Transit on Thursday: All About Whitey
While there is plenty to discuss in the world of Metrorail and Metrobus, today's installment of Transit on Thursday will focus on the always controversial Whitehurst Freeway. As you may recall, the Whitehurst -- built in the 1940s and named after Herbert Whitehurst -- has been on the chopping block for some time now, eyed by Council-member Jack Evans (D-Ward 2) for demolition. He and his Georgetown constituents have never much liked the elevated roadway, and if it weren't for the democratic process, they may well have gone at it themselves years ago. City officials have claimed that the freeway could well be gone by 2007, but before they call in the wrecking balls, they actually need proposals on where to direct the 42,000 cars that daily use the roadway to bypass Georgetown.
And this is where we are now. Transportation officials spent the summer gathering public input and brainstorming alternatives to the freeway, and on Tuesday launched the first of three open houses where their proposals -- which cost $550,000 to produce -- were presented to the public. DCist attended Tuesday's open house, curiously exploring what engineers and urban designers had decided could feasibly replace the Whitehurst.
It's really an unassuming, understated roadway. Tucked between the ritzy environs of Georgetown and the Potomac River, the Whitehurst Freeway is less than a mile long. It casts a permanent shadow upon K Street below, and serves as the last reminder of Georgetown's industrial roots. But to its opponents, that small amount of elevated asphalt is an eyesore, the reason the waterfront under it remains relatively underdeveloped, a blight in an otherwise tony Northwest neighborhood. To its advocates, it represents the last remaining artery to channel traffic away from the notoriously congested M Street. To the engineers and urban designers charged with contemplating its removal, it presents both an opportunity and a challenge.
The first open house consisted of a conference room, the 19 proposed plans (narrowed down from an initial 92) divided into four different "families," and a crowd of engineers and urban designers who worked on the proposals fielding questions and explaining their rationale. The four families of proposals included those that would leave the freeway intact, those that would remove it and offer additional access to K Street via Canal Road and the Key Bridge, those that would remove it and include additional access to K Street via only Canal Road, and those which would remove it and run a tunnel under a stretch of K Street. Each proposal included an aerial view of the existing freeway with any changes indicated in red or purple, and a each family of proposals featured a large poster in which each proposal was broken down by cost, impact on traffic and neighborhood aesthetics, and other characteristics. In short, the open house was a transit geek's mecca.
Almost everything imaginable was considered, mapped out, run through a regional computer program to test impacts on traffic patterns, and printed on large posters with each contemplated lane change and road addition clearly marked upon the aerial picture of the freeway and the surrounding area. New ramps were added off of the Key Bridge, K Street was widened and extended to meet up with Canal Road, 34th Street was contemplated as a throughway to funnel traffic off the Key Bridge onto K Street, and a tunnel was imagined running under the length of K Street. Every cost was considered, from zero for doing nothing to the $58.6 million base cost of running a tunnel under K Street to Washington Circle. Each proposal was complimented by a to-the-second analysis of how traffic would be affected, day and night. Some showed great promise, others none at all.
While slowly wandering past the different proposals, we couldn't help but think that knocking down the Whitehurst is a workable idea, and may even increase the area's ability to deal with traffic while allowing K Street to emerge from the shadows in which it now hides. An ideal solution would involve a ramp from the Key Bridge down to a newly-extended K Street reaching all the way to Canal Road, thus allowing for those drivers on the bridge and those coming from upper Northwest along Canal Road to ferry down to K Street. Of course, this alternative would result in an unsightly ramp breaking up the Key Bridge's otherwise attractive architecture and the K Street extension bulldozing over part of the Capital Crescent Trail and within spitting distance of an existing boathouse.
But pros, cons, traffic analyses, and technical considerations aside, the basic question still remains -- Why tear down the Whitehurst Freeway? For development along the waterfront? To identify and implement new traffic solutions in the area? To benefit landowners along K Street? Development is possibly the pro-demolition forces' biggest canard. As it is, the best of the waterfront land is currently out from under the freeway, used only for parking and storage. If the city truly wanted to develop that stretch of the waterfront, all they would have to do is try, Whitehurst or no. For the landowners? The buildings along K Street aren't much to write home about as it is, so tearing down the freeway won't suddenly turn frogs into princesses. Traffic? Well, that just might be the ticket.
The people who envisioned the alternatives to the Whitehurst Freeway seemed legitimately convinced that, spare the development and real estate arguments, traffic in the area could be improved by knocking the Whitehurst Freeway down and creatively working with K Street, Canal Road, and the Key Bridge. While opponents to the idea cannot fathom how 42,000 extra cars a day could fit into and get through Georgetown, the engineers and urban designers that presented their proposals had run tests to prove that it is in fact possible. More than that, it may actually improve traffic in the area.
In the end, though, someone will emerge unhappy with the fate of the Whitehurst. No project of this magnitude is expected to proceed forward without opposition, but it is encouraging that city officials are approaching opponents with solid proposals and scientific analyses of what is and what could be. And as any of the many changes that city's undergo as they change and expand, years down the line people may look upon the area where the Whitehurst once stood (or continues to stand) and never imagine that it could be otherwise.
>>DCist on the Whitehurst Freeway
