Hearing on Foundry Branch Trestle raze permit is next week

Next Friday, the Mayor's Agent will have a hearing on WMATA's desire for a raze permit for the Foundry Branch Trestle. The Foundry Branch Trestle is the last remaining streetcar trestle in Washington, DC. Advocates support restoring it for bike/ped use. 

Back in May, the HPRB rejected WMATA's application, but it can be overruled by the Mayor's agent. At the time the HPRB staff report said that DDOT "agreed to accept the trestle and pay for its adaptive use as a pedestrian/bicycle trail if its forthcoming study
determines it is feasible to do so" and that "The DDOT study...represents the most credible prospect for restoration of the trestle." They further note that 

Demolition has been deemed acceptable by the Mayor’s Agent when determined necessary to construct a project of “special merit.” The few examples where demolition of historic properties was found to be consistent with the Act usually involve properties so compromised that they no longer retain sufficient integrity to convey their historic significance.

But they add that this is not applicable here, because the trestle is not in as bad a condition as reported.

WMATA’s proposal to demolish the trestle is partially based upon a late-2017 inspection which identified three of the twenty-two vertical supports as “severely compromised.” However, this inspection also suggests that the remaining nineteen supports could be repaired while the three most deteriorated elements could potentially be replaced in-kind. Similar approaches, possibly including augmentation with additional structural supports, could also be applied to the main truss and all other deteriorated elements.

And finally, they determined that a raze permit was premature as

Temporary stabilization, or at least postponement of the raze application until DDOT completes its study could ultimately result in a pedestrian/bike trail that provides both historic and transportation benefits.

Which seems very reasonable. And local groups support waiting for the study as well. The Foxhall Community Citizens Association wrote at the time

It is our position that the Foundry Branch Trolley Trestle could be restored and adapted as a bike/walking trail providing our neighborhood with a recreational link to Georgetown and eventually to a river trail. Its restoration and adaptive reuse would create a vital multi-use trail for pedestrians, cyclists, dog-walkers as well as people in wheelchairs and parents with strollers. The benefits of rebuilding the trestle would not only be an homage to our past, but also a bridge to our future, positively impacting the health and fitness of our residents and our quality of life.

Regardless, WMATA is still pushing for the raze permit. In their comments for next week's meeting they make several arguments. They argue that they're a transit agency, given this land by the courts for the purpose of funding buses; but this trestle has no value and in fact would cost millions to restore and since no one will take it off their hands, the best interest of WMATA and the public it serves is to knock it down. Where I would argue with them is that it has no value and would cost millions to restore. We don't know that, but will when the feasibility study is complete. But as for waiting for the study they state that

Denying WMATA’s permit to demolish the trestle in the speculative hope that DDOT someday may find a productive use for and accept title to the trestle properties would impose an unreasonable economic hardship on WMATA.

That's misstating it, I think. Denying it to allow DDOT to complete the feasibility study and then giving them a reasonable amount of time to act on that is what trail advocates are asking for. 

Interestingly, WMATA argues that DDOT has given mixed messages on the transfer

Because WMATA’s efforts to give away the trestle properties have been unsuccessful, WMATA is open to paying DDOT, or another party, to accept ownership of them.

In 2017, DDOT suggested that it could fund temporary stabilization or restoration of the trestle despite Jim Sebastian, DDOT’s Associate Director of the Division of Planning and Sustainability, previously explaining that, in DDOT’s opinion, the trestle was not worth restoring. Then, DDOT Chief Project Delivery Officer Sam Zimbabwe proposed an immediate transfer of the trestle properties to DDOT along with an unquantified financial contribution from WMATA....WMATA Managing Director of the Office of Real Estate Nina Albert offered DDOT a contribution from WMATA of approximately $100,000 for DDOT to acquire title to the trestle properties. However, DDOT did not further engage on either proposal despite WMATA follow-up 

In late 2017, WMATA—through WMATA Board of Directors Chair and D.C. Councilmember Jack Evans—offered DDOT a quitclaim deed for the trestle properties in exchange for a mere $10, but DDOT refused.54 Instead, DDOT indicated that it intended to complete a feasibility study to determine whether DDOT could utilize the trestle for a valid transportation purpose. In refusing to accept ownership of the trestle properties prior to completing the study, Mr. Zimbabwe explained, “[DDOT] doesn’t want a bridge that needs millions of dollars of work and can’t be a transportation asset. In that case, some other district agency can preserve it or [WMATA] can tear it down/mothball it.”

That makes sense. Why take on the liability? [Interestingly, I was trying to get WMATA to give this land and trestle to DC about a decade ago, when DDOT seemed willing, but WMATA thought they could sell it to Georgetown. Missed opportunities...] Still, a deal now seems possible.

The HPO circulated a draft Programmatic Agreement (“PA”) among NPS, the Federal Highway Administration, DDOT, and WMATA contemplating eventual transfer of the trestle properties to DDOT with a payment from WMATA equal to WMATA’s avoided costs of trestle demolition. On October 1, 2018, WMATA circulated a revised draft PA that would include immediate transfer of the trestle to DDOT accompanied by a potentially higher payment to DDOT toward trestle stabilization, deconstruction, rehabilitation, removal of deconstructed pieces, and/or interpretive signage. DDOT has not responded to either proposal in the many ensuing months.

WMATA has also repeatedly offered to quitclaim the trestle properties to NPS although no formal negotiations have taken place. NPS has not indicated any interest in acquiring the trestle properties while the trestle remains. Similarly, D.C. Water declined to acquire the trestle properties in May 2018.

WMATA also criticizes DDOT for dragging their feet on the feasibility study - which is fair, and not unusual.

Months later, DDOT had not even begun such a study. At an April 11, 2018, meeting between WMATA, DDOT, HPO, and NPS, DDOT stated that it might acquire the trestle properties if a feasibility study indicates that the trestle can be restored and used as part of a future hiker-biker trail that DDOT has not yet planned. DDOT indicated that its study would begin in June 2018 and would take approximately 10 months to complete. DDOT later revised the study’s start date to July 2018. In fact, DDOT did not begin the feasibility study until the week of October 22, 2018. DDOT notified WMATA that the feasibility study likely would be completed in August 2019.

I get that we can't wait forever on this, but perhaps one more year, until the end of 2019 would be prudent.

A trail on the right-of-way makes sense, and the community keeps coming back to the idea of one since at least the 1970's. In 1976, a trail on the right-of-way from Georgetown to Maryland was included on the District's "Long-term Bicycle Transportation Plan".[1] And in 1981, but for an unorthodox and close vote at the Palisades Citizens Association, DC would have built a trail. The idea has found its way into many plans - including MoveDC - since then. And it keeps coming up, because people keep seeing that it makes sense. 

[1] Hodge, Paul. "New Network of Bike Trails May Not Find Easy Rolling" The Washington Post. April 22, 1976. Page DC1. 

Comments

[Brett Young]

Thanks for writing this Dave.
I will be a the Mayor's Agent meeting to testify next week.
Looking forward to it.

Crickey will be joining us soon to tell us its a waste of money to keep the bridge, but let me respond to that statement.

There is zero bike lanes in the Palisades and there are very few in all of Georgetown.

A 5 mile bike trail from the Palsiades rec center to the Georgetown U campus would be great for our communities.
This trail already has 3 schools on the trail.

A bike lane on Macarthur Blvd is not in DDOT plans because paking would need to be removed and there is not enough room on the side streets to accommodate those spaces.
There will never be bike lanes on Canal RD.
And on Reservoir RD, the French Embassy, Georgetown U, and residents all want the onstreet parking and parking meters. So no bike lane on Reservoir RD.
That leaves the bridge as the only East-West connection in Between the two neighborhoods.
The path is 30 ft wide and use to hold 2 concurrent trolleys.
Yes this bridge is very important, Crickey!

[contrarian]

Depends what you mean by "on the trail" but I count the following schools within a couple blocks of the trail:
GDS
Lab School (2 campuses)
River School
Our Lady of Victory
St. Patrick's
Key Elementary

Plus the Mt. Vernon campus of GWU.

[Crickey]

Sounds like you don't even need me, you had the argument all by yourself and declared yourself the winner. And yet, I find myself strangely unconvinced.

[Crickey]

Note that GDS' lower school will be leaving that location at some point for its Friendship Heights/Tenleytown expanded campus.

[Brett Young]

Crickey
1) DDOT agrees with me. 5 years ago I talked with Jim Sebastian about MacArthur Blvd.
BAC rode with me in the Palsiades and agreed with me too.
Too many cars and not enough spaces on the side streets to compensate.

2) As for GDS, they are leaving and have been sold.....to another school.
I talked to their principal over the phone but they have yet to announce who the new school/buyer is.
Essential I am assuming its another private school.
My regret is not pushing for DC to buy the GDS campus.

[Crickey]

Sounds to me like HPRB is pinning a lot of hopes on a vague set of ifs from DDOT. No other agency wants it. Even if the demolition is stayed, what are the odds DDOT will find the appetite for a multi million dollar rehabilitation of the trestle, followed by more millions for the trail? Because mere stabilization is pointless. As the piece notes, "In refusing to accept ownership of the trestle properties prior to completing the study, Mr. Zimbabwe explained, “[DDOT] doesn’t want a bridge that needs millions of dollars of work and can’t be a transportation asset. In that case, some other district agency can preserve it or [WMATA] can tear it down/mothball it."

[washcycle]

what are the odds DDOT will find the appetite for a multi million dollar rehabilitation of the trestle, followed by more millions for the trail?

I don't know, but they have some appetite for it, or else they would not have put it in MoveDC and other forecasting and planning; nor would they be doing a feasibility study or setting aside money for it.

Can we all just wait until the feasibility study is done before we settle the debate?

[Crickey]

Because it's forcing the closure of trails that people actually could be using.

https://currentnewspapers.com/hazardous-abandoned-bridge-still-forcing-trail-closure-in-glover-archbold-park/

[Brett Young]

Crickey-
1) DDOT is currently doing a study which should finish by mid year. The study (and due diligence) will determine if the 5 mile trail is feasible)
2) The trail is closed because WMATA chose not to put ANY money towards the bridge while it was in its possession.
Even with their argument that they don't want to put any of their own money into the bridge, they somehow are very willing to come up with 500k to demolish the bridge.
Also, because the bridge is a historic landmark, over the 20 years WMATA owned the bridge, they could have applied for Historic landmark funding. They could have worked with SHPO on how to maintain the bridge without using WMATA funds. Instead they let all 3 bridges that they own decay.
SHPO conclusion WMATA wants to demolish due to demolition by neglect.
If they let everyone who owned a historic landmark do this, then everyone who owned a landmark building would never put money into it and then demolish the building.
So WMATA was in violation of the covenants that they took on when they took over a historic landmark bridge.

[washcycle]

The trail is closed, which is WMATA's fault. And I think when this is all done, and land that is not used for the trail should be handed over to NPS as a way of making trail users whole. But maybe they would owe NPS more. They should pursue a lawsuit.

Tearing down possibly historic buildings is not a way to resolve issues like this.

[Crickey]

Letting nature reclaim Man's works is poetic justice.

[Brett Young]

Crickey-
There is no other way to get cycle lanes between the Palisades and Georgetown.
No space on Canal Rd.
Reservoir RD has the embassy and the University and residents who park their cars on street.
The bridge is the last chance for an East-West connection.
For someone who is very knowledge about other cycling projects in the city, I wish I could meet with you in the Palisades and show you why I'm doing this.