e l t was not r e c e i v i n g a proper c r i t i c a l a n a l y s i s . f i n d i n g s of t h e s e r e p o r t s formed a base f o r the a n a l y s e s i n t h i s study. This report represents the i n f o r m a t i o n The performed provided i n these p r i o r reports. The first an attempt t o supplement c i t i z e n ' s r e p o r t i s e n t i t l e d "A of L i g h t R a i l Transportation Citizens' Proposal.(2)" Demonstration i n the N a t i o n ' s C a p i t a l : I t was i s s u e d i n March 1975 A and was produced i n the hope o f " ( a ) s t i m u l a t i n g f u r t h e r i n - d e p t h a n a l y s i s and at f o l l o w - u p a c t i o n by the a p p r o p r i a t e the f e d e r a l , l o c a l and responsible r e g i o n a l l e v e l s and (b) officials generating p u b l i c i n t e r e s t i n the c o n c e p t s examined." The study i n v e s t i g a t e d three r e g i o n a l l i g h t r a i l n a t i v e s , two alter- of which i n c l u d e d r o u t e s through Georgetown. a l t e r n a t i v e s were designed to p r o v i d e an i n t e r m e d i a t e The level t r a n s i t s e r v i c e i n s e v e r a l c o r r i d o r s i n which M e t r o r a i l s e r v i c e i s not planned. The systems were d e s i g n e d to s e r v e as an a u x i l i a r y d i s t r i b u t o r and c o l l e c t i o n s e r v i c e to M e t r o r a i l and to reduce v e h i c u l a r t r a f f i c i n s e v e r a l r e s i d e n t i a l communities i n the D i s t r i c t of Columbia, i n c l u d i n g Georgetown. The rail bus f i n d i n g s of the study i n d i c a t e d t h a t medium s c a l e l i g h t systems c o u l d operations, time s a v i n g s a f f o r d o p e r a t i o n a l c o s t s a v i n g s o v e r comparable t h e y c o u l d o f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t door-to-door t r a v e l r e l a t i v e to t r a v e l by bus, and they could l i k e l y have �.jhk. 7 s i g n i f i c a n t p o s i t i v e i m p a c t s on i m p o r t a n t economic, e n v i r o n m e n t a l and s o c i a l v a l u e s such as enhanced p e r s o n a l m o b i l i t y f o r i n n e r - c i t y r e s i d e n t s and estimates per m i l e i n 1975 i n c r e a s e d commercial a c t i v i t y . d o l l a r s were made w h i c h approximated $3 m i l l i o n (including construction and rolling stock). team concluded t h a t i t b e l i e v e d t h a t " i t s i n i t i a l further serious consideration officials." Capital cost The study findings warrant by D i s t r i c t , r e g i o n a l and federal They b e l i e v e d t h e i r s t u d y s t r o n g l y suggested t h a t "major t r a n s p o r t a t i o n and r e l a t e d b e n e f i t s would be a c h i e v e d by the i n t e g r a t i o n o f a l i g h t r a i l program i n t o the transportation region's plans." A second independent r e p o r t was produced i n September 19 76 by t h e C i t i z e n s A s s o c i a t i o n of Georgetown e n t i t l e d "Report on the R e s t o r a t i o n of S t r e e t c a r s and C o b b l e s t o n e s " ( 3 ) . was This report produced i n response t o p l a n s by the D i s t r i c t of Columbia t o pave o v e r the t r o l l e y t r a c k s and Georgetown. U. The c o b b l e s t o n e s on M S t r e e t through D i s t r i c t of Columbia was under o r d e r by the S. D i s t r i c t C o u r t to e i t h e r remove the t r o l l e y t r a c k s o r c o v e r them w i t h pavement. and T h i s r e p o r t concluded t h a t much of the c o n d u i t through Georgetown was i n good c o n d i t i o n and used f o r t r o l l e y s e r v i c e w i t h o n l y minor r e p a i r work. track could It be estimated t h a t t r o l l e y s e r v i c e c o u l d be r e s t o r e d a t a t o t a l c o s t o f between $1.0 m i l l i o n and The $1.8 m i l l i o n . r e p o r t c o n s i d e r e d t h r e e a l t e r n a t i v e a l g i n m e n t s a l l of w h i c h would o r i g i n a t e a t the Foggy Bottom Metro S t a t i o n and 2 4 t h S t r e e t to P e n n s y l v a n i a to M S t r e e t , and The Avenue, west on P e n n s y l v a n i a run up Avenue from t h e r e to W i s c o n s i n Avenue a l o n g M S t r e e t . f i r s t a l i g n m e n t would t e r m i n a t e j u s t west of W i s c o n s i n Avenue on M S t r e e t a t the o l d D. C. T r a n s i t r e p a i r shop. would c o n t i n u e along M S t r e e t to Key B r i d g e , and The second the t h i r d would t u r n up W i s c o n s i n Avenue to P S t r e e t , go west on P S t r e e t t o 36th S t r e e t , south to P r o s p e c t S t r e e t , l o o p i n g around to 35th and S t r e e t s and r e t u r n i n g t o W i s c o n s i n Avenue v i a 0 S t r e e t . 0 �_jhk 8 The r e p o r t concluded t h a t o l d s t r e e t c a r s s i m i l a r to those p r e s e n t l y used i n D e t r o i t s h o u l d be sought f o r use i n Georgetown. O p e r a t i n g c o s t s were e s t i m a t e d a t $2.50 per v e h i c l e m i l e . e s t i m a t e d t h a t w i t h an average one-way passenger l o a d of 10 I t was and a f a r e o f 25 c e n t s , f a r e b o x r e v e n u e s c o u l d c o v e r o p e r a t i n g c o s t s f o r t h e base one-mile system. Because o f Georgetown's midday, e v e n i n g , and weekend a t t r a c t i v e n e s s , i t was average l o a d c o u l d be r e a s o n a b l y e x p e c t e d . f e l t t h a t such an �ihk* 3. THE FUNCTION OF A GEORGETOWN TROLLEY T r o l l e y s e r v i c e i n Georgetown c o u l d p r o v i d e a number o f functions. Such s e r v i c e would o b v i o u s l y be a t t r a c t i v e t o t h e many thousands o f p e r s o n s who l i v e , work, and shop i n Georgetown f o r movement w i t h i n t h e a r e a . L i k e w i s e , t o u r i s t s from out-of-town or v i s i t o r s t o Georgetown c o u l d be e x p e c t e d t o use i t as. a form of r e c r e a t i o n much a s v i s i t o r s and t o u r i s t s use t h e Metro system. F i n a l l y , f o r many p e r s o n s t r o l l e y s e r v i c e c o u l d be a p r i m a r y t r a n s portation service carrying them from t h e i r r e s i d e n c e t o t h e i r j o b s i t e o r t o another t r a n s p o r t a t i o n mode t h a t s e r v e s t h e i r j o b s i t e . To a g r e a t e x t e n t , t h e manner i n w h i c h t h e s e r v i c e would be s t r u c t u r e d would determine i t s p r i m a r y f u n c t i o n . A system u s i n g o l d e r v e h i c l e s , l i m i t e d t r a c k a g e , low f r e q u e n c y and l i m i t e d hours of o p e r a t i o n would p r o v i d e m o s t l y t o u r i s t , v i s i t o r and h i s t o r i c a l service functions. On t h e o t h e r hand, a s e r v i c e w i t h newer v e h i c l e s , extended r o u t e s , h i g h f r e q u e n c i e s and o p e r a t i n g o v e r t h e f u l l daytime and e v e n i n g hours would o f f e r a h i g h e r l e v e l o f t r a n s portation service. T h i s range o f f u n c t i o n s and t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s t h a t d e f i n e them a r e d e s c r i b e d i n t h e remainder o f t h i s r e p o r t and a r e summarized i n T a b l e 5 i n Chapter 1 1 . Georgetown was s e r v e d by s t r e e t c a r s o f one t y p e o r a n o t h e r f o r n e a r l y one hundred y e a r s between 18 62 and 1960. The Georgetown t h a t we know today l a r g e l y grew up around t h e s t r e e t c a r . s t r e e t c a r was a c r i t i c a l element i n i t s h i s t o r y . The As movement c o n t i n u e s t o p r e s e r v e Georgetown's h i s t o r i c a l landmarks, a t t e n t i o n has f o c u s s e d upon t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f r e s t o r i n g t r o l l e y s e r v i c e a s a means o f p r e s e r v i n g one o f Georgetown's most s i g n i f i c a n t portation a r t i f a c t s . town i s seen trans- The p r e s e r v a t i o n o f t r o l l e y s w i t h i n George- by some a s b e i n g somewhat a k i n t o p r e s e r v i n g George- town's o t h e r famous t r a n s p o r t a t i o n landmark, t h e C & 0 C a n a l . S t r e e t c a r museums have sprung up a c r o s s t h e c o u n t r y and have proven t o be e x t r e m e l y p o p u l a r , t h e n e a r e s t such one being t h e Wheaton T r o l l e y Museum i n nearby suburban Maryland. Reinstitution �_jhk* 10 o f t r o l l e y s e r v i c e i n Georgetown c o u l d s e r v e some of the same f u n c t i o n s as t h e s e p o p u l a r t r o l l e y museums. to be a t o u r i s t a t t r a c t i o n drawing tourists. Such a s e r v i c e c o u l d prove a l a r g e number of Washington Such an a t t r a c t i o n c o u l d prove t o be a boon t o many of the s p e c i a l t y shops and r e s t a u r a n t s i n Georgetown which r e l y on t o u r i s t b u s i n e s s and would add t o t h e o v e r a l l a t t r a c t i v e n e s s of Georgetown as an e n t e r t a i n m e n t c e n t e r . However, t r o l l e y s e r v i c e i n Georgetown c o u l d s e r v e much more than j u s t as a museum or r e c r e a t i o n a l r i d e . Perhaps the s e r v i c e i n the U n i t e d S t a t e s which most c l o s e l y resembles the type of s e r v i c e which many people e n v i s i o n f o r Georgetown i s t h e c a b l e c a r s i n San F r a n c i s c o . The j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r r e t a i n i n g c a b l e c a r s i n San F r a n c i s c o i s l a r g e l y h i s t o r i c . However, they s e r v e an i m p o r t a n t t r a n s p o r t a t i o n f u n c t i o n as w e l l . Many persons use San F r a n c i s c o *~S c a b l e c a r s t o commute t o and from work or t o a c c e s s o t h e r elements of San F r a n c i s c o ' s p u b l i c t r a n s p o r t a t i o n network. T r o l l e y s i n Georgetown c o u l d a l s o s e r v e an i m p o r t a n t p o r t a t i o n f u n c t i o n as w e l l as a h i s t o r i c a l f u n c t i o n . Georgetown i s p r e s e n t l y l i n k e d t o M e t r o r a i l o n l y by Metrobus r o u t e s pass over the major a r t e r i a l s t r e e t s . congested commuter t r a f f i c . trans- which These buses must t r a v e l i n R i d e r s boarding i n Georgetown o f t e n must s t a n d on overcrowded buses, f a r e s a r e h i g h , and t h e o v e r a l l p e r c e i v e d l e v e l o f s e r v i c e i s low. I f a t r o l l e y s e r v i c e could be i n s t i t u t e d i n Georgetown which would d i r e c t l y l i n k Georgetown t o the Foggy Bottom M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n and would be p r e f e r e n t i a l t r e a t m e n t over autos i n i t s use of the given streets, i t c o u l d p r o v i d e an i m p o r t a n t t r a n s p o r t a t i o n f u n c t i o n w i t h i n Georgetown. Thus i n e v a l u a t i n g whether the r e i n s t i t u t i o n of t r o l l e y s e r v i c e i n Georgetown i s w o r t h w h i l e , i t i s i m p o r t a n t t h a t the b i - f u n c t i o n a l n a t u r e of t h i s s e r v i c e by r e c o g n i z e d . In fact i f t r o l l e y s e r v i c e i s t o be r e i n s t i t u t e d , the n a t u r e o f t h i s service �11 w i l l depend t o a g r e a t e x t e n t upon t h e degree t o which i t i s t o s e r v e as a h i s t o r i c a l landmark and t h e degree t o w h i c h i t i s t o provide a transportation s e r v i c e . The e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e f e a s i b i l i t y of r e i n s t i t u t i n g t r o l l e y s e r v i c e w i l l be somewhat dependent upon t h e degree t o which i t i s d e s i g n e d t o meet each o f t h e s e f u n c t i o n s . I f t h e t r o l l e y i s t o be d e s i g n e d t o s e r v e p r i m a r i l y a h i s t o r i c a l f u n c t i o n t h e c r i t e r i a used t o e v a l u a t e a l t e r n a t i v e p l a n s and d e s i g n s and t h e w e i g h t s g i v e n t o each o f t h e c r i t e r i a w i l l be q u i t e d i f f e r e n t from t h e c r i t e r i a and w e i g h t s t h a t would be a s s i g n e d i f t h e purpose i s p r i m a r i l y t o p r o v i d e improved transportation access. H o p e f u l l y , i f t h e d e c i s i o n i s made t o s e r i o u s l y pursue t h e r e i n s t i t u t i o n o f t r o l l e y s e r v i c e as an o p t i o n , a system c o u l d be d e s i g n e d w h i c h c o u l d both o p e r a t e as a h i s t o r i c a l landmark and p r o v i d e improved t r a n s p o r t a t i o n service. �12 4'. REVIEW OF SELECTED NORTH AMERICAN LIGHT RAIL OPERATIONS Light r a i l systems e x i s t or a r e i n the p l a n n i n g s t a g e s i n a number o f c i t i e s these c i t i e s throughout North America. Operations i n p r o v i d e u s e f u l i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t s h o u l d be used i n t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f whether t r o l l e y s e r v i c e i n Georgetown would be feasible. Some of t h e s e o p e r a t i o n s have been i n p l a c e con- t i n u o u s l y since the nineteenth century. O t h e r s have r e c e n t l y begun o r a r e p l a n n i n g to b e g i n l i g h t r a i l service. d e s c r i p t i o n of some o f t h e s e systems f o l l o w s . A brief Operating c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of s e v e r a l o f t h e systems a r e summarized i n T a b l e 1 . The i n f o r m a t i o n p r o v i d e d i n t h i s c h a p t e r was d e r i v e d from i n f o r m a t i o n p r o v i d e d i n R e f e r e n c e s 4, 5, and B u f f a l o , New 6. York I n June 1976 t h e C i t y of B u f f a l o , N.Y. through t h e Niagara F r o n t i e r Transportation Authority received a p p r o v a l to c o n s t r u c t a $350 m i l l i o n l i g h t - r a i l r a p i d - t r a n s i t (LRRT) system. T h i s p r o j e c t was t h e c u l m i n a t i o n of a 10-year p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s which i n c l u d e d an e x t e n s i v e a l t e r n a t i v e s a n a l y s i s t o j u s t i f y t h e system. The LRRT system w i l l become the c e n t r a l t r a n s p o r t a t i o n f e a t u r e o f B u f f a l o ' s t r a n s i t shopping m a l l on Main S t r e e t . T h i s s u r f a c e o p e r a t i o n w i l l be an i m p o r t a n t p a r t of t h e s e r v i c e . I t was designed to m i n i m i z e CBD d i s r u p t i o n w h i l e a t t h e same time m a x i m i z i n g a c c e s s to t h e system. Edmonton, A l b e r t a The C i t y of Edmonton, A l b e r t a opened a new 4.5-mile LRT system i n A p r i l , 1978. The e s t i m a t e d c a p i t a l c o s t of t h e system was $65 m i l l i o n d o l l a r s . I n c o n t r a s t t o the B u f f a l o system, the CBD p o r t i o n o f t h e system i s i n subway w i t h two underground s t a t i o n s . The remainder of t h e system i s a t s u r f a c e and s h a r e s the r i g h t o f way w i t h the Canadian N o r t h e r n R a i l w a y System and t h e Grand Trunk P a c i f i c R a i l w a y . �Table 1. City Length (Mi.) Vehicle Type No. of Vehicles Seated Capacity Total Capacity Operating C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Selected North American LRT Systems Buffalo, New York 6.4 - Edmonton, Alberta Detroit, Michigan 4.5 0.9 DuWag U2 8rill Trolley New O r l e a n s , Louisiana Fort W o r t h , Texas 6.6 1.2 1920's Streetcars Restored PCC 47 14 6 35 6 - 64 24 52 30 - 164 40 78 45 Track 6.4 4.5 0.1 5.5 1.2 Single 1 -way - - 0.8 - - 2-way - - - 1.0 0 3.8 9.4 Lin 1 i m i t e d 0.13 Double Average Operating Speed (mph) Distance Between Stops (Mi.) Headways 22.8 - 18.8 - 16.1 0.4 - 15 m i n . 3-4 m i n . peak 5 min. base . . 1.2 0.8 5.8 - 0.1 5 min. peak 10 min. base 0.8 - Right-of-way Separated 5.2 4.5 Reserved Lane - - Mixed Traffic 1.2 Source: R e f e r e n c e s 4, 5, 6 �Toronto, Ontario The LRT system i n Toronto o p e r a t e s l a r g e l y w i t h i n s t r e e t r i g h t s o f way i n mixed t r a f f i c . I t interl i n k s CBD employment a r e a s and c l o s e - i n r e s i d e n t i a l neighborhoods, much as the proposed Georgetown system would. One of the keys t o the s u c c e s s of Toronto's system has been w e l l - d e s i g n e d t r a n s f e r f a c i l i t i e s a t r a p i d t r a n s i t s t a t i o n s , w i t h minimal d i s t a n c e between the subway and LRT l i n e s . Mexico C i t y , Mexico LRT v e h i c l e s i n Mexico C i t y o p e r a t e i n medians of arterial streets. However, t h e s e s t r e e t s a r e v e r y wide compared to Georgetown's, so adequate room i s a v a i l a b l e f o r s a f e passenger h a n d l i n g . Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania The P i t t s b u r g h t r a n s i t a u t h o r i t y has r e c e n t l y r e h a b i l i t a t e d t h e i r aging s t r e e t c a r s . They have made t h i s r e h a b i l i t a t i o n an e f f e c t i v e m a r k e t i n g t o o l to encourage r i d e r s h i p . P i t t s b u r g h ' s s t r e e t c a r s o p e r a t e i n mixed t r a f f i c i n t h e CBD. However, j u d i c i o u s use of p r i o r i t y t r e a t m e n t p e r m i t s s t r e e t c a r s t o m a i n t a i n r e l a t i v e l y h i g h speeds. P a r k and r i d e l o t s along s e v e r a l l i n e s p r o v i d e an e f f e c t i v e a l t e r n a t i v e t o c e n t r a l c i t y d r i v i n g and p a r k i n g . Shaker H e i g h t s , Ohio The h i g h income community of Shaker H e i g h t s , Ohio i s l i n k e d by an LRT system to downtown C l e v e l a n d . I t i s s i g n i f i c a n t t h a t the T r a n s i t Bureau o f Shaker H e i g h t s has found maintenance, r e l i a b i l i t y , and c l e a n l i n e s s to be of g r e a t e r importance t o p a t r o n s than t h e age of the v e h i c l e . New Orleans, Louisiana The S t . C h a r l e s l i n e i n New O r l e a n s i s the o n l y double t r a c k s t r e e t c a r l i n e i n t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s s t i l l o p e r a t i n g w i t h pre-PCC c a r s . The c a r s on t h i s l i n e were b u i l t i n the 1920's. The l i n e i s s i x and o n e - h a l f m i l e s long, w i t h 88 p e r c e n t of i t being l o c a t e d i n r e s e r v e d median l a n e s . The d i s t a n c e between s t o p s i s s h o r t (.12 m i l e s ) , so a v e r a g e system speed i s low (9.4 mph). �3i jssociates 15 D e t r o i t , Michigan D e t r o i t i s t h e most r e c e n t U.S. c i t y t o have r e i n s t i t u t e d t r o l l e y s e r v i c e when i t opened a 0.9-mile segment o f s i n g l e t r a c k s e r v i c e on September 20, 1976 i n t h e c e n t e r o f i t s CBD. The s e r v i c e o p e r a t e s w i t h B r i l l c a r s w h i c h were manufactured i n t h e 1890's and bought from t h e L i s b o n T r a c t i o n Company i n L i s b o n , P o r t u g a l . The t r a c k s a r e l o c a t e d on p r o t e c t e d r i g h t o f way i n t h e median o f a wide b o u l e v a r d . The 0.9-mile system c o s t $1.8 m i l l i o n t o c o n s t r u c t and was b u i l t w i t h no UMTA f u n d i n g . F o r t Worth, Texas The Tandy C o r p o r a t i o n i n F o r t Worth o p e r a t e s a t r o l l e y as a s h u t t l e between a p e r i p h e r a l p a r k i n g l o t and t h e i r downtown department s t o r e , 1.2 m i l e s away. The system uses o l d D.C. T r a n s i t PCC c a r s which have been c o m p l e t e l y r e n o v a t e d . The new body d e s i g n i s m o d e r n i s t i c and does not resemble o l d PCC v e h i c l e s . The F o r t Worth system i s an example o f a s i t u a t i o n where a p r i v a t e c o r p o r a t i o n r e c o g n i z e d t h e p o t e n t i a l o f a t r o l l e y system i n p r o v i d i n g improved a c c e s s t o a commercial c e n t e r and a t t r a c t i n g a d d i t i o n a l customers. San F r a n c i s c o , C a l i f o r n i a (Cable C a r s ) As was mentioned i n Chapter 3, t h e C i t y o f San F r a n c i s c o has r e t a i n e d c a b l e c a r o p e r a t i o n s on t h r e e r o u t e s w i t h i n t h e C i t y . The o p e r a t i o n c o s t s o f t h e system a r e h i g h , b u t t h e s e r v i c e i s r e t a i n e d because i t i s a h i s t o r i c a l landmark and i s r e c o g n i z e d f o r i t s importance i n c o n t r i b u t i n g t o t h e image o f t h e C i t y . The c a b l e c a r s a l s o p r o v i d e an important t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s e r v i c e and a r e used by many commuters f o r a c c e s s t o work l o c a t i o n s and o t h e r p u b l i c t r a n s i t modes, as w e l l a s by s i g h t s e e r s . The LRT systems d e s c r i b e d above r e p r e s e n t a wide range o f systems and s e r v i c e s . A Georgetown t r o l l e y system would likely f a l l w i t h i n t h i s range and can b e n e f i t by t h e o p e r a t i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e gained i n t h e s e o t h e r systems. �jhk* 16 5. EXISTING TRANSIT CONDITIONS IN GEORGETOWN A complete r e v i e w o f e x i s t i n g t r a n s i t c o n d i t i o n s i n Georgetown i s p r o v i d e d i n T e c h n i c a l Memoranda 3 and 4 of t h i s E x i s t i n g M e t r o r a i l and Metrobus s e r v i c e i s r e v i e w e d study. i n Technical Memorandum 3 and Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y ' s GUTS system i s r e v i e w e d i n T e c h n i c a l Memorandum 4. A b r i e f r e v i e w o f t h e s e c o n d i t i o n s and t h e i r i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r t r o l l e y s e r v i c e i s presented in this chapter. The Metrobus and M e t r o r a i l r o u t e s which p r e s e n t l y s e r v e Georgetown a r e shown i n F i g u r e 2. located approximately Three M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n s a r e one m i l e from t h e c e n t e r of Georgetown. These s t a t i o n s a r e l i n k e d t o Georgetown by a number o f Metrobus routes. The backbone o f Georgetown's Metrobus system 30's buses (Routes 30, 32, 34, and 36) w h i c h r u n on i s the Wisconsin Avenue, M S t r e e t , and P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue through Georgetown. These r o u t e s connect Georgetown t o t h e Foggy Bottom M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n and downtown Washington. F u r t h e r s e r v i c e along M S t r e e t i s p r o v i d e d by t h e M6 r o u t e w h i c h c r o s s e s Key B r i d g e and Georgetown t o t h e R o s s l y n M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n . a c r o s s t h e middle of Georgetown i s p r o v i d e d G2. East-west connects service by t h e D buses and t h e These r o u t e s connect Georgetown t o t h e Dupont C i r c l e and t h e M e t r o r a i l Red L i n e . station Route i n f o r m a t i o n f o r the above- mentioned Metrobus r o u t e s and o t h e r l e s s f r e q u e n t r o u t e s which s e r v e Georgetown i s p r e s e n t e d i n T a b l e 2. Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y , which i s t h e s i n g l e h i g h e s t genera t o r o f t r i p s i n t h e Georgetown a r e a , i s f u r t h e r s e r v e d by i t s GUTS s m a l l bus system. Georgetown i s p r o v i d e d A r o u t e map o f t h e GUTS system w i t h i n i n F i g u r e 3. GUTS p r o v i d e s a d i r e c t con- n e c t i o n between t h e U n i v e r s i t y and t h e R o s s l y n and Dupont C i r c l e s t a t i o n s , a l t h o u g h t h e r o u t e s t o both s t a t i o n s t r a v e r s e slow dential streets. connection resi- The U n i v e r s i t y does not p r e s e n t l y have a d i r e c t t o t h e Foggy Bottom s t a t i o n . �GEORGETOWN METROBUS AND METRORAIL ROUTES �Table 2 . Georgetown Metrobus S e r v i c e Average t i n a t i o n Via Midday Rush - Rush -/15 Dl Glover Park Federal Triangle Q S t . 15/- 02 Glover Park Federal Triangle Q 10/10 D3 Glover Park Federal Triangle M S t . 20/- D4 Sibley Hospital Farragut Square Q S t . 10/10 20 10/10 Georgetown•U. P S t . 7/9 12 Union M S t . 5/10 15 G2 Howard M6 Ros U. 30 Friendshp. 11 t s . Potomac 32 Friendshp. Hts. Shipley 34 Friendshp. Hts. Naylor Hts. H i l l c r e s t s1yn 36 Friendshp. 511 McLean 5K George 5N 5S 5W Routes S t a t i o n St. (in minutes) PM AM Des Origin Route Headways 20 10/10 - -/20 Evening Sat. - - 40 - 20 - 40 7/9 30 20 20 5/10 20 15 - - 30 60 Terrace Gardens Wise . Ave/M S t 6/- 30 -n Wise . Ave/M S t 20/10 30 10/15 60 30 45 Wise . Ave/M S t 20/8 30 15/20 60 30 45 Wise . Ave. S t a . Ave/M S t 10/20 60 30 45 20/10 30 M S t . (a)/- - Farragut Square M S t . 36/60 60 C . I.A. Farragut Square M St . -/30 - 30/- Ilerndon Farragut Square M St . 30/60 60 60/30 Oakton which Farragut Square M St . 30/- - -/50 (a) - pass through D9 Sibley N7 do not serve 60/30 60 60 - (b) - - Georgetown Bethesda (a) Whitehurst Fwy 20/- - -/30 - - - Triangle Whitehurst Fwy 20/- - -/20 - - Federal Hospital Square Federal Rockville N9 but - 20 Square U. 40 30 Farragut Mason Sun . Triangle Whitehurst Fwy 10/- - Farragut infrequent service (b) does not serve - Georgetown -/10 on Saturdays. - - �GUTS ROUTE MAP (IN THE GEORGETOWN AREA) �.jhk 20 The i n f o r m a t i o n p r e s e n t e d above appears t o i n d i c a t e that Georgetown i s s e r v e d by a h i g h l e v e l o f bus t r a n s i t s e r v i c e and has c o n v e n i e n t t r a n s i t c o n n e c t i o n s both t o M e t r o r a i l and downtown Washington. Georgetowners 1 However, t h e r e a r e some problems which lower perception of t h e i r l e v e l of t r a n s i t s e r v i c e . The most s e r i o u s i s t h e crowded c o n d i t i o n s on buses s e r v i n g Georgetown d u r i n g t h e peak p e r i o d s . factors. T h i s i s caused by a combination o f two Because Georgetown i s t h e l a s t community t h e 30's and M6 buses t r a v e r s e b e f o r e e n t e r i n g downtown Washington, Georgetown r e s i d e n t s a r e t h e l a s t p e r s o n s t o board and u s u a l l y have t o s t a n d , o f t e n on v e r y crowded buses i n u n c o m f o r t a b l e c o n d i t i o n s . Com- pounding t h i s problem i s t h e f a c t t h a t t h e W i s c o n s i n Avenue buses s u f f e r from a s e r i o u s p l a t o o n i n g problem. Although 20 peak d i r e c t i o n buses a r e s c h e d u l e d on W i s c o n s i n Avenue d u r i n g t h e peak hour, i t i s n o t uncommon f o r p e r i o d s o f 10 t o 12 m i n u t e s t o p a s s w i t h o u t a bus coming by. Then t h r e e o r f o u r buses w i l l p a s s by w i t h i n one o r two m i n u t e s . The f i r s t two o r t h r e e a r e o f t e n so f u l l t h a t p a s s e n g e r s cannot board o r i f they do, t h e y e x p e r i e n c e unc o m f o r t a b l e , crowded c o n d i t i o n s . The n e t r e s u l t i s t h a t Georgetown r e s i d e n t s p e r c e i v e t h e i r s e r v i c e a s b e i n g one w i t h 10 t o 12 minute headways i n s t e a d o f t h e t h r e e minute headways t h e s c h e d u l e shows. Once p a s s e n g e r s do board t h e b u s e s , t h e buses a r e caught i n t h e t r a f f i c c o n g e s t i o n on Georgetown's arterial streets. This combined w i t h f r e q u e n t s t o p s t o board and d i s c h a r g e p a s s e n g e r s , r e s u l t s i n slow t r a v e l times. Fares f o r short t r i p s to M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n s o r nearby employment c e n t e r s a r e q u i t e h i g h , e i t h e r 50 or 7 5 c e n t s d u r i n g peak p e r i o d s . What would appear t o be needed f o r Georgetown i s some t y p e of l o c a l i z e d t r a n s i t s e r v i c e w h i c h would r u n on r e g u l a r headways, would not r e s u l t i n Georgetowners a l w a y s b e i n g t h e p a s s e n g e r s who must s t a n d , would have lower f a r e s t o r e f l e c t Georgetowners 1 shorter t r i p s , would p r o v i d e a d i r e c t t r a n s i t c o n n e c t i o n t o t h e Foggy Bottom s t a t i o n , and would r u n on i t s own r i g h t o f way so a s n o t t o s u f f e r �jhk* 21 from congested t r a f f i c c o n d i t i o n s i n Georgetown. of t r o l l e y s e r v i c e The r e i n s t i t u t i o n i s one p o s s i b i l i t y o f a means t o p r o v i d e t h i s service. However, t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f e x i s t i n g t r a n s i t t r i p s through Georgetown i n d i c a t e that unless the t r o l l e y service i s to e x t e n d beyond Georgetown, i t s h o u l d be designed t o supplement e x i s t i n g bus s e r v i c e , n o t r e p l a c e i t . The m a j o r i t y o f r i d e r s on both t h e 30's buses and t h e M6 buses d u r i n g peak p e r i o d s a r e t r i p s w h i c h a r e p a s s i n g through Georgetown. alightings Most of t h e b o a r d i n g s and i n Georgetown a r e by p e r s o n s whose t r i p e i t h e r originates or ends o u t s i d e of Georgetown. F o r c i n g t h e s e p a s s e n g e r s t o make one o r two a d d i t i o n a l would r e s u l t i n s i g n i f i c a n t d e t e r - transfers i o r a t i o n of t h e i r l e v e l of s e r v i c e of them from u t i l i z i n g t r a n s i t . and would l i k e l y d r i v e some �jhk* 22 6. CONDITION OF EXISTING TROLLEY TRACKS AND S i n c e t r o l l e y s e r v i c e was CONDUIT abandoned i n Georgetown most of the t r o l l e y t r a c k s have been paved o v e r to improve o p e r a t i n g cond i t i o n s f o r autos and buses and to improve o v e r a l l s a f e t y c o n d i - t i o n s both f o r m o t o r i z e d v e h i c l e s and bicycles. The most r e c e n t t r a c k s t o have been paved o v e r a r e those along M S t r e e t P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue i n Georgetown. in 1977 following taken. 0 and The a U. and These t r a c k s were paved o v e r S. D i s t r i c t C o u r t o r d e r t h a t such a c t i o n o n l y r e m a i n i n g exposed t r a c k s i n Georgetown a r e P S t r e e t s west of W i s c o n s i n Avenue, where both the t r a c k s and c o b b l e s t o n e s i n the preservation On be on trolley s t r e e t have been saved f o r h i s t o r i c a l reasons. J u l y 22, 1976, P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue, two p r i o r to the r e p a v i n g of M S t r e e t and members of the C i t i z e n s A s s o c i a t i o n of Georgetown Subcommittee on M S t r e e t , t o g e t h e r w i t h p e r s o n n e l from the D. C. Department of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n , t h e s e two portions i n s p e c t e d the t r a c k a g e s t r e e t s to d e t e r m i n e i t s e x i s t i n g c o n d i t i o n (3). Major of the t r a c k along P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue and M S t r e e t were found to be i n r e l a t i v e l y good c o n d i t i o n a t the time of inspection, a l t h o u g h i t appeared t h a t some r e g a u g i n g of the t r a c k s would necessary. was on P r o b a b l y more i m p o r t a n t l y from the c o s t t h a t the c o n d u i t was a l s o found to be l o n g s t r e t c h e s of t h e s e two a t a number of l o c a t i o n s c o n d u i t was The f u l l of d e b r i s . c e n t e r s l o t was However, c l e a n i n g The perspective i n good c o n d i t i o n (an e a s i l y c o r r e c t a b l e be a r e l a t i v e l y e a s y t a s k . p i t t e d , but streets. power r a i l was along pinched problem) and the the c o n d u i t would found to be the Subcommittee members f e l t i t was S i n c e the Subcommittee made t h e i r i n s p e c t i o n , be slightly serviceable. construction has begun on the r e p l a c e m e n t of the P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue B r i d g e over Rock Creek P a r k . In replacing t h i s b r i d g e , the o l d t r a c k s and c o n d u i t have been removed. T r a c k a g e west of W i s c o n s i n Avenue on M S t r e e t and and P S t r e e t was found to be i n poor c o n d i t i o n and on 0 i n some p l a c e s �23 had been removed. However, t h e c o n d u i t t u n n e l appeared t o be s e r v i c e a b l e i n many p l a c e s , i f i t were p r o p e r l y c l e a n e d and t h e power r a i l s were r e p l a c e d . Segments on W i s c o n s i n Avenue, 3 6th S t r e e t , and P r o s p e c t S t r e e t were covered w i t h a s p h a l t , making inspection impossible. I f t r o l l e y s e r v i c e were t o be r e i n s t i t u t e d i n Georgetown and c e n t e r - o f - t h e - s t r e e t o p e r a t i o n s were planned, t h a t new t r a c k would have t o be l a i d . i t i s likely Usage o f t h e o l d t r a c k c o u l d a t b e s t be o n l y a temporary measure, and would forbode s i g n i f i c a n t maintenance problems. a s i m i l a r s i t u a t i o n and d e c i d e d long-term likely D e t r o i t was f a c e d w i t h that with the r e i n s t i t u t i o n of a s e r v i c e new c o n t i n u o u s l y - w e l d e d t r a c k would be n e c e s s a r y . Such t r a c k would p r o v i d e a much smoother r i d e , would enable higher speeds, reduce wear and t e a r on t h e t r o l l e y v e h i c l e s , and r e s u l t i n s i g n i f i c a n t l y lower n o i s e l e v e l s . The element o f t h e o l d system w h i c h would more l i k e l y be r e u s a b l e i s t h e o l d c o n d u i t tunnel. To t h e degree t h a t c o n d u i t t u n n e l c o u l d be r e u s e d c o s t s would be lowered. capital I n s t a l l i n g new c o n d u i t t u n n e ^ would be a major u n d e r t a k i n g , a s would removal o f t h e o l d t u n n e l . A t y p i c a l c r o s s s e c t i o n of M S t r e e t p r i o r t o r e p a v i n g showing both t r a c k s and c o n d u i t i s p o r t r a y e d i n F i g u r e 4. As can be seen i n t h i s c r o s s s e c t i o n d e p i c t i o n , t h e c o n d u i t t u n n e l i s encased i n concrete. I t i s l a r g e l y because i t was designed s t a n d a r d s t h a t i t remains i n such good c o n d i t i o n t o such high today. S i n c e t h e Subcommittee i n s p e c t e d t h e c o n d i t i o n o f t h e t r a c k a g e and c o n d u i t i n P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue and M S t r e e t , i t has been covered by b l a c k t o p . I t i s beyond t h e scope o f t h i s study t o uncover t r a c k a g e or c o n d u i t t o i n s p e c t i t s p r e s e n t c o n d i t i o n . I f the d e c i s i o n i s made t o f u r t h e r pursue t h e r e i n s t i t u t i o n o f t r o l l e y s e r v i c e and t h e d e t a i l e d p l a n n i n g and d e s i g n c o n t r a c t i s awarded, one o f t h e f i r s t t a s k s o f t h e study should be a thorough i n v e n t o r y o f t r a c k a g e and c o n d u i t c o n d i t i o n . �CARTRACK DETAILS �jhk* 25 7. ALTERNATIVE ALIGNMENTS The c h o i c e o f a f i n a l alignment depend upon a number of f a c t o r s . f o r a t r o l l e y system would Among t h e s e would be whether t h e p r i m a r y f u n c t i o n o f t h e system i s t o be h i s t o r i c , t o p r o v i d e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s e r v i c e , o r t o p r o v i d e a h y b r i d f u n c t i o n ; whether t h e system i s t o p r o v i d e l o c a l s e r v i c e w i t h i n Georgetown o n l y o r i s to e x t e n d beyond Georgetown and p r o v i d e a l i n e - h a u l to what degree the t r o l l e y w i l l be a l l o w e d t o reduce function; automobile c a p a c i t y and p a r k i n g on Georgetown's s t r e e t s ; to what degree r e s i d e n t s w i l l a l l o w t r o l l e y s t o p e n e t r a t e t h e i r neighborhoods; c a p i t a l and o p e r a t i n g c o s t s o f a l t e r n a t i v e a l i g n m e n t s ; demand which c o u l d be g e n e r a t e d on a l t e r n a t i v e a l i g n m e n t s ; and e n v i r o n mental impacts of v a r i o u s a l i g n m e n t s . The e x t e n t o f the system w i l l depend t o a g r e a t degree upon i t s p r i m a r y f u n c t i o n . T h i s d i s c u s s i o n of a l t e r n a t i v e a l i g n m e n t s w i l l c o n s i d e r two d i s t i n c t t y p e s o f systems, one which would be s t r i c t l y of a l o c a l s e r v i c e w i t h i n Georgetown which would a l s o a c t as a f e e d e r s e r v i c e to M e t r o r a i l f o r Georgetown r e s i d e n t s . The o t h e r would be a system which would e x t e n d beyond Georgetown and s e r v e both Georgetown t r i p s l o n g e r t r i p s from Northwest Washington, Maryland, and and Virginia. LOCAL SYSTEM A l l of t h e a l t e r n a t i v e s c o n s i d e r e d f o r t h e l o c a l system would o r i g i n a t e a t the Foggy Bottom M e t r o r a i l S t a t i o n and via P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue and M S t r e e t t o the i n t e r s e c t i o n o f W i s c o n s i n Avenue and M S t r e e t . for proceed There a r e s e v e r a l a l t e r n a t i v e s r o u t i n g t h e t r o l l e y between P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue and e n t r a n c e t o t h e Foggy Bottom S t a t i o n 23rd and 24th S t r e e t s on I S t r e e t . the which i s l o c a t e d between One would be t o o p e r a t e 24th S t r e e t between P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue and I S t r e e t . on Itis not known i f the b r i d g e on 24th S t r e e t over K S t r e e t i s c a p a b l e �jhk 26 of s u p p o r t i n g t r o l l e y l o a d s , but i t i s assumed t h a t some r e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h a t b r i d g e would be r e q u i r e d . Another o p t i o n would be t o o p e r a t e on 25th S t r e e t between P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue and I S t r e e t and t h e n t u r n down I S t r e e t t o t h e Foggy Bottom Station. Through auto t r a f f i c i s n o t p r e s e n t l y a l l o w e d t o make t h i s movement b u t a s i g n a l on K S t r e e t e x i s t s f o r p e d e s t r i a n u s e . I f t h e e l e v a t i o n o f K S t r e e t were m a i n t a i n e d a t i t s l e v e l under Washington C i r c l e and 24th S t r e e t a t r o l l e y b r i d g e c o u l d be b u i l t over i t a t 2 5 t h S t r e e t , t h u s m i n i m i z i n g a u t o / t r o l l e y Twenty-fifth Street i s presently interference. a q u i e t dead-end s t r e e t i n t h i s v i c i n i t y , so u s i n g i t f o r t r o l l e y s e r v i c e c o u l d be e x p e c t e d t o produce neighborhood i m p a c t s . A p o t e n t i a l problem w i t h both t h e 24th and 25th a l i g n m e n t s i s t h a t l a n d would Street have t o be t a k e n t o a l l o w enough room f o r t h e t r o l l e y t u r n a r o u n d . Another i s t h a t both streets a r e r e l a t i v e l y narrow, and double t r a c k t r o l l e y o p e r a t i o n s might be h i n d e r e d by i n t e r f e r e n c e turns. from p a r k i n g v e h i c l e s and by t i g h t An a l t e r n a t i v e o p t i o n might be t o o p e r a t e a one-way loop o p e r a t i o n u s i n g both 24th and 25th S t r e e t s . A less pre- f e r a b l e o p t i o n would be t o loop around Washington C i r c l e . Under t h i s o p t i o n p a s s e n g e r s would have t o g e t o f f a t l e a s t one b l o c k from t h e Foggy Bottom S t a t i o n . I f p a s s e n g e r s were t o board and d i s c h a r g e a t Washington C i r c l e , t h e r e would be a c o n s i d e r a b l e amount o f t r o l l e y / a u t o A discussion interference. o f t r o l l e y o p e r a t i o n s on P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue and M S t r e e t i s p r o v i d e d i n Chapter 8. I t s h o u l d be noted that t h e P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue B r i d g e o v e r Rock Creek P a r k i s p r e s e n t l y b e i n g r e c o n s t r u c t e d so t h a t i t c a n support t r o l l e y l o a d i n g s . discussion o f a l t e r n a t i v e a l i g n m e n t s west and n o r t h o f t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n o f W i s c o n s i n Avenue and M S t r e e t f o l l o w s . l o c a t i o n o f t h e s e a l i g n m e n t s i s shown i n F i g u r e 5. The A �A L T E R N A T I V E A L I G N M E N T S FOR L O C A L GEORGETOWN TROLLEY SERVICE �ihk 28 Alignment A T h i s a l t e r n a t i v e would end maintenance b u i l d i n g a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1/16 a t the former D.C. Transit l o c a t e d on the south s i d e of M m i l e west of W i s c o n s i n Avenue. Street This system would r e p r e s e n t a m i n i m a l system and would s e r v e as a s h u t t l e between the c e n t e r o f Georgetown and the Foggy Bottom s t a t i o n . I t would p r o v i d e m i n i m a l s e r v i c e f o r t r i p s to and r e s i d e n t i a l a r e a s o f Georgetown and portation be the Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y . However, i f the t r o l l e y s e r v i c e i s to be f o r h i s t o r i c a l and from justified primarily entertainment reasons r a t h e r than f o r t r a n s - s e r v i c e i t i s perhaps the most f e a s i b l e system to implemented. Alignment B T h i s a l t e r n a t i v e would c o n t i n u e a l o n g M S t r e e t to i t s i n t e r s e c t i o n w i t h the Key the Car B a r n B u i l d i n g Bridge. located From h e r e i t would t u r n a t the end of Key B r i d g e where f a c i l i t i e s once e x i s t e d f o r t u r n a r o u n d , s t o r a g e , and o f the v e h i c l e s . maintenance T h i s a l t e r n a t i v e would b r i n g s e r v i c e reasonable walking distance into of Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y and within would s e r v e the e n t i r e l e n g t h of the M S t r e e t commercial d i s t r i c t Georgetown. T r o l l e y s o p e r a t i n g i n the s t r e e t a t the end Key B r i d g e would l i k e l y cause s i g n i f i c a n t t r a f f i c of of impacts. Alignment C T h i s a l i g n m e n t would be s i m i l a r to A l t e r n a t i v e B but extend across Key would B r i d g e to R o s s l y n C i r c l e where i t would loop around f o r i t s r e t u r n t r i p a c r o s s a l t e r n a t i v e would be the r i v e r . A v a r i a t i o n of f o r the t r o l l e y to p a s s through R o s s l y n this �jhk* 29 C i r c l e and e x t e n d to the R o s s l y n M e t r o r a i l Station. Another o p t i o n might be to i n t e g r a t e the t r o l l e y i n t o the d e s i g n of the proposed p a r k - l i k e p l a z a to be c o n s t r u c t e d o v e r I n t e r s t a t e 66. Running t r o l l e y s a c r o s s Key B r i d g e and through R o s s l y n C i r c l e would r e s u l t i n s i g n i f i c a n t impacts on auto traffic. Alignment D From the i n t e r s e c t i o n of M S t r e e t and W i s c o n s i n Avenue t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e would t u r n up W i s c o n s i n Avenue, t u r n westward on P S t r e e t , south on 3 6th S t r e e t , and e a s t w a r d a g a i n on 0 t o W i s c o n s i n Avenue. T r o l l e y s on P, 3 6 t h , and Street 0 S t r e e t s would have to run one-way because of the narrowness of the s t r e e t s . One v a r i a t i o n of t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e might b r i n g the t r o l l e y s south on 3 6th S t r e e t to P r o s p e c t S t r e e t , e a s t on P r o s p e c t S t r e e t 3 5th S t r e e t , n o r t h on on 0 S t r e e t . 35th S t r e e t to 0 S t r e e t , and east to again T h i s i s the r o u t e t r o l l e y s i n the Georgetown a r e a have h i s t o r i c a l l y t a k e n . Another v a r i a t i o n might be to b r i n g the t r o l l e y onto Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y ' s campus and thus p r o v i d e s e r v i c e d i r e c t l y to Georgetown's l a r g e s t t r i p g e n e r a t o r . Alignment E A fifth l o c a l a l t e r n a t i v e would a l s o t u r n up W i s c o n s i n Avenue from M S t r e e t , but would t u r n e a s t on P S t r e e t and t o Dupont C i r c l e where p a s s e n g e r s c o u l d a g a i n l i n k up Metrorail. T h i s a l t e r n a t i v e i s not r e v i e w f o r two primary reasons. with recommended f o r f u r t h e r T h i s r o u t e was not p a r t of C a p i t a l T r a n s i t Company's s t r e e t c a r network (see F i g u r e i t does not have e x i s t i n g t r a c k or c o n d u i t t h a t might be In addition the 1 ) , so usable. i t i s u n l i k e l y t h a t the P S t r e e t B r i d g e o v e r Rock Creek Park i s d e s i g n e d f o r t r o l l e y l o a d i n g s . critical proceed Perhaps even more though i s the f a c t t h a t Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y would not be d i r e c t l y s e r v e d by such a system. �30 EXTENDED SYSTEM A system which e x t e n d s beyond Georgetown would p r i m a r i l y serve a line-haul t r a n s i t function for t r i p s accessing Metrorail and e n t e r i n g downtown Washington from Upper Northwest Maryland, and V i r g i n i a . Washington, Such a system would l i k e l y o p e r a t e w i t h d i f f e r e n t v e h i c l e s t h a n a l o c a l system w i t h i n Georgetown. It would be d e s i r a b l e i f c o m p a t i b l e gauges were used f o r t h e two t y p e s of systems so t h e d i f f e r e n t t y p e s of c a r s c o u l d be mixed w i t h i n Georgetown i t s e l f . inter- An extended system would be d e s i g n e d to r e p l a c e l i n e - h a u l bus s e r v i c e which p r e s e n t l y s e r v e s the c o r r i d o r through which i t would be l o c a t e d . Interfaces with l o c a l bus s e r v i c e would be c r i t i c a l to t h e s u c c e s s f u l o p e r a t i o n of such a s e r v i c e , a s would t h e o p e r a t i o n of park and r i d e d e s i g n e d t o i n t e r c e p t auto d r i v e r s to downtown Washington. extended system a l t e r n a t i v e s were c o n s i d e r e d i n t h i s lots Three analysis. These a r e shown i n F i g u r e 6. Alignment F T h i s a l i g n m e n t would extend out W i s c o n s i n Avenue from Georgetown. I t c o u l d run a p p r o x i m a t e l y 3.1 m i l e s up W i s c o n s i n Avenue where i t would a g a i n meet M e t r o r a i l a t t h e f u t u r e T e n l e y C i r c l e M e t r o r a i l S t a t i o n . Another o p t i o n would be t o t e r m i n a t e a t an i n t e r m e d i a t e p o i n t such as the i n t e r s e c t i o n of W i s c o n s i n and M a s s a c h u s e t t s Avenues. Such an a l i g n m e n t would p r o v i d e s e r v i c e to a h i g h demand c o r r i d o r and would be w e l l u t i l i z e d . I t would r e p l a c e t h e e x i s t i n g 30's buses n o r t h of Washington C i r c l e and c o u l d p r o v i d e a h i g h l e v e l of s e r v i c e i n t h i s c o r r i d o r . Unless two l a n e s o f t r a f f i c were removed from W i s c o n s i n Avenue and d e d i c a t e d t o l i g h t r a i l v e h i c l e s , however, i t i s u n l i k e l y s i g n i f i c a n t time s a v i n g s c o u l d be a f f o r d e d o v e r e x i s t i n g bus s e r v i c e and s i g n i f i c a n t modal s h i f t s would not o c c u r . �ALTERNATIVE ALIGNMENTS FOR EXTENDED GEORGETOWN TROLLEY SERVICE ihk FIGURE <c associates 3 NO. �.jhk & 32 Alignment G T h i s a l i g n m e n t would u t i l i z e D.C. T r a n s i t ' s C a b i n John r i g h t o f way between Georgetown and Glen Echo Amusement Park i n Glen Echo, Maryland. The r i g h t o f way f o r t h i s a l i g n m e n t i s a l m o s t e n t i r e l y h e l d by one owner, so r i g h t of way acquisition would be made much e a s i e r than i f i t were under m u l t i p l e ownership. Because t h e a l i g n m e n t i s e n t i r e l y s e p a r a t e d from e x i s t i n g s t r e e t systems a h i g h l e v e l of s e r v i c e c o u l d be r e a l i z e d i n a c o r r i d o r w h i c h i s not p r e s e n t l y w e l l s e r v e d by transit. P o p u l a t i o n d e n s i t i e s i n t h e c o r r i d o r a r e q u i t e low. c o n s i d e r a b l e p o t e n t i a l f o r s i g n i f i c a n t p a r k - r i d e usage However, exists a t t h e G l e n Echo Amusement P a r k where a l a r g e p a r k i n g l o t presently exists. The D.C. Department o f E n v i r o n m e n t a l S e r v i c e s (DES) i s p r e s e n t l y c o n s i d e r i n g u s i n g t h e C a b i n John r i g h t o f way t o l o c a t e a f u t u r e w a t e r main. I f DES d e c i d e s to do so, the r i g h t of way c o u l d be s h a r e d by t h e w a t e r p i p e and t r o l l e y system. Alignment H T h i s a l i g n m e n t would u t i l i z e t h e B&O r a i l r o a d t r a c k s , between Georgetown and t h e Maryland s t a t e l i n e . From t h i s p o i n t i t c o u l d e x t e n d a c r o s s Montgomery County to S i l v e r S p r i n g where i t would a g a i n meet M e t r o r a i l . The c h i e f advantage o f t h i s alignme'ht i s t h a t 'the t r a c k a g e i s a l r e a d y i n p l a c e and c o n s t r u c t i o n c o s t s c o u l d be m i n i m i z e d . However, t h e t r a c k s would have t o be s h a r e d w i t h t h e B&O R a i l r o a d which r e c e n t l y s i g n e d a f o r t y - y e a r agreement w i t h t h e G e n e r a l S e r v i c e s A d m i n i s t r a t i o n to c o n t i n u e s u p p l y i n g c o a l t o GSA's Foggy Bottom power p l a n t . Although i t would be p o s s i b l e t o connect t o Montogmery County p o p u l a t i o n c e n t e r s a l o n g t h i s a l i g n m e n t juoCMtei �jhk* 33 i t would not s e r v e l a r g e enough p o p u l a t i o n d e n s i t i e s w i t h i n t h e D i s t r i c t of Columbia or w e s t e r n Montgomery County t o a t t r a c t g r e a t enough demand t o be j u s t i f i e d . I t a l s o would e n t e r George- town south of K S t r e e t and p r o v i d e l i t t l e s e r v i c e to t h e main a c t i v i t y c e n t e r s o f Georgetown itself. A t r o l l e y system which e x t e n d s beyond Georgetown i s an o p t i o n which s h o u l d be k e p t open f o r f u t u r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n . However, due t o i t s c o s t and the s i g n i f i c a n t c o n s t r u c t i o n which would be i n v o l v e d i t must be viewed as a long term major c a p i t a l i n v e s t m e n t o p t i o n and would t h e r e f o r e have t o undergo d e t a i l e d a l t e r n a t i v e s a n a l y s i s r e v i e w b e f o r e i t c o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d f o r UMTA f u n d i n g . terms of implementing The major c o n c e n t r a t i o n i n a t r o l l e y system i n the s h o r t term s h o u l d f o c u s upon a system w h i c h would p r o v i d e s e r v i c e w i t h i n Georgetown o n l y . However, i f such a s e r v i c e i s t o be implemented i t s h o u l d be designed so i t c o u l d some day be extended Georgetown. beyond �J H I V * i'sociatcs 34 8. OPERATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS I n t h i s c h a p t e r a number o f c o n s i d e r a t i o n s r e g a r d i n g t r o l l e y o p e r a t i o n s w i l l be a d d r e s s e d . They w i l l e n t e r i n t o the d e c i s i o n r e g a r d i n g whether t r o l l e y s e r v i c e i s to be r e i n s t i t u t e d and i f so, what t y p e of s e r v i c e would be p r o v i d e d . LOCATION OF TRACK I n t h e p a s t t r o l l e y s i n Georgetown o p e r a t e d i n the c e n t e r o f the s t r e e t w i t h b o a r d i n g and d i s c h a r g i n g o f p a s s e n g e r s g e n e r a l l y occuring at i n t e r s e c t i o n s . The p r i m a r y d i s a d v a n t a g e o f such a system i s passenger s a f e t y . or p l a t f o r m s would l i k e l y t r a f f i c lane. To p r o v i d e passenger s a f e t y islands r e q u i r e the t a k i n g of a t l e a s t one extra I f p a s s e n g e r s w a i t on s i d e w a l k s , the t r o l l e y i s d e l a y e d w h i l e p a s s e n g e r s w a i t u n t i l t h e y can s a f e l y c r o s s l a n e s t o board or a l i g h t . . t r a c k s i s i n the curb lane. traffic An a l t e r n a t i v e l o c a t i o n f o r t r o l l e y With t h i s t y p e o f o p e r a t i o n , p a s s e n - g e r s can board and a l i g h t from the s i d e w a l k much as bus p a s s e n g e r s do and i n t e r f e r e n c e w i t h t r a f f i c i s m i n i m i z e d . However, curb l a n e o p e r a t i o n s i n t e r f e r e w i t h t r u c k l o a d i n g and u n l o a d i n g , which p r e s e n t s a s e r i o u s problem i n t h e commercial a r e a s along M S t r e e t and W i s c o n s i n Avenue. NUMBER OF TRACKS The number o f t r a c k s i n t h e Georgetown system w i l l depend l a r g e l y upon system e x t e n t , system headways, r e l i a b i l i t y r e q u i r e ments, t r a v e l time r e q u i r e m e n t s and t r a c k l o c a t i o n . Detroit's 0.9-mile t r o l l e y o p e r a t e s w i t h a s i n g l e t r a c k f o r most of i t s l e n g t h . Double t r a c k a g e i s p r o v i d e d f o r a s h o r t segment near t h e center to allow t r o l l e y cars t r a v e l l i n g i n opposite d i r e c t i o n s to pass each o t h e r . I f a s h o r t h i s t o r i c system s i m i l a r t o D e t r o i t ' s �35 were e s t a b l i s h e d i n Georgetown, s i n g l e t r a c k o p e r a t i o n would be f e a s i b l e and perhaps p r e f e r a b l e because p l a t f o r m s o r p e d e s t r i a n s a f e t y i s l a n d s c o u l d be e s t a b l i s h e d i n the s t r e e t . ing Diagrams show- a s t a t i o n w i t h a s i n g l e t r a c k i n t h e c e n t e r o f the s t r e e t and bypass t r a c k s f o r s i n g l e t r a c k o p e r a t i o n s a r e shown i n F i g u r e 7. S i n g l e t r a c k o p e r a t i o n s a r e a l s o p o s s i b l e when t h e t r a c k s a r e l o c a t e d i n the curb l a n e . T r u c k l o a d i n g and u n l o a d i n g can then o c c u r on t h e o p p o s i t e s i d e o f t h e s t r e e t . Single t r a c k operations are only f e a s i b l e with a l i m i t e d system which does not r e q u i r e h i g h s e r v i c e s t a n d a r d s or i n l o c a t i o n s where loop o p e r a t i o n s a r e p o s s i b l e , such as on 0 and P S t r e e t s west o f W i s c o n s i n Avenue. A two-way system w i t h f r e q u e n t headways, which i s l o n g e r than about one m i l e i n l e n g t h , or which i s designed to o p e r a t e a t c o m p e t i t i v e speeds w i t h buses and must o p e r a t e w i t h two tracks. RESERVED RIGHT OF WAY autos VERSUS OPERATING IN MIXED TRAFFIC L i g h t r a i l can o p e r a t e i n one o f t h r e e modes: on grade-separated r i g h t o f way, or i n mixed t r a f f i c o n - s t r e e t . i n r e s e r v e d o n - s t r e e t r i g h t of way The h i g h e s t l e v e l of s e r v i c e can be a c h i e v e d when l i g h t r a i l v e h i c l e s o p e r a t e w i t h no ence from o t h e r t r a f f i c . exclusive Such o p e r a t i o n s c o u l d be interfer- a c h i e v e d on a l i g h t r a i l l i n e e x t e n d i n g out t h e Cabin John r i g h t of way. However, w i t h i n Georgetown, t h e t r o l l e y s w i l l have t o o p e r a t e o n - s t r e e t and w i l l e x p e r i e n c e i n t e r f e r e n c e from o t h e r u s e r s of t h e s t r e e t . A means of m i n i m i z i n g t h i s i n t e r f e r e n c e i s t o r e s e r v e s t r e e t space for t o do t h e e x c l u s i v e use of t r o l l e y s . The most e f f e c t i v e way i s t o p l a c e a r a i s e d curb between g e n e r a l t r a f f i c t r o l l e y lanes. l a n e s and this the T r a f f i c i n t e r f e r e n c e w i l l s t i l l be e x p e r i e n c e d a t i n t e r s e c t i o n s where a u t o s , t r u c k s , a n d buses have t o c r o s s the trolley tracks. However, i f a p r i o r i t y s i g n a l system i s i n s t a l l e d t r o l l e y s can preempt o t h e r t r a f f i c w i t h minimal delay. and pass through intersections I t i s a l s o p o s s i b l e to r e s e r v e r i g h t of way �36 DETAILS OF SINGLE TRACK OPERATION �37 w i t h o u t s e p a r a t i n g i t from o t h e r t r a f f i c l a n e s by r a i s e d c u r b s . I n t h i s way t u r n i n g v e h i c l e s can maneuver more e a s i l y . The t r a c k s w i l l d i s c o u r a g e t r a f f i c from u s i n g t h e t r o l l e y l a n e s , b u t i n cases of severe t r a f f i c congestion v i o l a t o r s w i l l enter the l a n e s much a s t h e y do on a r t e r i a l bus l a n e s . ate i n mixed t r a f f i c i n s e v e r a l North American c i t i e s . these to Trolleys s t i l l oper- However, t r o l l e y s do not e x p e r i e n c e any t r a v e l time s a v i n g s r e l a t i v e autos and buses and they o f t e n g e t delayed, s i g n i f i c a n t l y when other v e h i c l e s block the t r a c k s . TYPE OF VEHICLE The t y p e o f v e h i c l e chosen f o r t h e system w i l l be dependent upon t h e p r i m a r y f u n c t i o n o f t h e system. I f t h e system i s t o s e r v e a h i s t o r i c a l f u n c t i o n , t r o l l e y c a r s from t h e l a t e n i n e t e e n t h or e a r l y t w e n t i e t h c e n t u r y s h o u l d be sought. However, i f a h i g h speed, r a p i d l i g h t r a i l s e r v i c e w i t h f u l l a c c e s s i b i l i t y f o r t h e e l d e r l y and handicapped i s t o be t h e g o a l o f t h e system, old c a r s w i l l not Georgetown perhaps suffice. these I f t h e system i s t o be extended a m i x o f v e h i c l e t y p e s s h o u l d be sought. beyond The c h a r - a c t e r i s t i c s of s e v e r a l types of l i g h t r a i l v e h i c l e s are l i s t e d i n T a b l e 3. A number o f h i s t o r i c B r i l l and S t . L o u i s t r o l l e y c a r s might be a v a i l a b l e from a s o u r c e i n P o r t u g a l . These c a r s p r e d a t e t h e PCC c a r s and would s e r v e a h i s t o r i c f u n c t i o n . The D e t r o i t system o b t a i n e d t h e i r c a r s from t h i s s o u r c e and was a b l e t o s u c c e s s f u l l y r e f u r b i s h them. The c a r s t h a t a r e a v a i l a b l e have been c o n v e r t e d to n o n - t r a n s i t u s e s , however, and c o n s i d e r a b l e e f f o r t i s r e q u i r e d to r e n o v a t e them. tralia. Other v e h i c l e s a r e a v a i l a b l e from Melbourne, Aus- These a r e open a i r v e h i c l e s and would have t o be e n c l o s e d so t h e y c o u l d o p e r a t e i n Washington's temperate c l i m a t e . An extended system would l i k e l y r e q u i r e c a r s which c o u l d pro- v i d e a h i g h e r l e v e l o f s e r v i c e than t h e h i s t o r i c c a r s . The �T a b l e 3. Light R a i l Vehicle Characteristics LOCAL SYSTEM Vehicle EXPANDED SYSTEM BOTH U.S. P C C Car J.5, B r i l l & Si. Louis Car DuWag U2 Boeing LEV 1965 1973 Canadian LRV approximate design year Systems late using 1990's renovated f o r D e t r o i t and Y a k i m a , Wash. (planned f o r ) 1933 approximately 5000 b u i l t Frankfurt (Edmonton) 1975 (Boston) (San (Toronto) Fran) (Dayton) Axles/aritcu2/0 lation Length, Width, ft.,mtrs. 4/0 6/1 6/1 4/0 2 5 ' 6 V 7.3 71.5/21.8 50.67/15.44 7 ' 8 " / 2.3 feet/mtrs. 43.5 t o 5 0 . 5 / 75.5/23.0 13.2 t o 15.4 3.33 t o 9.0/ 2.54 t o 2.74 8.70/2.65 a.85/2.70 8.50/2.59 Floor height feet/meters - 2.75/0.34 3.18/0.97 2.82/0.36 3.02/0.92 Roof h e i g h t , feet/meters ll'10y/3.6 10.1/3.08 10.8/3.28 11.5/3.51 11.0/3.37 Seats,number/ layout 24/2 49 t o 6 9 / 2 + 1 o r 2+2 64/2+2 Doors 68/2+2 42 o r 47 Varies per side Number 2 Type Folding Steps Maximun mphAph Low Minimum radius Folding Folding Plug Folding Low High High/Low Low feet/sec. 2 50/80 - feet/sec. 50/80 4.6 3.3 4.1 4.6 - 4.6 3.9 5.1 5.1 9.5 10 8.8 10 66 68 52 4.4 9.0 10+ Empty w e i g h t , 1000 l b s . grade 2 double 50/80 Emergency Deceleration ,load/ft/sec. Maximum 3 double 50/30 Deceleration, loaded, 4 double speed Acceleration loaded, 2 or 3 double 33 design (feet) Source: • 10+ - (percent) curve- t o 42 Varies R e f e r e n c e s 4, 5, & 6 32 Varies 32 o r 4 2 38 �jiiJV A jssociaici 39 F o r t Worth e x p e r i e n c e p r o v e s t h a t PCC c a r s can be refurbished. successfully A number of o t h e r systems a r e p r e s e n t l y p u r c h a s i n g modern l i g h t r a i l v e h i c l e s which a r e d e s i g n e d t o o p e r a t e a t a h i g h l e v e l o f s e r v i c e and and handicapped. a r e f u l l y a c c e s s i b l e t o the e l d e r l y However, a t t h e p r e s e n t time t h e s e v e h i c l e s c o s t on t h e o r d e r of $500,000 t o $800,000 a p i e c e . ELECTRIFICATION SYSTEM Most N o r t h American t r o l l e y systems have traditionally o p e r a t e d w i t h e l e c t r i c a l power s u p p l i e d from overhead wires. Much of Washington's system was o p e r a t e d w i t h o u t overhead w i r e s because C o n g r e s s i o n a l a c t i o n p r o h i b i t e d overhead w i r e s i n the Old C i t y o f Washington. E l e c t r i c power was p r o v i d e d through a t h i r d r a i l which was l o c a t e d i n an underground between t h e t r o l l e y t r a c k s (see F i g u r e 4 ) . conduit placed Although Georgetown i s not l o c a t e d w i t h i n t h e c o n f i n e s of t h e Old C i t y of Washington, overhead w i r e s would p r o b a b l y be p o l i t i c a l l y i n f e a s i b l e and would v i s u a l l y d e t r a c t from t h e image which Georgetown i s a t t e m p t i n g to create. F o r t u n a t e l y i t has been found t h a t much o f t h e c o n d u i t below t h e s t r e e t i s s a l v a g e a b l e , a l t h o u g h f u l l of d e b r i s . However, it system would p r o b a b l y be b e s t to begin the o p e r a t i o n o f a new with new power r a i l s . Segments o f the c o n d u i t system have been r e - moved and would have t o be r e p l a c e d . exceeds $200 per f o o t . The e s t i m a t e d c o s t of doing so The h i g h c o s t of i n s t a l l i n g new c o n d u i t i s a s t r o n g argument f o r r e t a i n i n g t r o l l e y o p e r a t i o n s i n the c e n t e r of the s t r e e t where c o n d u i t p r e s e n t l y e x i s t s , r a t h e r t h a n i n t h e c u r b l a n e where new c o n d u i t would have t o be i n s t a l l e d . A third elec- t r i f i c a t i o n o p t i o n might be some form of new t e c h n o l o g y system. One o p t i o n i n v o l v e s t h e placement o f e l e c t r i c a l l y charged b u t t o n s along the length of the t r a c k . A f o r s e e a b l e problem w i t h such a system, o t h e r t h a n the f a c t t h a t i t i s a new t e c h n o l o g y system which has not been f u l l y t e s t e d , i s t h a t t h e r e i s no way t o g u a r a n t e e t h a t a charge w i l l o n l y be r e l e a s e d when a t r o l l e y p a s s e s over t h e b u t t o n . �40 Another new technology system might be t h e use of e l e c t r i c b a t t e r i e s t o p r o v i d e power. storage PLATFORM DESIGN Two t y p e s of p l a t f o r m s a r e commonly used t o a c c e s s v e h i c l e s , low l e v e l p l a t f o r m s and h i g h l e v e l p l a t f o r m s . c a r s of the PCC l e v e l platforms. LRT Trolley e r a and e a r l i e r can be a c c e s s e d o n l y from low P l a t f o r m s c o u l d be i n s t a l l e d i n t h e c e n t e r o f M S t r e e t and P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue i f s i n g l e t r a c k o p e r a t i o n s maintained. The s i d e w a l k would a c t as a p l a t f o r m i f c u r b o p e r a t i o n s were m a i n t a i n e d . lane With double t r a c k c e n t e r l a n e o p e r a t i o n s p l a t f o r m s would p r o b a b l y passengers are not be p o s s i b l e and would have t o board from t h e s t r e e t l e v e l . The use of low l e v e l p l a t f o r m s and h i s t o r i c t r o l l e y c a r s r e q u i r e s passengers t o c l i m b s e v e r a l s t e p s to e n t e r the c a r . o p e r a t i o n s would not meet F e d e r a l a c c e s s i b i l i t y f o r t h e e l d e r l y and handicapped. by handicapped persons Such requirements Newer v e h i c l e s can be from low l e v e l p l a t f o r m s . High l e v e l p l a t f o r m s can o n l y be used w i t h t h e newer v e h i c l e s . advantage i s i n h i g h volume l o c a t i o n s . accessed Their chief I t i s unlikely that h i g h l e v e l p l a t f o r m s would be used w i t h i n Georgetown, but be used on an extended system which u t i l i z e d new LRT could vehicles. STATION SPACING The system s p a c i n g between s t o p s w i l l depend upon whether t h e i s t o be designed t o be c o n v e n i e n t l y a c c e s s i b l e or to o p e r a t e a t maximum p o s s i b l e speeds. A system which i s to s e r v e p r i m a r i l y a h i s t o r i c or e n t e r t a i n m e n t function s h o u l d be e a s i l y a c c e s s i b l e and s h o u l d have s t o p s almost every block. A system which i s designed to p r o v i d e speeds than buses must s a c r i f i c e convenience of higher accessibility �41 and space s t o p s f u r t h e r a p a r t so a c c e l e r a t i o n , d e c e l e r a t i o n , and d w e l l t i m e s c a n be m i n i m i z e d . e v e n t u a l l y extended I f a system i s b u i l t which i s beyond Georgetown, s t a t i o n s p a c i n g o u t s i d e Georgetown i s l i k e l y t o be g r e a t e r than w i t h i n Georgetown where a c t i v i t y i s more c o n c e n t r a t e d . HOURS OF OPERATION The hours a t r o l l e y would o p e r a t e i n Georgetown would depend upon t h e f u n c t i o n the t r o l l e y i s to serve, r i d e r s h i p demand, t h e amount o f d e f i c i t w h i c h w i l l be a l l o w e d , and t h e degree t o which a u t o / t r o l l e y i n t e r f e r e n c e w i l l be t o l e r a t e d . A t r o l l e y which i s designed to serve as a h i s t o r i c landmark c o u l d have l i m i t e d hours o f o p e r a t i o n , perhaps d u r i n g midday and c e r t a i n e v e n i n g s o r on weekends. discontinued during the w i n t e r . S e r v i c e might a l s o be I n t h i s way t h e t r o l l e y p r o v i d e s e r v i c e d u r i n g p e r i o d s when many t o u r i s t s could and v i s i t o r s t o e n t e r t a i n m e n t s p o t s i n Georgetown a r e p r e s e n t w h i l e a t t h e same time h a v i n g minimal impacts on peak hour t r a f f i c . t h e t r o l l e y i s t o p r o v i d e an e f f e c t i v e However, i f transportation service f u n c t i o n i t i s l i k e l y i t w i l l have t o o p e r a t e throughout t h e day, as w e l l a s on weekends. Whether i t would o p e r a t e d u r i n g a l l hours of M e t r o r a i l o p e r a t i o n s (6 AM - 12 PM) w i l l depend upon demand, p a r t i c u l a r l y d u r i n g e v e n i n g hours and on weekends; t h e l e v e l o f d e f i c i t which i s a l l o w e d ; and t h e degree t o which bus operations a r e allowed to replace t r o l l e y operations during l i g h t demand p e r i o d s . During p e r i o d s o f snow and i c e i t i s u n l i k e l y t h a t t h e t r o l l e y would o p e r a t e . I f s a l t and o t h e r a b r a s i v e s can be k e p t from e n t e r i n g t h e e l e c t r i c a l system i t s expected l i f e would be s i g n i f i c a n t l y lengthened. �jhk* 42 HEADWAYS The headways a t w h i c h the t r o l l e y s e r v i c e would o p e r a t e w i l l depend upon t h e f u n c t i o n o f t h e s e r v i c e , demand, t h e c a p a c i t y of i n d i v i d u a l t r o l l e y v e h i c l e s , minimum a l l o w a b l e service t h e number o f c a r s a v a i l a b l e t o t h e system, a l l o w a b l e levels, deficit l e v e l s , and whether t h e system i s designed f o r s i n g l e t r a c k o r double t r a c k o p e r a t i o n s . A t r o l l e y system s i m i l a r t o D e t r o i t ' s can o p e r a t e w i t h headways a s h i g h a s 15 o r 20 minutes because a r e n o t a s concerned w i t h t h e amount o f time spent w a i t i n g users for a v e h i c l e t o a r r i v e a s t h e y a r e i f t h e y u s e t h e system p r i m a r i l y transportation service. transportation service function for However, i f t h e system i s t o p r o v i d e a and i s t o a c t a s an e f f e c t i v e f e e d e r s e r v i c e t o M e t r o r a i l , f r e q u e n t headways w i l l be n e c e s s a r y , p a r t i c u l a r l y d u r i n g peak p e r i o d s . I n t h i s c a s e headways s h o u l d c e r t a i n l y be no more t h a n 10 m i n u t e s , and would p r e f e r a b l y be 5 minutes o r l e s s d u r i n g peak p e r i o d s . NUMBER OF VEHICLES The number o f v e h i c l e s r e q u i r e d on a t r o l l e y system i s dependent upon t h e time r e q u i r e d f o r a v e h i c l e t o make one complete c y c l e of t h e system, i . e . , r e t u r n t o i t s p o i n t o f o r i g i n ; headways d u r i n g t h e peak p e r i o d o f o p e r a t i o n , and s p a r e v e h i c l e r e q u i r e m e n t s . The f o r m u l a f o r v e h i c l e r e q u i r e m e n t s is: _ - T 7 , • -i Round T r i p Running Time _ „ . . , Number o f V e h i c l e s = Peak Headway =les + S p a r e V e h l I f a m i n i m a l system i s b u i l t between the Foggy Bottom S t a t i o n and the i n t e r s e c t i o n o f W i s c o n s i n Avenue and M S t r e e t , t h e t o t a l distance way). t r a v e l e d i n one c y c l e would be 2.0 m i l e s (1.0 m i l e each I f t h e average speed d u r i n g t h e e n t i r e c y c l e (including �jhk* 43 s t o p s and l a y o v e r t i m e ) i s 6.0 mph and the headway i s 10 m i n u t e s , two v e h i c l e s would have t o be i n o p e r a t i o n a t a l l t i m e s . i s s i m i l a r to the e x i s t i n g D e t r o i t operation. I n t h a t system, two v e h i c l e s a r e i n o p e r a t i o n , two a r e k e p t i n r e s e r v e , two more a r e used f o r s p a r e p a r t s . This and I f a system were b u i l t which extended e i t h e r t o Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y or R o s s l y n C i r c l e , f o u r v e h i c l e s would be i n o p e r a t i o n a t any g i v e n time i f 10 headways a r e m a i n t a i n e d . minute I f headways dropped t o f i v e m i n u t e s , the number o f v e h i c l e s i n o p e r a t i o n would double to e i g h t . average speeds c o u l d reduce t h i s number somewhat. Increased E x t e n s i o n of t h e system beyond Georgetown would i n c r e a s e v e h i c l e r e q u i r e m e n t s substantially. FARES One of t h e o f t e n e x p r e s s e d c r i t i c i s m s of e x i s t i n g t r a n s i t s e r v i c e i n Georgetown i s t h a t many t r i p s which a r e l e s s than two m i l e s i n l e n g t h c o s t 50 to 75 c e n t s d u r i n g peak periods. The h i g h f a r e s d i s c o u r a g e t r a n s i t r i d e r s h i p w i t h i n Georgetown and t o the t h r e e nearby M e t r o r a i l s t a t i o n s . Since a t r o l l e y system w i t h i n Georgetown would be d e s i g n e d to a t t r a c t p r i m a r i l y s h o r t i n t r a - G e o r g e t o w n and M e t r o r a i l a c c e s s t r i p s , i t s f a r e s would have t o be k e p t low. Montgomery County's Ride-On system i s an example of a system which w i t h i t s 25-cent f a r e a t t r a c t s many s h o r t t r i p s which would not be made on WMATA buses where a 50-cent f a r e i s charged. Because t r i p s on a l o c a l t r o l l e y system w i t h i n Georgetown would be s h o r t , t h e c o s t o f p r o v i d i n g t h e s e r v i c e per passenger t r i p should be l e s s t h a n t h e c o s t o f p r o v i d i n g s e r v i c e f o r a l o n g e r t r i p , so the f a r e s h o u l d a c c o r d i n g l y be l o w e r . p e r s o n s who I f the t r o l l e y i s used by t r a n s f e r to or from a Metrobus, a p p r o p r i a t e t r a n s f e r p r o c e d u r e s should be adopted, perhaps s i m i l a r to those used on Ride-On buses. �.jhk 44 F a r e c o l l e c t i o n p r o c e d u r e s on most t r o l l e y l i n e s a r e s i m i l a r to those used on most b u s e s , i . e . , p a s s e n g e r s board through t h e f r o n t door and d e p o s i t e x a c t change i n a f a r e box n e x t t o t h e driver. However, b o a r d i n g e x c l u s i v e l y through t h e f r o n t door i n s m a l l v e h i c l e s c o u l d prove t o be d i f f i c u l t . I n San F r a n c i s c o , p a s s e n g e r s a r e a l l o w e d t o board e i t h e r i n t h e f r o n t o r back o f t h e v e h i c l e and pay on an honor system. Such a f a r e c o l l e c t i o n system should r e c e i v e s e r i o u s c o n s i d e r a t i o n i f small v e h i c l e s or a r t i c u l a t e d v e h i c l e s a r e used. MAINTENANCE AND STORAGE F A C I L I T Y A c r i t i c a l element i n t h e o p e r a t i o n o f a t r o l l e y system i n Georgetown would be maintenance and s t o r a g e o f v e h i c l e s . Several o p t i o n s e x i s t f o r t h e l o c a t i o n o f a b u i l d i n g w h i c h c o u l d be used for t h e s e purposes. A former D. C. T r a n s i t r e p a i r shop still s t a n d s j u s t west o f W i s c o n s i n Avenue on t h e s o u t h s i d e o f M S t r e e t . D. C. T r a n s i t ' s C a r B a r n B u i l d i n g i s l o c a t e d on t h e n o r t h s i d e of M S t r e e t , o p p o s i t e t h e Key B r i d g e . o f f e r e d f o r s a l e f o r $5,000,000. T h i s b u i l d i n g has been However, i t would require s u b s t a n t i a l r e n n o v a t i o n t o be brought up t o e x i s t i n g b u i l d i n g code standards. I f e i t h e r o f t h e above f a c i l i t i e s were t o be used f o r maintenance and s t o r a g e of a l i m i t e d number o f t r o l l e y v e h i c l e s , the b u i l d i n g s c o u l d p r o b a b l y be c o n v e r t e d t o m u l t i p l e use. A t h i r d o p t i o n would be t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a new maintenance and storage f a c i l i t y . D e t r o i t b u i l t an a t t r a c t i v e , glass-walled maintenance b u i l d i n g f o r a p p r o x i m a t e l y $200,000 w h i c h s e r v e s i t s f o u r - c a r system. The major o b s t a c l e t o b u i l d i n g a new maintenance and s t o r a g e f a c i l i t y , o t h e r t h a n c o s t , i s f i n d i n g a l o c a t i o n on which t o c o n s t r u c t i t . Land v a l u e s i n Georgetown a r e h i g h and v i r t u a l l y a l l l a n d a l o n g any o f t h e l o c a l r o u t e s proposed f o r t r o l l e y s e r v i c e i s developed o r has p l a n s f o r development. Zoning o r d i n a n c e s and p o t e n t i a l neighborhood impacts a l s o l i m i t t h e number of l o c a t i o n s w h i c h c o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d f o r such a b u i l d i n g . �ihk 3c associates 45 OPERATING AUTHORITY Who would assume a u t h o r i t y f o r o p e r a t i o n of a t r o l l e y system would l a r g e l y depend upon what t y p e of system i s instituted. I f a l i m i t e d system i s b u i l t o p e r a t i n g p r i m a r i l y as a h i s t o r i c a l landmark, the o p e r a t i n g a u t h o r i t y would l i k e l y be d i f f e r e n t than i f an extended system w h i c h forms an i n t e g r a l l i n k i n t h e r e g i o n a l t r a n s i t network is built. Several operating a u t h o r i t y options e x i s t i f a l i m i t e d o r even moderate system Georgetown. One i s b u i l t which does not extend beyond o p e r a t i n g a u t h o r i t y c o u l d be a b r a n c h of the D i s t r i c t of Columbia Government, most probably Transportation. the D.C. Department of Another o p t i o n might be a p r i v a t e , n o n - p r o f i t c o r p o r a t i o n or a q u a s i - p u b l i c agency. a u t h o r i t y would be p u b l i c l y a c c o u n t a b l e E i t h e r of t h e s e t y p e s of and c o u l d be s u b s i d i z e d . A p r i v a t e n o n - p r o f i t c o r p o r a t i o n named t h e Old Georgetown and Foggy Bottom C o r p o r a t i o n has been e s t a b l i s h e d f o r t h e purpose of monitoring the conduct of t h e d e t a i l e d p l a n n i n g and d e s i g n f o r a Georgetown t r o l l e y system. study T h i s c o r p o r a t i o n or a s i m i l a r c o r p o r a t i o n c o u l d a l s o assume r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r o v e r s e e i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n and o p e r a t i o n of the system. Another p o s s i b l e o p t i o n would be f o r the N a t i o n a l Park S e r v i c e to o p e r a t e system, the i n t h e i n t e r e s t of p r e s e r v i n g a h i s t o r i c a l landmark i n the n a t i o n ' s c a p i t a l . Such an o p e r a t i o n would be analogous t o NPS's p r e s e n t o p e r a t i o n of s i g h t s e e i n g barges on the C&O Canal. The N a t i o n a l P a r k S e r v i c e f r e q u e n t l y becomes i n v o l v e d i n t h e p r e s e r v a t i o n of e x i s t i n g h i s t o r i c a l a r t i f a c t s , but u s u a l l y does not make i t a p r a c t i c e t o b r i n g back h i s t o r i c a l o p e r a t i o n s which are p r e s e n t l y defunct. I t i s l i k e l y the N a t i o n a l P a r k S e r v i c e would become the o p e r a t i n g agency • o n l y i f t h e y were g i v e n a mandate to do so by the U. S. Congress. I f a system i s implemented w h i c h p r o v i d e s a h i g h level o f t r a n s i t s e r v i c e and i s an i n t e g r a l p a r t of the r e g i o n a l t r a n s i t system, i t i s probable t h a t WMATA would be the system operating �authority. However, i t i s u n l i k e l y t h a t WMATA would be an appropriate operating primary function a u t h o r i t y f o r a l i m i t e d system whose i s historic. A l i m i t e d system c o u l d be o p e r a t e d w i t h i n an i n f o r m a l management s t r u c t u r e w i t h a s m a l l number o f employees. A larger service-oriented system, p a r t i c u l a r l y one o p e r a t e d by WMATA, would have t o f a l l a f o r m a l management and employee structure. within �jhk* 47 9. SYSTEM IMPACTS There a r e a number o f a d d i t i o n a l impacts o t h e r than t h o s e r e l a t e d t o o p e r a t i o n a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s w h i c h a t r o l l e y system would have. Some of t h e s e impacts a r e d i s c u s s e d i n t h i s c h a p t e r . Cost and f u n d i n g c o n s i d e r a t i o n s a r e d i s c u s s e d i n Chapter 10. HISTORIC PRESERVATION A t r o l l e y system w h i c h i s o p e r a t e d w i t h h i s t o r i c cars through the c e n t e r of Georgetown c o u l d o f f e r a p l e a s a n t reminder of t u r n - o f - t h e - c e n t u r y Georgetown and c o u l d a i d s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n the a t t e m p t s p r e s e n t l y b e i n g made t o p r e s e r v e Georgetown i n i t s historic state. As was s t a t e d i n Chapter 3, much of Georgetown as we know i t today grew up around s t r e e t c a r s and t r o l l e y s the reinstitution and of t h i s s e r v i c e would add t o Georgetown's a t t r a c t i v e n e s s and charm. Because Georgetown i s a historic d i s t r i c t e v e r y e f f o r t s h o u l d be made i n the d e s i g n of a t r o l l e y system t o make i t as h i s t o r i c a l l y c o r r e c t as a p p r o p r i a t e w h i l e s t i l l m a i n t a i n i n g h i g h l e v e l s of accessibility. IMPACTS ON BUSINESS The p o t e n t i a l impacts a t r o l l e y c o u l d have on b u s i n e s s e s i n Georgetown a r e m o s t l y p o s i t i v e . The t r o l l e y would s e r v e t o i n c r e a s e t r a n s i t a c c e s s i b i l i t y t o Georgetown and thereby encourage persons t o t r a v e l t o Georgetown f o r shopping and e n t e r t a i n m e n t . The t r o l l e y w i l l add t o Georgetown's image as a w o r t h w h i l e tion for tourists and t h e r e b y i n c r e a s e commercial t r a d e w i t h i n Georgetown. attrac- I t i s l i k e l y t h a t i f t h e t r o l l e y i s o p e r a t e d on r e s e r v e d r i g h t o f way or i s o p e r a t e d i n t h e c u r b l a n e t h a t p a r k i n g along M S t r e e t and W i s c o n s i n Avenue would have to be T h i s c o u l d meet w i t h r e s i s t a n c e from shop owners who have p a r k i n g spaces l o c a t e d i n f r o n t of t h e i r curtailed. presently s t o r e s , although any l o s s of b u s i n e s s caused by t h e removal of t h e s e spaces would �.jhL 48 l i k e l y be more t h a n o f f s e t by i n c r e a s e d patronage r e s u l t i n g from the i n c r e a s e d number o f p e r s o n s a t t r a c t e d t o Georgetown because of t h e t r o l l e y , A more s e r i o u s problem f o r b u s i n e s s e s would be t h e p o t e n t i a l l o s s o f l o a d i n g zones f o r d e l i v e r y trucks. The d e s i g n o f t h e system must be such t h a t l o a d i n g and u n l o a d i n g of t r u c k s i s s t i l l p o s s i b l e a l o n g M S t r e e t and W i s c o n s i n Avenue. To t h e degree t h a t t h e t r o l l e y would i n c r e a s e t r a f f i c c o n g e s t i o n i n Georgetown, accessibility customers c o u l d be l o s t . by auto would be h u r t and p o t e n t i a l However, t h e l o s s o f customers who would n o t t r a v e l t o Georgetown because o f t h e i n c r e a s e d c o n g e s t i o n s h o u l d be more t h a n o f f s e t by t h e i n c r e a s e d number o f customers a t t r a c t e d because t r o l l e y s e r v i c e e x i s t s i n Georgetown. ACCESSIBILITY As was mentioned i n Chapter 5, t h e p e r c e i v e d l e v e l o f t r a n s i t s e r v i c e i n Georgetown i s lower t h a n might appear when s c h e d u l i n g and r o u t i n g i n f o r m a t i o n i s a n a l y z e d . tend t o form p l a t o o n s . Buses a r e overcrowded and Fares are high f o r r e l a t i v e l y short trips, w a l k i n g d i s t a n c e s t o buses w h i c h a r e d e s t i n e d t o t r a v e l l e r s ' ulti- mate d e s t i n a t i o n s a r e sometimes h i g h , and buses g e t caught i n Georgetown's congestion and s u f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t delays. A local- i z e d t r o l l e y s e r v i c e w i t h i n Georgetown has t h e p o t e n t i a l t o o v e r come a number o f t h e s e problems, and t h e r e b y s i g n i f i c a n t l y transit accessibility w i t h i n Georgetown. improve Such a s e r v i c e would s e r v e Georgetown t r i p s o n l y , so p a s s e n g e r s would not be r i d i n g on t r a n s i t v e h i c l e s w h i c h a r e a l r e a d y f i l l e d w i t h p a s s e n g e r s who boarded b e f o r e t h e v e h i c l e e n t e r e d Georgetown. Because t h e v e h i c l e s would have a r e l a t i v e l y s h o r t r o u t e t h e p l a t o o n i n g problem s h o u l d be m i n i m i z e d . The t r o l l e y c o u l d p r o v i d e a d i r e c t t r a n s i t c o n n e c t i o n from Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y and t h e r e s i d e n t i a l a r e a s s u r r o u n d i n g t h e U n i v e r s i t y t o t h e Foggy Bottom M e t r o r a i l Station. Such a c o n n e c t i o n does n o t p r e s e n t l y e x i s t . The t r o l l e y �j X 1W ft 49 c o u l d be o p e r a t e d w i t h lower f a r e s t h a n WMATA p r e s e n t l y charges for r e l a t i v e l y s h o r t t r i p s made by Georgetowners. o p e r a t i n g on r e s e r v e d r i g h t o f way A trolley could avoid congestion on 1 Georgetown s s t r e e t s and t h e r e b y g a i n a t r a v e l time advantage over mixed t r a f f i c . However, as w i l l be d i s c u s s e d i n the n e x t s e c t i o n t h e s e g a i n s i n t r a n s i t a c c e s s i b i l i t y would l i k e l y d e g r a d a t i o n i n auto a c c e s s i b i l i t y t o and through cause an o v e r a l l Georgetown. TRAFFIC IMPACTS T r a f f i c impacts a r e l i k e l y t o be among the most c r i t i c a l impacts r e s u l t i n g from a t r o l l e y o p e r a t i o n . I t was partially because of t r o l l e y s ' i n t e r f e r e n c e w i t h t r a f f i c t h a t p r e s s u r e was e x e r t e d t o remove them from Washington's s t r e e t s . I f t r o l l e y s are o p e r a t e d i n mixed t r a f f i c t h e y b l o c k t r a f f i c when t h e y stop t o serve passengers. T r o l l e y s often are delayed w h i l e w a i t i n g f o r stopped v e h i c l e s t o move from t h e i r t r a c k s . Due to t h e i r size, t h e y f u r t h e r compound t r a f f i c c o n g e s t i o n d u r i n g t h e s e p e r i o d s o f delay. T r o l l e y t r a c k s i n a t r a f f i c l a n e s i g n i f i c a n t l y reduce l a n e ' s c a p a c i t y because d r i v i n g amidst the t r a c k s i s more the difficult than d r i v i n g i n a r e g u l a r t r a f f i c l a n e . I f two l a n e s o f s i x a r e removed and d e d i c a t e d t o e x c l u s i v e use by t r o l l e y s , c a p a c i t y i s reduced by a t l e a s t a t h i r d . In Georgetown where most s t r e e t s p r e s e n t l y o p e r a t e a t L e v e l o f S e r v i c e D or E, t h i s r e d u c t i o n i n c a p a c i t y c o u l d cause s e v e r e c o n g e s t i o n problems. R e s e r v i n g two l a n e s f o r t r o l l e y s , whether they be c e n t e r o r c u r b l a n e s would p r o b a b l y n e c e s s i t a t e t h e removal of p a r k i n g , p a r t i c u l a r l y a l o n g major a r t e r i a l s t r e e t s such as M S t r e e t and W i s c o n s i n Avenue. T h i s would f u r t h e r reduce Georgetown's a l r e a d y t i g h t parking supply. The degree t o w h i c h trolley o p e r a t i o n s would impact t r a f f i c w i l l depend t o a c e r t a i n e x t e n t upon what o t h e r a c c e s s improvements a r e implemented i n Georgetown which might reduce t r a f f i c volumes or t h o s e s t r e e t s which trolley traverses. the associates �j 1 11\ \ jMociates 50 SAFETY R e i n t r o d u c i n g t r o l l e y s e r v i c e has t h e p o t e n t i a l t o cause s e v e r e s a f e t y problems and g r e a t l y i n c r e a s e t h e number of t r a n s p o r t a t i o n a c c i d e n t s i n Georgetown, p a r t i c u l a r l y i f c e n t e r l a n e t r a c k operations are u t i l i z e d . i s the s a f e t y of boarding passengers Perhaps the most s e v e r e problem and a l i g h t i n g p a s s e n g e r s . must c r o s s t r a f f i c two These l a n e s t o a c c e s s t h e t r o l l e y i n the c e n t e r o f the s t r e e t , t h e r e b y g r e a t l y i n c r e a s i n g t h e p o t e n t i a l for pedestrian/vehicle accidents. A c c i d e n t s between t r o l l e y s and o t h e r v e h i c l e s c o u l d a l s o be a s e r i o u s problem. Turning v e h i c l e s o f t e n attempt t o pass i n f r o n t of t r o l l e y s when they a r e stopped t o s e r v e p a s s e n g e r s , but do not s u c c e s s f u l l y complete t h e i r maneuver b e f o r e the t r o l l e y s t a r t s up a g a i n . Sideswipe a c c i d e n t s a r e a l s o a f r e q u e n t problem when t r o l l e y s o p e r a t e i n mixed t r a f f i c . Autos o p e r a t i n g i n l a n e s w h i c h have t r o l l e y t r a c k s tend t o swerve and cause a c c i d e n t s w i t h o t h e r Many of t h e s e a c c i d e n t s not i n v o l v i n g boarding autos. and a l i g h t i n g pas- sengers can be g r e a t l y reduced i f t r o l l e y s o p e r a t e on r e s e r v e d r i g h t of way w h i c h i s i n a c c e s s i b l e t o o t h e r v e h i c l e s . i n v o l v i n g boarding and a l i g h t i n g p a s s e n g e r s curb l a n e o p e r a t i o n s . Accidents can be m i n i m i z e d w i t h However, as has been p r e v i o u s l y d i s c u s s e d there are s i g n i f i c a n t disadvantages w i t h curb l a n e o p e r a t i o n s . NOISE Perhaps the most s i g n i f i c a n t e n v i r o n m e n t a l impact of o p e r a t i n g a t r o l l e y system i s t h e n o i s e i t g e n e r a t e s . However, t e s t d a t a show t h a t t r o l l e y systems a r e c a p a b l e of o p e r a t i n g a t lower n o i s e l e v e l s than d i e s e l buses and a t n o i s e l e v e l s compara b l e t o or s l i g h t l y l o u d e r t h a n autos o p e r a t i n g on c i t y s t r e e t s . Noise l e v e l s f o r PCC c a r s o p e r a t i n g a t s u r f a c e on a s t r a i g h t t r a c k range between 70 and 80 dBA a t 50 f e e t ( 6 ) . However, t r o l l e y s on an a e r i a l or e l e v a t e d s t r u c t u r e , or t r o l l e y s n e g o t i a t i n g a v e r y t i g h t r a d i u s c u r v e c o u l d be expected t o produce much g r e a t e r n o i s e l e v e l s . �jhk* 51 AIR QUALITY T r o l l e y s produce v i r t u a l l y no d i r e c t a i r p o l l u t i o n and as a r e s u l t c o u l d reduce l o c a l a i r p o l l u t i o n l e v e l s t o t h e degree t h a t t h e y r e p l a c e buses. However, b e n e f i t s c o u l d e a s i l y be more than o f f s e t by t h e i n c r e a s e d t r a f f i c created as a r e s u l t of t r o l l e y operations. congestion Furthermore, air p o l l u t i o n would be c r e a t e d a t t h e p l a n t g e n e r a t i n g t h e e l e c t r i c i t y used by t h e t r o l l e y i f t h e p l a n t i s a f o s s i l f u e l p l a n t . NEIGHBORHOOD IMPACTS I f t r o l l e y o p e r a t i o n s p e n e t r a t e r e s i d e n t i a l neighborhoods, c e r t a i n n e g a t i v e impacts would r e s u l t . Noise l e v e l s would be h i g h e r on s t r e e t s w h i c h p r e s e n t l y do n o t have l a r g e auto o r bus volumes. Speeds c o u l d be d e c r e a s e d f o r v e h i c l e s caught behind t r o l l e y s on narrow r e s i d e n t i a l s t r e e t s . Some p a r k i n g might have t o be removed t o p e r m i t t r o l l e y o p e r a t i o n s . I n s p i t e of t h e s e p o t e n t i a l i m p a c t s , however, support among Georgetown r e s i d e n t s appears t o be g e n e r a l l y i n f a v o r o f renewed t r o l l e y opera t i o n s . A s u r v e y o f Georgetown r e s i d e n t s i n 1975 showed t h a t among those who r e t u r n e d t h e s u r v e y , over 65 p e r c e n t f a v o r e d r e s t o r a t i o n o f t r o l l e y o p e r a t i o n s i n Georgetown, w i t h a l a r g e number o f the r e m a i n i n g r e s p o n d e n t s e x p r e s s i n g no o p i n i o n ( 3 ) . CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS C o n s t r u c t i o n o f t r o l l e y t r a c k s and c o n d u i t i n Georgetown's s t r e e t s would l i k e l y f o r c e t h e c l o s i n g o f t h e t r a f f i c l a n e s i n w h i c h t h e y a r e being p l a c e d w h i l e c o n s t r u c t i o n o c c u r s . I n addi- t i o n i n t e r s e c t i o n s c o u l d be c l o s e d t o c e r t a i n c r o s s i n g movements f o r p e r i o d s o f s e v e r a l weeks a t a t i m e . be h i g h d u r i n g t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n p e r i o d . Noise l e v e l s would a l s o �jhk* 52 ELDERLY AND HANDICAPPED ACCESS P r e s e n t UMTA r e g u l a t i o n s r e q u i r e t h a t a l l new r a i l systems b u i l t w i t h UMTA c a p i t a l a s s s i t a n c e funds be f u l l y a c c e s s i b l e t o the e l d e r l y and handicapped. A t t h i s time i t i s u n c l e a r whether an e x c e p t i o n c o u l d be made i f a h i s t o r i c t r o l l e y o p e r a t i o n were r e i n s t i t u t e d i n Georgetown.. I t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t a s p e c i a l p r o v i s i o n c o u l d be made f o r such a system, p a r t i c u l a r l y Demonstration i f UMTA P r o j e c t funds a r e used r a t h e r t h a n c a p i t a l assis- tance funds. The u s e o f h i s t o r i c a l v e h i c l e s would make f u l l accessibility f o r passengers i n wheelchairs nearly impossible. Proposed UMTA r e g u l a t i o n s would f u r t h e r r e q u i r e t h a t a l l r a i l systems r e c e i v i n g UMTA o p e r a t i n g funds be f u l l y a c c e s s i b l e . I f these r e g u l a t i o n s a r e put i n e f f e c t , Georgetown t r o l l e y o p e r a t i o n i ti s unlikey a h i s t o r i c would be e l i g i b l e f o r such a s s i s t a n c e . �jhk* 53 10. ESTIMATED COSTS AND FUNDING SOURCES The c o n s t r u c t i o n and i n s t a l l a t i o n o f a Georgetown • t r o l l e y as described i n t h i s r e p o r t w i l l i n v o l v e a s i g n i f i c a n t c a p i t a l c o s t and a c o n t i n u i n g a n n u a l o p e r a t i o n and maintenance cost. I n t h i s c h a p t e r , assumptions r e g a r d i n g t h e s e c o s t s a r e o u t l i n e d and a c o s t e s t i m a t e range i s p r o v i d e d . t h i s , an assessment i s made r e g a r d i n g f u n d i n g Following sources f o r both c a p i t a l and o p e r a t i n g c o s t s . CAPITAL COSTS There i s v e r y l i t t l e d a t a a v a i l a b l e on which t o prepare a d e t a i l e d cost estimate. has r e v i e w e d F o r t h e purposes o f t h i s r e p o r t , JHK c o s t e s t i m a t e s f o r o t h e r L R T / t r o l l e y systems which have r e c e n t l y been c o n s t r u c t e d , compared those systems w i t h t h a t e n v i s i o n e d i n Georgetown, and used e n g i n e e r i n g judgment t o t r a n s l a t e those c o s t s t o a l i k e l y Georgetown s i t u a t i o n . D e t r o i t ' s t r o l l e y system probably comparison. was o f f e r s the best d i r e c t That system ( s i n g l e - t r a c k , 0.9 m i l e s i n l e n g t h ) c o n s t r u c t e d f o r a c o s t o f $1.26 m i l l i o n , e x c l u s i v e o f r o l l i n g stock. The D e t r o i t system was c o n s t r u c t e d i n an e x i s t i n g highway median and t h e r e f o r e no r i g h t o f way a c q u i s i t i o n was required. The e s t i m a t e d c o s t i n c l u d e d an overhead power d i s t r i b u t i o n system and a new maintenance facility. As an a d d i t i o n a l example, t h e Edmonton LRT system a l s o provides recent c a p i t a l cost data. T h i s system's c o n s t r u c t i o n c o s t , e x c l u d i n g r o l l i n g s t o c k , was a p p r o x i m a t e l y The s u r f a c e p o r t i o n o f t h e system length) cost approximately $56.2 m i l l i o n . ( d o u b l e - t r a c k , 3.5 m i l e s i n $10.5 m i l l i o n , o r $3.0 m i l l i o n p e r mile. The c o s t t o implement a system i n Georgetown would f a l l between t h e s e two. W i t h a l l new t r a c k and c o n d u i t s t r u c t i o n i t i s estimated t h a t extending likely con- a system between Foggy �jhk, 54 Bottom and the i n t e r s e c t i o n of W i s c o n s i n Avenue and M S t r e e t would i n v o l v e an i n i t i a l c o n s t r u c t i o n c o s t o f $2.2 m i l l i o n i n 19 79 d o l l a r s . vehicles approximately Adding to t h i s , the c o s t of (assuming 4 t r o l l e y s r e s t o r e d a t a c o s t of $50,000 each) and a maintenance f a c i l i t y ( e s t i m a t e d c o s t of $200,000), t h e t o t a l c a p i t a l c o s t of a minimum system would be $2.6 m i l l i o n i n 19 79 d o l l a r s . approximately T h i s c o s t f i g u r e would be reduced t o the degree t h a t e x i s t i n g c o n d u i t and t r a c k s c o u l d be used. Table 4 provides an e s t i m a t e o f the range of c o s t s f o r s e v e r a l of t h e a l t e r n a t i v e s w h i c h have been c o n s i d e r e d report. in this E s t i m a t e s f o r a more e x t e n s i v e r e g i o n a l system have not been developed g i v e n the scope of t h i s p r o j e c t , but l i k e l y range of c o s t s c o u l d be anywhere from $3 to $15 a million per m i l e depending upon c o n s t r u c t i o n methods, a v a i l a b i l i t y r i g h t of way, of and t h e type of r o l l i n g s t o c k used. A major c o s t i s s u e i n Georgetown i s the t y p e of v e h i c l e to be used. Restoring e i t h e r a turn-of-the-century S t . L o u i s c a r or r e s t o r i n g a PCC estimated to c o s t a p p r o x i m a t e l y c a r to o p e r a t i n g $50,000. A new Brill condition i s LRV vehicle of t h e t y p e b e i n g used i n San F r a n c i s c o and Boston would c o s t between $500,000 and $800,000 per v e h i c l e . or The likely restored v e h i c l e s a r e the most s a t i s f a c t o r y a l t e r n a t i v e f o r the system being c o n s i d e r e d i n Georgetown. I f a r e g i o n a l system were b e i n g i n v e s t i g a t e d , t h e newer c a r s would l i k e l y be An u n d e r l y i n g f a c t o r i n any of t h e s e the r a t e o f i n f l a t i o n . required. cost estimates i s G i v e n the l i k e l i h o o d t h a t i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f the t r o l l e y system i s a t l e a s t f o u r , and p r o b a b l y e i g h t y e a r s i n the f u t u r e , the e s t i m a t e d during t h a t period. 1979 costs could conceivably double �jhk»,u 55 T a b l e 4. Georgetown T r o l l e y E s t i m a t e d Alternative Alignment I. Foggy Bottom Metro S t a t i o n to Wisconsin Ave. & M S t r e e t Estimated C a p i t a l Costs(a) Const. - $1,600-3,100 Vehicles 120- 240 Maint. F a c . 100- 250 Total II. III. Costs Const. - $3,700-6,200 Vehicles 320- 600 Maint. F a c . 150- 300 Extend A l t e r n a t i v e " I " on M S t r e e t and a c r o s s Key Bridge to Rosslyn Const. - $4,100-6,600 Vehicles 320- 600 Maint. F a c . 150- 300 Total $200 - 280 $120(c) $1,820-3,590 Extend A l t e r n a t i v e " I " up W i s c o n s i n Ave. and loop r o u t e s on P & 0 S t r e e t s Total Estimated Annual Operating C o s t s (a,b) $400 - 550 $4,170-7,100 $4,570-7,500 (a) A l l c o s t s i n thousands of d o l l a r s . (b) (c) A l l o p e r a t i n g c o s t s assume 10 minute headways. E s t i m a t e d annual o p e r a t i n g c o s t f o r a h i s t o r i c a l t r o l l e y o p e r a t i n g e i g h t hours p e r day. $400 - 550 �jhk 56 OPERATING COSTS The o p e r a t i n g c o s t s f o r a Georgetown t r o l l e y would i n c l u d e maintenance, power s u p p l y and wages p a i d to o p e r a t i n g and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e p e r s o n n e l . The range of c o s t s f o r o t h e r o p e r a t i n g systems ranges between $1.50 and $3.50 per v e h i c l e m i l e . The key v a r i a b l e s i n c l u d e t h e t y p e o f equipment t o be used, t h e number of days and hours of o p e r a t i o n , v e h i c l e headways, l a b o r c o n t r a c t s , e t c . G i v e n t h e l e v e l o f d e t a i l of t h i s s t u d y , a p r e c i s e e s t i m a t e i s d i f f i c u l t to document. However, i t i s e x p e c t e d t h a t w i t h r e l a t i v e l y low o p e r a t i n g speeds, Georgetown's o p e r a t i n g c o s t s would be a t t h e h i g h end o f t h i s s c a l e , i . e . , on t h e o r d e r o f $3.50 per v e h i c l e m i l e . G i v e n t h e g e n e r a l assumptions d e s c r i b e d i n p r e v i o u s c h a p t e r s , t h e a n n u a l o p e r a t i n g c o s t may be assumed t o be a p p r o x i m a t e l y $200,000 to $280,000 per y e a r f o r t h e base system o p e r a t i n g between W i s c o n s i n Avenue and M S t r e e t . T h i s i s based on a system w i t h two v e h i c l e s o p e r a t i n g a t 10 minute headways a t an average speed of s i x m i l e s per hour. I t i s a l s o assumed t h a t t h e system w i l l o p e r a t e 18 hours a day, seven days a week. A range of c o s t s f o r s e v e r a l of the s y s t e m s , i n c l u d i n g a l i m i t e d h i s t o r i c o p e r a t i o n , a r e p r e s e n t e d i n T a b l e 4. System revenue i s a l s o d i f f i c u l t t o p r e d i c t but i t i s u n l i k e l y t h a t any system would do b e t t e r than meet i t s o p e r a t i n g c o s t s , and d e f i c i t s can be e x p e c t e d w i t h i n c r e a s e d s e r v i c e l e v e l s . For t h e base system d e s c r i b e d above t o b r e a k even, average oneway l o a d s w i t h a 25-cent f a r e would have to be 10-14 p a s s e n g e r s . The systems t o Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y o r R o s s l y n would have t o average t w i c e as many p a s s e n g e r s i n o r d e r to break even. �_jhL. 57 FUNDING SOURCES Funding f o r a Georgetown t r o l l e y system c o u l d come from a number of p r i v a t e , q u a s i - p u b l i c and p u b l i c s o u r c e s . l i k e l y t h a t a combination Itis o f s o u r c e s c o u l d be found t o p r o v i d e both c a p i t a l and o p e r a t i n g funds. Some of t h e more l i k e l y sources a r e b r i e f l y d i s c u s s e d below. The Urban Mass T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A d m i n i s t r a t i o n might fund t h e t r o l l e y s e r v i c e as a demonstration UMTA's S e c t i o n 6 f u n d s . project. T h i s would use These moneys c o u l d c o v e r both and o p e r a t i n g c o s t s o f a l o c a l capital system f o r a l i m i t e d p e r i o d of time. Any UMTA f u n d i n g beyond t h a t f o r d e m o n s t r a t i o n purposes would be t r e a t e d i n t h e manner of a normal g r a n t a p p l i c a t i o n f o r e i t h e r S e c t i o n 3 or S e c t i o n 5 funds. Such a p p l i c a t i o n s would have t o compete w i t h o t h e r a p p l i c a t i o n s f o r such funds and would be s u b j e c t t o a l l the c o n d i t i o n s t h a t a r e a t t a c h e d t o such funds i n c l u d i n g employee p r o t e c t i o n ( S e c t i o n 13c) and t h e r e q u i r e ments f o r a c c e s s i b i l i t y by the e l d e r l y and handicapped. I f o p e r a t e d as a h i s t o r i c a l f a c i l i t y , Department o f I n t e r i o r might be a v a i l a b l e . f u n d i n g from t h e Other F e d e r a l and l o c a l a g e n c i e s i n t e r e s t e d i n h i s t o r i c a l p r e s e r v a t i o n might a l s o contribute l i m i t e d funding. The D i s t r i c t o f Columbia Government may of funds. The D.C. be a l o c a l source Department o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n o p e r a t e s the s t r e e t and highway system w i t h i n which the t r o l l e y s e r v i c e would operate. I t might be p o s s i b l e t h a t D.C. DOT could provide maintenance s e r v i c e s once the system i s o p e r a t i o n a l . The Georgetown Merchants A s s o c i a t i o n c o u l d p r o v i d e support of t h e system i n a manner s i m i l a r to merchant support o f p a r k i n g v a l i d a t i o n programs. T h i s would of c o u r s e depend upon the v a l u e t h e merchants p l a c e on t h e t r o l l e y improving t h e i r b u s i n e s s . service I n F o r t Worth, a s i n g l e merchant c u r r e n t l y operates a t r o l l e y system. �58 Management support c o u l d be p r o v i d e d by t h e Old Georgetown and Foggy Bottom C o r p o r a t i o n w h i c h has strongly supported t h e r e i n s t i t u t i o n o f t r o l l e y s e r v i c e i n Georgetown. T h i s group, i n a manner s i m i l a r t o the Reston Community Bus Association involved c o u l d p r o v i d e the d i r e c t i o n and t e c h n i c a l i n t h e day-to-day o p e r a t i o n o f the expertise system. I f t h e system p r o v i d e s a h i g h l e v e l o f s e r v i c e o r extended s e r v i c e and i s o p e r a t e d by WMATA, then the normal WMATA f u n d i n g program would be u t i l i z e d . This includes s t a t e and f e d e r a l s o u r c e s a s w e l l a s u s e r funds from contributions. A s u b s t a n t i a l amount o f money r e q u i r e d costs s h o u l d be g e n e r a t e d by t h e f a r e box. local, t o cover operating However, a s l e v e l o f s e r v i c e v e h i c l e r e q u i r e m e n t s and o p e r a t i n g c o s t s increase, the gap between income from the f a r e box and o p e r a t i n g c o s t s w i l l widen. �jhk* 59 11. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS T h i s r e p o r t has o u t l i n e d a number o f alignment and operat i o n a l a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r implementing a t r o l l e y system i n Georgetown. The a l t e r n a t i v e s have been e v a l u a t e d w i t h i n a framework which considered serve. the primary f u n c t i o n s t h e system i s designed t o F o r purposes o f summarizing t h e k e y f i n d i n g s o f t h i s e v a l u a t i o n a m a t r i x has been p r e p a r e d which d i s p l a y s t h e key o p e r a t i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and impacts o f f o u r d i f f e r e n t f u n c t i o n a l levels of service. This m a t r i x i s presented i n T a b l e 5. I t is d e s i g n e d t o a s s i s t i n v i s u a l l y comparing t h e d i f f e r e n t t y p e s o f service. The e n t r i e s i n t h e m a t r i x have been d i s c u s s e d i n p r e v i o u s chapters. The o p t i o n s which a r e p r e s e n t e d i n t h e m a t r i x show a wide range o f t y p e s o f t r o l l e y s e r v i c e which c o u l d be implemented i n Georgetown. These t y p e s range from a v e r y l i m i t e d s e r v i c e which i s p r i m a r i l y h i s t o r i c a l l y or t o u r i s t o r i e n t e d t o a s e r v i c e which e x t e n d s w e l l beyond Georgetown and a c t s as an i n t e g r a l p a r t o f t h e r e g i o n a l t r a n s i t network. I n between l i e a l t e r n a t i v e s which c o u l d both s e r v e a h i s t o r i c a l p r e s e r v a t i o n f u n c t i o n and p r o v i d e a needed t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s e r v i c e w i t h i n Georgetown. A t r o l l e y s e r v i c e w i t h i n Georgetown c o u l d a i d i n Georgetown's a t t e m p t s t o p r e s e r v e i t s h e r i t a g e w h i l e a t t h e same time a s s i s t i n g t o improve t h e l e v e l o f t r a n s i t s e r v i c e f o r t r i p s w i t h i n Georgetown and t r i p s a c c e s s i n g M e t r o r a i l from Georgetown. Such a s e r v i c e would be s i m i l a r t o San F r a n c i s c o ' s c a b l e c a r s o r New Orlean's s t r e e t c a r s , both o f w h i c h s e r v e important h i s t o r i c a l and t r a n s p o r t a t i o n f u n c t i o n s i n r e s i d e n t i a l and commercial a r e a s bordering and i n t h e main C e n t r a l B u s i n e s s D i s t r i c t . Although such a system would have both p o s i t i v e and n e g a t i v e impacts, JHK & A s s o c i a t e s f e e l s t h a t w i t h a p r o p e r l y planned and designed system t h e p o s i t i v e impacts c o u l d outweigh t h e n e g a t i v e impacts. These arguments, combined w i t h t h e g e n e r a l support f o r t r o l l e y s e r v i c e w i t h i n t h e Georgetown community, l e a d s JHK & A s s o c i a t e s t o conc l u d e t h a t t h e t r o l l e y o p t i o n s h o u l d be i n c l u d e d as one o f t h e �1 T a b l e 5. Service Type and Function Hours of Operation Headways (minutes) C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f P o t e n t i a l Georgetown T r o l l e y Vehicle Type Impact on Street Oper. Capital Costs Operating Costs Service Operating Agency Potential Funding Historic/ Tourist 9:30 AM 4:30 PM 15 Old Minor Low Low (Break Even or modest subsidy) Private N o n - P r o f i t , Quasi-Public Federal Demonstration Funding Local Service (Moderate LOS) 7:00 AM 7:00 I'M 10-15 Old Modest Low Modest (Break Even or modest subsidy) Private N o n - P r o f i t , Quasi-Public or Local Agency ' Federal/ Local Demonstration Funding Local Serv ice (High LOS) 6:00 AM 12:00 PM* 5 15 PK OffPeak PCC Type and Old Substantial Moderate High (Subsidy Required) Local A g e n c y , Regional Agency Require Federal Capital/Operating Funds Local and Extended Service (High LOS) 6:00 AM 12:00 PM* 5 15 PK OffPeak PCC Type and LRV Substantial High High (Subsidy Required) Regional Agency Require Federal Capital/Operating Funds C o n s i s t e n t with Metrorail Operation. cn o �jhk* 61 a l t e r n a t i v e s t o be f u r t h e r a n a l y z e d A l t e r n a t i v e s Study. i n the Georgetown A r e a A c c e s s By i n c l u d i n g the t r o l l e y o p t i o n as one of the major a l t e r - n a t i v e s to be t e s t e d i n the Georgetown Area A c c e s s A l t e r n a t i v e s Study, t h i s o p t i o n w i l l be e v a l u a t e d a l t e r n a t i v e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n access a g a i n s t a number of o t h e r improvements f o r the area. Examples of a l t e r n a t i v e improvements i n c l u d e a l o c a l a r e a bus system, expanded Metrobus s e r v i c e , and vehicle small e x c l u s i v e h i g h occupancy lanes. I f t h e t r o l l e y o p t i o n i s chosen as one n a t i v e s to be t e s t e d i n the c u r r e n t a c c e s s of the major a l t e r - study, i t w i l l be i m p o r t a n t t h a t i t be compared w i t h the o t h e r c a n d i d a t e a l t e r n a t i v e s not o n l y w i t h r e s p e c t to t r a d i t i o n a l t r a n s p o r t a t i o n criteria, evaluation but a l s o w i t h r e s p e c t t o i t s impact upon h i s t o r i c a l p r e s e r v a t i o n w i t h i n the Georgetown a r e a . During t h e c o u r s e of t h i s r e p o r t a number o f ' i s s u e s have been i d e n t i f i e d w h i c h s h o u l d be a d d r e s s e d i n more d e t a i l b e f o r e a f i n a l decision regarding i s made. the r e i n s t i t u t i o n of t r o l l e y s e r v i c e Among t h e s e i s s u e s a r e the following: Function I s the p r i m a r y f u n c t i o n of the system t o be h i s t o r i c preservation, transportation service, or a combination of the two? System L o c a t i o n I s the system to be a l o c a l Georgetown system, or i s i t t o e x t e n d beyond Georgetown and p r o v i d e a major l i n e - h a u l f u n c t i o n ? What i s t o be the a l i g n m e n t of the system? P h y s i c a l System To what degree can e x i s t i n g e l e c t r i c a l c o n d u i t and t r a c k be used f o r t r o l l e y o p e r a t i o n s ? Should t h e t r a c k be l o c a t e d i n the c e n t e r l a n e ( s ) or curb l a n e s ( s ) ? Should the system have s i n g l e or double t r a c k operations? �Should t h e sytem be l o c a t e d i n r e s e r v e d r i g h t of way o r w i l l i t o p e r a t e i n mixed t r a f f i c ? What t y p e of v e h i c l e s h o u l d be used? What t y p e o f power s o u r c e s h o u l d be used? What s h o u l d be t h e s t a t i o n spacing? Where w i l l t h e maintenance f a c i l i t y be l o c a t e d ? System O p e r a t i o n s What would be t h e h o u r s o f o p e r a t i o n ? What would be t h e s y s t e m headways? How many v e h i c l e s would be r e q u i r e d ? What f a r e s would be charged? What would be t h e r o l e s f o r o t h e r t r a n s i t systems i n t h e Georgetown a r e a ? System Impacts How would t h e t r o l l e y a f f e c t b u s i n e s s e s i n Georgetown? How would t h e t r o l l e y a f f e c t to and w i t h i n Georgetown? accessibility How would t h e t r o l l e y a f f e c t t r a f f i c o p e r a t i o n s and p a r k i n g ? How would i t a f f e c t t r a f f i c volumes on Georgetown s t r e e t s ? What s a f e t y problems does a t r o l l e y s y s t e m i n t r o d u c e ? To what degree a r e t h e s e s o l v a b l e ? What a r e t h e neighborhood i m p a c t s ? What would the community a c c e p t a n c e of t h e s e i m p a c t s be? How much n o i s e would t h e system c r e a t e ? How would t h e t r o l l e y a f f e c t a i r q u a l i t y ? What a r e t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n i m p a c t s ? I s t h e s y s t e m t o be a c c e s s i b l e t o t h e e l d e r l y and handicapped? I f s o , how does t h i s a f f e c t d e s i g n and o p e r a t i o n s ? Institutional Who would o p e r a t e t h e system? Who would fund t h e system? Where a r e moneys available? How would f u n d i n g f o r a t r o l l e y a f f e c t funding f o r other t r a n s i t i n the region? �.jhk. associates 63 Patronage and Revenue What r i d e r s h i p would be a t t r a c t e d t o t h e system? How would t h i s demand be d i s t r i b u t e d over time of day, day o f week and season o f t h e y e a r ? How does demand a f f e c t system r e q u i r e m e n t s ? What p o r t i o n s o f t h e demand would be former t r a n s i t r i d e r s , former auto u s e r s , o r induced trips? How much revenue would be c o l l e c t e d from t h e system? Costs How much would a l t e r n a t i v e systems c o s t t o build? What would i t c o s t t o o p e r a t e t h e s e systems a t v a r i o u s l e v e l s of s e r v i c e ? What would system d e f i c i t s ( o r o p e r a t i n g s u r p l u s e s ) be? I f t h e r e were a d e f i c i t , who would pay t h e s u b s i d y ? Based upon t h e i n f o r m a t i o n a v a i l a b l e a t t h i s t i m e , JHK & Associates does n o t f e e l t h a t any o f t h e s e i s s u e s s h o u l d foreclose t r o l l e y s e r v i c e a s a p o s s i b l e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n o p t i o n i n Georgetown. R a t h e r i t appears t h a t many o p t i o n s remain f o r f u r t h e r consideration o f r e i n s t i t u t i n g t r o l l e y s e r v i c e i n Georgetown. flexibility of a v a i l a b l e options, for continuing This combined w i t h t h e s t r e n g t h o f t h e arguments the consideration o f a t r o l l e y o p t i o n a s an a c c e s s improvement a l t e r n a t i v e w i t h i n Georgetown, l e a d s JHK & A s s o c i a t e s t o f u r t h e r recommend t h a t t h e i n - d e p t h Georgetown T r o l l e y Study be performed, and t h a t t h e study be s t r u c t u r e d t o a d d r e s s t h e issues i d e n t i f i e d i n this report. I t i s important t h a t a d e c i s i o n regarding the r e i n s t i t u t i o n o f t r o l l e y s e r v i c e i n Georgetown be made on an informed b a s i s . In o r d e r t h a t t h i s may be done, i t i s n e c e s s a r y t h a t t h e i s s u e s i d e n t i f i e d above be s t u d i e d i n detail. The proposed Georgetown T r o l l e y Study c o u l d do t h i s . Of t h e i s s u e s i d e n t i f i e d above, s e v e r a l a r e l i k e l y t o be more c r i t i c a l than t h e r e s t . These a r e t h e i s s u e s w h i c h may have the g r e a t e s t b e a r i n g on whether t r o l l e y s e r v i c e i s a c t u a l l y r e i n s t i t u t e d i n Georgetown. Among t h e s e i s s u e s a r e t h e f o l l o w i n g : �_jhk^ 64 T r a f f i c impacts Source o f f i n a n c i a l support L o c a t i o n o f v e h i c l e s t o r a g e and maintenance facility Power supply system U s a b i l i t y o f e x i s t i n g t r a c k and c o n d u i t A c c e s s i b i l i t y requirements and handicapped f o r the e l d e r l y I t i s recommended t h a t e f f o r t s d u r i n g t h e i n i t i a l phase o f t h e Georgetown T r o l l e y Study f o c u s upon t h e s e i s s u e s and t h a t a d e c i s i o n t o c o n t i n u e beyond t h i s phase be based upon whether t h e s e i s s u e s can be s u c c e s s f u l l y r e s o l v e d . I t i s f u r t h e r recommended t h a t subsequent work a l s o be s t r u c t u r e d i n phases w i t h an e v a l u a t i o n o f whether t h e s t u d y should c o n t i n u e o c c u r r i n g a t t h e end o f each phase. I n t h i s way i f i n s o l u b l e problems a r e encountered d u r i n g t h e c o u r s e o f t h e s t u d y o r i f i t i s judged d u r i n g t h e c o u r s e o f t h e s t u d y t h a t t h e t r o l l e y o p t i o n s h o u l d no l o n g e r be pursued, c o n t i n u e d funds would n o t be expended on t h e e x a m i n a t i o n o f an o p t i o n which w i l l never be implemented. A committee o f l o c a l o f f i c i a l s and c i t i z e n s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s should a c t as a s t e e r i n g committee f o r t h e s t u d y . Many of t h e members o f t h i s committee may be t h e same persons who a r e p r e s e n t l y members of t h e Georgetown A r e a A c c e s s A l t e r n a t i v e s Study S t e e r i n g Committee. Although t h e f o c u s o f t h e Georgetown T r o l l e y Study should be upon t h e a n a l y s i s o f a l t e r n a t i v e t r o l l e y o p e r a t i o n s , i t i s recommended t h a t o p t i o n s o t h e r than a t r a d i t i o n a l t r o l l e y o p e r a t i o n be c o n s i d e r e d . I t i s noted t h a t o t h e r t r a n s i t o p t i o n s a r e s t i l l under c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n t h e a c c e s s study. The t r o l l e y analysis s h o u l d i n c o r p o r a t e t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e Georgetown A r e a Access Study. F i n d i n g s d u r i n g t h e a n a l y s i s and e v a l u a t i o n s t a g e s o f t h e a c c e s s s t u d y c o u l d l e a d t o changes i n t h e d i r e c t i o n of t h e t r o l l e y C o n v e r s e l y , a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n which study. i s gained d u r i n g t h e t r o l l e y s t u d y should be used t o r e e v a l u a t e whether t h e t r o l l e y o p t i o n ' s r a n k i n g r e l a t i v e t o o t h e r a c c e s s improvements i n Georgetown as determined d u r i n g t h e a c c e s s study should be changed. �J1 65 I t i s l i k e l y that i f a t r o l l e y system i s t o be implemented i n Georgetown i t w i l l be because i t i s j u s t i f i e d f o r a combination of h i s t o r i c a l and t r a n s p o r t a t i o n reasons. For t h i s reason, i t i s recommended t h a t i f the proposed Georgetown T r o l l e y Study i s conducted t h a t i t c o n c e n t r a t e upon a system w h i c h would s e r v e both h i s t o r i c and t r a n s p o r t a t i o n service functions. recommended t h a t a l t h o u g h l i g h t r a i l I ti s further systems which e x t e n d beyond Georgetown be c o n s i d e r e d w i t h i n t h e study as long-range o p t i o n s t h e s t u d y s h o u l d c o n c e n t r a t e upon t h e p l a n n i n g and d e s i g n o f a l o c a l i z e d system w h i c h would s e r v e t r i p s w i t h i n Georgetown and t r i p s between Georgetown and M e t r o r a i l . * associates �66 REFERENCES (1) LeRoy 0. K i n g , J r . 1Q0 Y e a r s of C a p i t a l T r a c t i o n : The S t o r y of S t r e e t c a r s i n the N a t i o n ' s C a p i t a l . D a l l a s , T e x a s : LeRoy 0. K i n g , J r . , 1972. (2) J o s e p h A. Bosco, e t . a l . "A Demonstration of L i g h t R a i l T r a n s p o r t a t i o n i n the N a t i o n ' s C a p i t a l : A C i t i z e n s ' P r o p o s a l " , March 15, 1975. (3) The C i t i z e n s A s s o c i a t i o n of Georgetown Subcommittee on M Street. "Report on the R e s t o r a t i o n of S t r e e t c a r s and C o b b l e s t o n e s . " September 9, 1976. (4) L i g h t R a i l T r a n s i t . TRB S p e c i a l R e p o r t 1 6 1 , R e s e a r c h Board, Washington, D. C , 1975. (5) L i g h t R a i l T r a n s i t : P l a n n i n g and Technology. TRB S p e c i a l Report 182, T r a n s p o r t a t i o n R e s e a r c h Board, Washington, D. 1978. (6) Transportation C, E. S. Diamant, e t . a l . L i g h t R a i l T r a n s i t : A S t a t e of the A r t Review. P r e p a r e d f o r Urban Mass T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , 1976. �APPENDIX LETTER FROM CHARLES H. GRAVES TO ALBERT A. GRANT �,5 z DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION URBAN MASS TRANSPORTATION W A S H I N G T O N . O.C. ADMINISTRATION 20390 Mr. Albert A . G r a n t , -P.E. Director Department of Transportation Planning Washington Council of Governments Suite 201 1225 Connecticut A v e n u e , N.W. Washington, D. C. 20036 Dear A1-: I have your May 24th letter asking certain questions about the proposed Georgetown Trolley study. First, you ask if the grant ratio could be 100 percent. The answer is yes because the study could have national significance. It could demonstrate how to olan an at-crade light rail facility which connects urban activity cancers and which may ooerate witnout a deficit. The grant would be in addition to our regular annual apportionment of technical studies funds to the Washington metropolitan area. S e c o n d , work should not begin on the Trolley Study until the related Georgetown Access Study has produced appropriate early results: for example, until the range of alternatives has been narrowed and at-grade light-rail remains a promising option. It may also be appropriate to examine in detail some other option emerging from the Access study. If you w i s h , we would be willing to participate in the review of any approach to integrating these two efforts. T h i r d , you asked if the steering committee of the Georgetown Access Study should also be used for the Trolley Study. I would rather not express an opinion on this, p o i n t , though we would be willing to participate as. observers. The Trolley Study proposal is unlikely to require a "ma.for transoortation investment" and therefore would not be subject to our formal alternative analysis requirements for new starts and extensions. �Finally, you asksci several questions about procurement of third party contracts. You should follow your normal procedures and ours as described in UMTA's External Operating M a n u a l . This letter merely invites you to apply and establishes the ground rules for processing an application but does n o t , of c o u r s e , imply that we will approve a g r a n t . T h e proposal looks very interesting and I would encourage the Washington Metropolitan Council of Governmen to transmit an application to our Philadelphia office. Sincerely, Charles H . Graves Director of Planning Assistance �D D D [ D n D rj n r- n � 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 The reinstitution of Georgetown trolley service : an overview Subject The topic of the resource Georgetown (Washington, D.C.) Georgetown University (Washington, D.C.) Trolleybuses Trolley buses Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource JHK & Associates Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource District of Columbia. Department of Transportation District Department of Transportation 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 Georgetown Subject The topic of the resource Parking Transportation--Research--United States Georgetown (Washington, D.C.) Georgetown University (Washington, D.C.) 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 Description An account of the resource Historical reports relating to the Georgetown neighborhood in Washington, D.C. Georgetown Parking