Since January, 2003
            
 (a random before-and-after moment)
August 28, 2004
June 16, 2018
Half at I, Looking East (see more)

Earlier this week the Federal Highway Administration and DDOT gave notice that the in-process National Environmental Policy Act study of CSX's Virginia Avenue Tunnel project will be switching mid-stream from an Environmental Assessment to a more detailed Environmental Impact Statement study.
Since the outcome of an EA is often the instigation of an EIS, this is probably serving mainly to speed up the process and get started on an EIS that most likely would have been needed anyway. The NEPA web site mentions that "[i]f a federal agency anticipates that an undertaking may significantly impact the environment, or if a project is environmentally controversial, a federal agency may choose to prepare an EIS without having to first prepare an EA," both of which would certainly seem to be ways this project could be described.
If you want to see how extensive an EIS can be, check out the ones completed for the 11th Street Bridges reconstruction and the planned South Capitol Street corridor improvements.
The information already gathered and feedback already garnered during the EA process will be incorporated into the EIS. CSX representatives tell me that they expect the switch to add about six months to the environmental review process, and the project's web site now has a Spring 2013 date listed for the Final EIS/record of decision. CSX has always wanted the project to be done in 2015, to coincide with the opening of the expanded Panama Canal, but that timeline is starting to look a bit dicey given that construction has been expected to take 2-3 years.
The public meeting to unveil the chosen "alternative" designs that the EIS is studying is currently being planned. You can read my write-up from the last meeting to see more about the initial group of concept designs, which ranged from expanding the tunnel to building a separate parallel tunnel to leaving the tunnel untouched to closing it and having CSX reroute all their traffic rerouting the double-stack traffic and through traffic out of the city (UPDATED to fix my mistake--there is no proposal that would close the tunnel altogether). (It probably isn't hard to guess which alternatives are preferred by the Capitol Quarter Homeowners Association, with CQ's homes on Virginia Avenue standing mere feet away from any construction.) UPDATE: It's been requested that I mention that, while the CQ HoA letter above lists a group of possible signatories, at least three of them (ANC 6B, Barracks Row Main Street, and the Committee of 100) have all already voted against co-signing the letter.
For those blissfully unaware of this project (I wish!), CSX is needing to expand the 105-year-old tunnel that runs beneath Virginia Avenue between 2nd and 12th streets, SE so that a second track can be added and double-height cars can be accommodated. With initial plans calling for the extended closure of Virginia Avenue and a temporary track in an open trench to run trains through during construction, residents on both sides of the freeway have been greatly concerned about how the work will be designed and carried out, which then spurred DDOT to request a formal environmental review (despite this being a project being carried out by a private entity on a right-of-way that they own some of).
My pile of posts over the past few years on the subject may also be enlightening, or may not.
UPDATE: This flyer just posted on the VirginiaAvenueTunnel.com web site says that the next public meeting, announcing which concepts will be looked at in the EIS, is scheduled for May 21 from 6 to 8 pm at Nationals Park.
Comments (14)
   
 
 More About CSX/Virginia Ave. Tunnel

JDLand.com Home

Comments

Alex B. says: (5/3/12 9:25 AM)
I completely understand the reasoning of the CQ neighbors (to a degree - construction impact, sure; but operational impact of increased train traffic in a tunnel? I don't buy it), but they do realize they're favoring the $4+ billion alternative, right?


MJM says: (5/3/12 9:38 AM)
Let's not forget the tracks have been there for 100+ years and a super majority of CQ residents knew CSX was planning construction but they signed on the ......line


Shogungts says: (5/3/12 12:15 PM)
Forgive me for my ignorance of railways and if this was mentioned elsewhere, but what does DC get out of this? Do they get some type of usage fee/toll for every train that comes through? What is the incentive for DC to allow CSX to build out the tunnel? Higher tolls, just keeping them from leaving DC altogether?


Gladiator says: (5/3/12 8:36 PM)
Yes, there does not appear to be ANYTHING for DC in this deal. While DC appears to have driven a hard bargain (perhaps too hard) with Whole Foods, e.g., there was at least some clear benefit to the city from having a Whole Foods in Near SE. But while everyone would have to acknowledge that there will be many detrimental impacts to DC of a CSX tunnel project -- the question is only just how MASSIVE will be the scale of the damage to DC economically, environmentally, etc. -- the only gains discussed for the District are promises from CSX of how they will plant a few trees or something in the aftermath of the damage left in the wake of this project.

While the alternatives may involve entail significant expense to CSX, its not clear why DC should care, any more than CSX cares about the impact their proposal would have on the District. This is really a question of how much market share of the NE corridor freight CSX will get, relative to its competitors. Why should DC care if CSX competitors are advantaged because CSX is unable to avail itself of the lowest cost/highest damage alternative for moving its freight through the region?


Gladiator says: (5/3/12 8:43 PM)
Interesting that even though EYA has stated that they did not know about the CSX project until the end of 2010, MJM thinks that a "supermajority" of CQ residents knew CSX was planning construction when they bought their homes.......So they knew something that the people selling them the houses did not know (and certainly did not disclose, as they more recently began to do to potential buyers)??


JD says: (5/3/12 8:50 PM)
No, it was late summer 2009: link While some of the Virginia Avenue houses were still being sold. I know because I talked with some people who were wanting to know more about the tunnel project before buying.


JD says: (5/3/12 8:55 PM)
And, if we go to the photo archive, we can see it was February/March 2010 when the Virginia Avenue homes started getting built: link


BillP says: (5/4/12 9:10 AM)
As part of the NEPA process, CSX posed all of those as legitimate alternatives. Therefore, it is my understanding that the CQ HOA chose to support all of the non-invasive alternatives as its initial position. By moving from the EA to the EIS and as part of the NEPA process, this list of alternatives will be narrowed and modified and so the CQ HOA will obviously modify its position in accordance with the new alternatives.

While I would not presume to speak for the HOA board or all CQ homeowners, many of us feel that some type of tunnel construction is inevitable and we would simply like to mitigate these circumstances so that the worst case but very real scenario does not come to fruition - freight trains running through a completely open tunnel, only a few feet from some homes, that separates much of the near SE neighborhood from points north for three years or more.


Bob says: (5/4/12 9:36 AM)
CQ residents have told me that CSX told them at the first community meeting about the project that CSX didn't even know there were houses there. This would be a great issue for Tommy Wells to oppose. He could re-do Marion Barry's opposition to freeways running through the middle of DC in the '60s. Instead of "No White man's highways through Black man's bedrooms", Tommy could do "No corporate train tracks through gentrifriers front yards." Not as catchy, but it could work.


Alex B. says: (5/4/12 10:06 AM)
@Shogungts:

<i>What is the incentive for DC to allow CSX to build out the tunnel? Higher tolls, just keeping them from leaving DC altogether?</i>

There is no incentive. DC has little leverage. While the right of way is public, CSX (as most railroads do) have very strong legal rights of access via perpetual easements. This makes sense, as if you were running a railroad, it wouldn't be possible to operate if suddenly someone decided they wanted to remove your tracks.

Railroad rights of way vary, either from easements to outright ownership. I'm not sure exactly where this falls, but what is known is that:

a) CSX has the right to operate trains there,
b) they have the right to improve that right-of-way,
c) they are offering to do it with their own money.

Those three things means that, practically, DC has little leverage at all. They can't force CSX to go elsewhere. Perhaps they could provide an incentive to do so, but as I noted, the alternative is a $4+ billion bypass of the DC area. I think CSX's early cost estimates to re-do this tunnel were on the order of $150 million. That's quite a gap to make up.

Furthermore, this is a project of national importance. This and the rail bottlenecks in Baltimore are key elements of the entire east coast freight rail network. The required geometry of railcars, combined with the geography of the east coast and the hills of the fall line, plus the water bodies of the Chesapeake Watershed mean that there are only a few viable options for where tracks can go. Building a bypass isn't like directing trucks to just take another highway.

GGW posted on this a few years back:
link


Andrew in DC says: (5/4/12 12:55 PM)
@Alex B.
"a) CSX has the right to operate trains there,
b) they have the right to improve that right-of-way,
c) they are offering to do it with their own money. "

The greatest issue I have is with point "b". While they do have the right to improve their existing tunnel, the law which provided the B&O the right to dig the tunnel in the first place did not allow for trench work beyond the 5th year past the passage of the law. Nor were temporary tracks permitted at all, for that matter. CSX's proposed plans are in violation of each of these.

Further, CSX's "preferred" alternative requests a significant expansion of the ROW than B&O utilized. Since B&O did not use it, and was, by law, restricted from digging it back up to use it, a case could clearly be made that they forfeited the "full" ROW established in the law, and therefore CSX only inherits the ROW currently in use.

So please, by all means, CSX has the right to improve on their ROW... so long as they abide by the restrictions set out for them.


Gladiator says: (5/5/12 10:01 AM)
JD -

Yes, it was indeed the end of 2009 (not 2010) when EYA claims they were first made aware of the project. But that was still after the fact (and yes, there were a couple of stray news reports before then, but EYA itself is on the record in writing saying they only became aware of the project near the very end of 2009).

What CSX or EYA is not going to tell you is that most Virginia Ave home-owners had to put down huge deposits well before that time. And of course many other CQ homes as well. What you seem to be ignoring is that the VA Ave homeowners were required to put down very large deposits well in advance of when their homes were actually built. THey then faced a Hobson's choice of losing tens of thousands of dollars by walking away, or having a tunnel dug through their front yard.


MJM says: (5/6/12 2:34 PM)
8 May 2008 - CSX released a vague press release that something was going to happen here in DC in the near future - so I have a feeling EYA is being less than truthful about when they really knew what was happening. Its kinda like moving next to an airport and complaining about the noise or future expansion?

link


Alex B. says: (5/8/12 9:21 AM)
Andrew,

There have been decades of legal precedent concerning rail rights of way - I don't think DC would be breaking any new ground by opposing this project.

I don't know how wide their ROW is, but I doubt it's limited to the tunnel alone. Rail ROWs are often far wider than just the tracks themselves.

Those restrictions are all well and good, but again: this is a project of national importance. I don't think the concerns of neighbors give them a right to veto this project. Their concerns should be addressed, of course.

Add a Comment:

Comments are closed for this post.

JDLand Comments RSS Feed


 More News


See All Current News Items | Full Blog Archive

 

JDLand.com's Official Unofficial Guide, Updated for 2018!
 Recent Posts

RMP on Ramen Coming: The Japanese Hot dogs left a lot to be desired. I trust the actual ramen will be...
dude on Ramen Coming: Hah! I’ll pass on the ramen, but I can definitely never have too many taco opti...
CJBabyDaddy on Ramen Coming: Went into Hatoba yesterday for my inaugural sampling. My inquiry of the waiter/b...
jdc on Let the All-Starring: Wait, JD wasn't invited to throw out the first pitch?
JD on Let the All-Starring: I have not been anointed by the Lady of the Lake, I guess.
walt on Let the All-Starring: Excellent article JD. Although why do they say "unofficial"? You're ...
  
Get JDLand Updates In Your Inbox!



City Government Data for Near Southeast Records added or updated recently displayed here; click the "archive" links to see additional detail and older records. All data from DC Government databases and RSS feeds. JDLand takes no responsibility for errors, omissions, etc. (read CapStat disclaimer). Data is retrieved daily.

Recent Crime Incidents Archive  
200 B/O I ST SE   ROBBERY  07/17/18
1200 B/O 1ST ST SE   THEFT
Theft First Degree (all Other Larceny)
 07/15/18
1400 B/O SOUTH CAPITOL ST   THEFT
Theft 2nd Degree (all Other Larceny)
 07/15/18
1200 B/O 4TH ST SE   ASSAULT WITH A DANGEROUS WEAPON  07/14/18
400 B/O M ST SE   THEFT
Theft 2nd Degree (all Other Larceny)
 07/13/18
900 B/O POTOMAC AVE SE   THEFT
Theft 2nd Degree (all Other Larceny)
 07/13/18
400 B/O M ST SE   THEFT
Theft 2nd Degree (all Other Larceny)
 07/11/18
400 B/O M ST SE   THEFT
Theft 2nd Degree (all Other Larceny)
 07/11/18
UNIT B/O L ST SE   THEFT
Theft 2nd Degree (all Other Larceny)
 07/10/18
100 B/O I ST SE   THEFT
Theft 2nd Degree (all Other Larceny)
 07/09/18
700 B/O L ST SE   THEFT FROM AUTO
Theft (theft From Motor Vehicle)
 07/06/18
900 B/O NEW JERSEY AVE SE   THEFT
Theft 2nd Degree (all Other Larceny)
 07/04/18
400 B/O M ST SE   THEFT
Theft 2nd Degree (all Other Larceny)
 07/02/18
400 B/O M ST SE   THEFT
Shoplifting
 07/02/18
200 B/O L ST SE   THEFT
Theft 2nd Degree (all Other Larceny)
 06/28/18
400 B/O M ST SE   THEFT
Theft 2nd Degree (all Other Larceny)
 06/28/18
400 B/O M ST SE   THEFT
Theft 2nd Degree (theft From Building)
 06/28/18
400 B/O M ST SE   THEFT
Theft 2nd Degree (all Other Larceny)
 06/28/18
900 B/O NEW JERSEY AVE SE   THEFT
Theft 2nd Degree (all Other Larceny)
 06/27/18
1000 B/O 1ST ST SE   MOTOR VEHICLE THEFT
Theft First Degree (Stolen Auto)
 06/25/18
1100 B/O NEW JERSEY AVE SE   THEFT FROM AUTO
Theft (theft From Motor Vehicle)
 06/24/18

Recent Issued Building Permits Archive  
1346 4TH ST SE   
07/02/18 
PC 1346 LLC / INSPECTOR STEVENS
B1811126 / CONSTRUCTION
For elevator review ONLY in reference to permit # B 1711594
   
07/11/18 
FC1346 LLC / ASHLY SALISBURY; KONE
EN1802014 / SHOP DRAWING
Installation of 4 KONE Mono500 Elevators
2 I ST SE   
07/02/18 
FORIDA ROCK PROPERTIES INC / DANIEL P. THOMPSON
P1807204 / SUPPLEMENTAL
   
07/03/18 
MCDONALDS CORPORATION / BOB BIROONAK; X
SG1800364 / CONSTRUCTION
one illuminated ID sign
417 I ST SE   
06/28/18 
DALE E OWEN / TIMOTHY P. CROPP 703-698-8855
M1802925 / SUPPLEMENTAL
202 M ST SE   
06/22/18 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA / DAVID BERUBE
TN1800146 / CONSTRUCTION
40'x60' and 16'x16' tent for a private event not open to public. Event to take place during daylight hours between 1130 and 1630.
300 M ST SE   
07/02/18 
FEDERAL CENTER LP / null
E1808201 / SUPPLEMENTAL
400 M ST SE   
07/09/18 
null / DONNA G GRAHAM
AH1801113 / CONSTRUCTION
WR #3476633-VAETH / BRUNO-PEPCO CREWS WORKING THE 300-400 BLK OF M ST SE SPLICING CABLES - FROM TUESDAY NIGHT (7 / 10 / 18) THROUGH SATURDAY NIGJT (7 / 14 / 18) FROM 9PM TIL 9AM
861 NEW JERSEY AVE SE   
06/28/18 
CONSOLIDATED RAIL CORPORATION / NA CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC.
AH1801055 / CONSTRUCTION
Work in public ROW within the Virginia Avenue Tunnel Reconstruction Project LOD for utility, demolition, and concrete structure construction activities. TO EXCLUDE LEGAL HOLIDAYS***
   
07/12/18 
CONSOLIDATED RAIL CORPORATION / RPS INC
SB1800373 / CONSTRUCTION
PER WORK PLAN, ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIGATION, DATED JUNE 25, 2018 (SEE ATTACHED), THE WORK INVOLVES DRILLING 10 SOIL BORINGS USING A GEOPROBE RIG FOR THE PURPOSE OF COLLECTING SOIL SAMPLES FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION. BORING DEPTHS RANGE FROM 20 TO 50 FT. BORINGS WILL BE PROPERLY BACKFILLED AFTER COMPLETION.
1200 NEW JERSEY AVE SE 1ST FL 20590   
07/06/18 
JBG/FEDERAL CENTER LLC / DAVID T. MORALES
P1807299 / SUPPLEMENTAL
1299 NEW JERSEY AVE SE   
07/12/18 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA / GARRETT MILLS
TN1800142 / CONSTRUCTION
Event: Play Ball Park DC Location: The Yards, Parcel A (Corner of First Street and M Street); Play Ball Park is a Fan event sponsor zone that features BaseBall clinics, Sponsor Areas, Food and Beverage, and Entertainment.
   
06/29/18 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA / SHANNON BURKE
SB1800332 / CONSTRUCTION
Site is being investigated before construction in accordance with Consent Order between GSA and EPA. Temporary soil borings will be installed for soil and groundwater sampling.
71 POTOMAC AVE SE   
06/27/18 
FORIDA ROCK PROPERTIES INC / BARR CONCRETE
TC1800036 / CONSTRUCTION
towercrane for jobsite use
   
07/02/18 
FORIDA ROCK PROPERTIES INC / DANIEL P. THOMPSON
P1807202 / SUPPLEMENTAL
79 POTOMAC AVE SE   
07/13/18 
RIVERFRONT HOLDINGS I LLC / CARLOS H. LOPEZ
P1807478 / SUPPLEMENTAL
221 TINGEY ST SE   
06/27/18 
GONE YARD HOTEL OWNER, LLC / STEPHEN J. EXELBERT
P1807049 / SUPPLEMENTAL
(1) Gas generator (1) Gas Meter (1) Eye washer (12) Backwater Valve
227 TINGEY ST SE   
07/09/18 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA / DFM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC
AH1801111 / CONSTRUCTION
Afterhours Permit to allow for work under Permit B1801871 (Yards Parcel L2) to occur from 5am to 7am on July 12 through July 17. ANC approval provided.
   
07/12/18 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA / DFM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC
B1806775 / CONSTRUCTION
Parcel L1 - Revision to Permit FD1700126 to incorporate changes requested and approved by DC Water.
355 WATER ST SE   
07/12/18 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA / null
E1808509 / SUPPLEMENTAL
AH = After Hours; B = Alteration & Repair; D = Demolition; E = Electrical; FB = Boiler; M = Mechanical; P = Plumbing and Gas; PC = Post Card; R = Raze; SG = Sign; TL = Tenant Layout; TN = Tent; RW = Retaining Wall;

Real Property Sales Archive  
No commercial transaction records added or modified in the past two weeks.


Project Directory
Completed
99 M ('18)
Agora ('18)
1221 Van ('18)
District Winery ('17)
Insignia on M ('17)
F1rst/Residence Inn ('17)
One Hill South ('17)
Homewood Suites ('16)
ORE 82 ('16)
The Bixby ('16)
Dock 79 ('16)
Community Center ('16)
The Brig ('16)
Park Chelsea ('16)
Yards/Arris ('16)
Hampton Inn ('15)
Southeast Blvd. ('15)
11th St. Bridges ('15)
Parc Riverside ('14)
Twelve12/Yards ('14)
Lumber Shed ('13)
Boilermaker Shops ('13)
Camden South Cap. ('13)
Canal Park ('12)
Capitol Quarter ('12)
225 Virginia/200 I ('12)
Foundry Lofts ('12)
1015 Half Street ('10)
Yards Park ('10)
Velocity Condos ('09)
Teague Park ('09)
909 New Jersey Ave. ('09)
55 M ('09)
100 M ('08)
Onyx ('08)
70/100 I ('08)
Nationals Park ('08)
Seniors Bldg Demo ('07)
400 M ('07)
Douglass Bridge Fix ('07)
US DOT HQ ('07)
20 M ('07)
Capper Seniors 1 ('06)
Capitol Hill Tower ('06)
Courtyard/Marriott ('06)
Marine Barracks ('04)


Overviews
Capper/Carrollsburg
Anacostia Riverwalk
New Jersey Avenue
M Street
South Capitol Street
The Yards
Lower 8th Street
East M Street
Boathouse Row





                  © Copyright 2018 JD.