WMATA moves to raze the Foundry Branch Bridge

Metro has applied for a permit to raze the streetcar bridge over Foundry Branch. DDOT is interested in using the bridge as part of a trail that would follow some portion of the streetcar ROW between the Palisades and Georgetown, so razing it would force them to consider something else. WMATA has been warning for some time now that the trestle is in bad shape.

No action will be taken anytime soon because the permit application has to go through a review and public comment process.

“DDOT has offered to do a study on keeping the trestle and (assessing) its current condition, and WMATA’s response to that was to file this application for demolition. So, we don’t see that as working in good faith with other parties involved,” Miller said.

District Department of Transportation spokesman Terry Owens said his agency is still planning a feasibility study.

“Also, under the (D.C. Historic) Preservation Act, there is a requirement to show alternatives to demolition, and obviously WMATA has not looked at that, given that DDOT hasn’t had the opportunity to do their study yet,” Miller added.

The Preservation Act applies in this case, according to Miller, because the bridge is a contributing structure within the Glover-Archbold Park Historic Area.

Earlier, DDOT told the State Historic Preservation Office (HPO) that it intends to do a study of the trail including the Foundry Branch Bridge area. They then requested a meeting with HPO, NPS and WMATA to discuss their next steps, but WMATA declined the meeting and instead filed permits to raze the bridge.

 

HPO has since said that the current state of the bridge, based on their criteria, does not justify razing it.  They acknowledge it needs work, but that parts of it are structurally sound and they do not feel that demolishing it is necessary now.  Because DDOT has expressed interest in reusing bridge, there is justification for saving it.

 

HPO will meet with DDOT soon and hold a hearing on the raze permit on May 24th The public may comment on the razing.  

Metro claims that they have been trying to transfer the trestle to any "agency" that will take it, but so far none have stepped forward. I bet they have. Because right now the trestle has negative value. I'd be eager to give it away too. I've asked if they're offering to give away the trestle, the trestle and the land it sits on or the trestle and all of the remaining ROW in DC, but I've gotten no response. It may be that Metro needs to sweeten the pot. They own the ROW from Foxhall road to the old streetcar barn on Canal, along with some additional land between Canal Road and Georgetown U (I think they own everything between the black lines on the picture below and you can see how it widens on the east side of the park). Maybe if they offered all the land in DC, they would have better luck finding a taker. Or maybe they need to kick in some money too. 

Meanwhile, public support for the bridge continues to grow. The Foxhall Community Citizens Association voted in November to support restoration of the bridge for use in a trail. They join the Palisades Citizens Association and the Citizens Association of Georgetown. NPS also supports restoration of the bridge.  

WMATA asked to take over this bridge along with all the other property they got from the Rider's Fund in 1997. They could have argued that they only wanted the money the Rider's Fund had, but they didn't, and so they have a responsibility to be good stewards of this bridge. They've failed in that. And they've failed to sell most (all?) of the land they took over 21 years ago. Perhaps they can find a way liquidate the land, get rid of the bridge and save Metro from having to pay to raze the bridge if they do all three at once. 

Update: WaPo reporting on this includes this:

One plan is for Metro to transfer the property to the District Department of Transportation to be turned into a bike and pedestrian trail. But DDOT won’t commit to taking it until a study is done to determine the feasibility of it being repurposed as a pedestrian connection in the Northwest neighborhood.  That study will kick off in late June, city officials said.

In a statement Tuesday, DDOT said it is “actively working” to get the multiple agencies involved together to develop an interim plan to maintain public safety around the bridge while exploring opportunities to preserve it.

“If it is feasible to rehabilitate the bridge for a transportation purpose, DDOT remains willing to receive the bridge and property interests,” the agency said. “If it is not feasible to preserve for a transportation purpose, DDOT does not have an interest in owning the bridge.”

Brett Young, a Palisades resident who has been lobbying the city to convert the former streetcar bridge into a pedestrian path, said his hope is that in the weeks to come the agencies involved can come to a resolution “where the trestle can be saved and reused as a valuable connection to the Palisades and Georgetown region.”

And somewhat related is the issue of the Arizona Avenue Pedestrian Bridge rehabilitation. (I meant to write about this in this post and forgot.) This bridge is further north on the Trolley ROW and DDOT had a meeting on it this week. It deals with the bridge and 0.65 miles of the existing, natural surface trail. 

The purpose of this project is to rehabilitate or replace the superstructure of the Arizona Avenue pedestrian bridge and ramp, to provide proper clearance over Arizona Avenue, and to provide an all-weather surfaced trail for the full length of the project. In addition, during the preliminary design phase adding a pedestrian access ramp on the south side of Arizona Avenue will be evaluated.

The project will also include drainage, stormwater management facilities, and landscaping along the trail. This bridge and trail project will upgrade the existing facilities to current standards and provide improved access from the neighborhood to the Palisades Recreation Center.

The project is currently in the 30 percent design phase.

Comments

[Brett Young]

The Hearing meeting will be on May 24th. SHPO will publish the time 2 weeks in advance.
I've been pushing for this because cycling on Reservoir RD and Canal RD lack cycle lanes. The old trolley right of way is 30 ft wide...so plenty of room for pedestrians and cyclists.
Its a 5 minute walk from Foxhall RD over the bridge into Georgetown University.
WMATA, is attempting to raze the bridge by "demolition by neglect"
They knew in 2014 that this bridge needs repairs via their own assessment report.
I think they are going to have a tough time getting a permit to demolish a historic landmarked bridge that they neglected to maintain.

[Brett Young]

Article in today's Wash Post on this:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/dr-gridlock/wp/2018/04/11/heres-why-metro-wants-to-get-rid-of-d-c-s-last-trolley-trestle/?utm_term=.19dc3a839f3e

[contrarian]

The ownership between Foxhall Road and Prospect Street is complex. The best way to see it is to go to the DC Atlas at:
http://atlasplus.dcgis.dc.gov/

Set the "Base Map and Imagery" to "DC Property Basemap" and it will show the lot lines and the square and lot numbers.

You can then go to the Real Property Assessment Database at https://www.taxpayerservicecenter.com/RP_Search.jsp?search_type=Assessment to look up ownership by square and lot.

WMATA owns lot 822, square 1321. Georgetown U. owns lot 821, which is the crucial connection to Prospect. There may also exist rights of way across those lots. For example I know (maybe read it here?) that Georgetown has a right of way where their driveway crosses lot 822. It was the subject of litigation with WMATA when they widened the entrance a few years ago.

[washcycle]

The atlas is very useful, but I always worry it's not 100% accurate or that I'm using it wrong. I did write about that court case. WMATA tried to get GU to pay them money when they widened the driveway, but GU refused and won. Merrick Garland ruled in that decision.

I didn't realize (or had forgotten) that GU owned lot 811. That adds a layer of complexity, but it should be solvable. I think the trail is in the school's recently updated campus plan.

[contrarian]

I don't think the atlas is inaccurate -- landowners tend to be diligent about making sure their holdings are correctly recorded -- as it may be incomplete and not convey all of the complexity of overlapping rights of way, etc.

It looks like DC owns nothing between Foxhall and Prospect. WMATA owns the tracts on either side of the bridge up to the GU driveway, GU owns from the driveway to Prospect. And the NPS owns the land under the bridge. So you've got four large institutions that need to be dealt with -- DDOT, WMATA, NPS and GU. Not impossible, but a tall order.

DDOT is going to have to deal with NPS elsewhere if the full trail is ever constructed.

The fact that the publicly-owned land ends at GU's driveway may be an opportunity. There's no reason (other than perhaps historical consistency) to route the trail over the trolley path. GU may prefer to route it along existing campus roads or elsewhere on land that they own.

[Bilsko]

The Real Property GIS Atlas is also a good reminder of the history of property and structures along Canal Road.

I have a great picture from when the Whitehurst was being constructed looking down canal road and all of the properties that show up in the atlas have houses/businesses on them. You can see the remains of some of the structures in the woods today, but you might not otherwise know that there used to be buildings there.