FAQ's   Why a Park?   The Environment   Get Involved  Current Events  Contact 

The problem in Klingle Valley is largely about stormwater runoff. Klingle Creek  is a stream about 1/2 mile long which discharges into Rock Creek near Porter Street. The Klingle watershed is about 320 acres, much of it impervious surfaces. This means that when there are heavy rains, the water goes into the valley almost immediately, flash flooding the creek, causing massive erosion of the creek and the roadbed. Although this is a big deal for Klingle Stream - each time there are big rains it scours the stream - it is a far bigger deal for Rock Creek. This water is hotter than the natural stream water, and depleted of oxygen, and comes down way to fast, carrying all sorts of sediment and other junk with it.

A 3'6" storm drain, which parallels Klingle creek and Macomb Street, joins a 4'6" drain from Porter Street just before the combined system empties into Rock Creek. This system is overwhelmed during heavy rains and has been deteriorated due to lack of upkeep prior to the road closure. This runoff is a major pollution problem for Rock Creek. Various stormwater management proposals have been worked on over the years, 

The 1991 plan proposed that there should be "ten oil and particulate removal structures with a wet detention/release volume of 400 cubic feet each and they should have underdrains to slowly bleed (l-2gpm) the 4,000 cubic feet to the stream. In essence, this will capture and treat all of a 0.5 inch of a precipitation event which is about the ten day frequency storm."  

The problem with this is that with the roadbed, guardrails and other road structures, as well as the sewer and gas pipes under the road, there is very little room within the right of way to put these measures in place, even if they were adequate to solve the problem. This would mean that federal parkland would be needed to fix the road. 

Adrienne Coleman, Superintendent of Rock Creek Park described the problem this way at the Nov '00 meeting: "We are in a valley and we are literally dumped on constantly. Storm water runoff, leaky sewers, mystery discharges into the creek. The Klingle Valley is just a microcosm of some of the things that are happening in Rock Creek Park. Storm water and drainage problems have been an issue in the Klingle Valley for many, many years, and the park has been harmed for many, many years as a result of it. I think we all need to keep in mind that the reason that the road was closed because the drainage system failed. And at this point, we are not assured that any construction of paved surface is not going to cause harm to Rock Creek Park . So, at this point, we cannot support any paved roadway leading or feeding into Rock Creek Park.."

Trees

A small section of the proposed Klingle Road and which trees would either be cut down, or whose roots would be severely damaged by road construction.

The road also has to be safe by modern standards - AASHTO standards - American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. These can be very involved in a project like Klingle. They require barriers and curbs and those need deep concrete footings to hold them. Very many trees will need to be felled to construct the road, and construction damage to even more tree's roots will spell slow death for many more trees. Many of the doomed trees are on federal parkland, which is protected by a series of laws.

David Murphy, also speaking at the Nov '00 meeting  representing the National Park Service said: "The National Park Service is confronted with a continuing and constant level of work to preserve that valley. We have worked with the District of Columbia for approximately that last twenty years, looking at various schemes for restoration of their roles which is a narrow band within the broader sections and adjoining park land. The alternative that was studied in 1991 created a requirement for an extensive number of trees to be removed in that construction. However, alternatives that we have seen that involve pavement appear to require use of parkland and/or in a direct or indirect injury impacts, i.e., loss of trees and affect on the drainage and grading of that Park. The National Park Service cannot support or encourage the District of Columbia to pursue a paved solution in this valley and they are committed to providing access for infrastructure such as storm water and gas lines"

Environmental

A road proposal faces substantial environmental legal hurdles before it can even get a permit to be built. In order to qualify for federal funding (which comprises the vast majority of DC's DOT spending), a road project must meet federal environmental protection standards (NEPA). Although most roads in DC get what is called a categorical exclusion, a federally funded project must have a finding of no siginificant impact (FONSI) under an environmental asessment process that is carefully detailed, and if it will have a significant impact, then a detailed mitigation plan must be crafted and approved. 

If this is not enough, if a project borders federal parkland, as Klingle does, then compliance with US DOT section 4f must be evaluated to get federal funding. In order to pass this test,  the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) must find that there is not a "prudent and feasible alternative" to the impact and use of federal land, and that the project includes all possible planning to minimize harm.

Since the National Park Service has already said it will not support any solution that will remove trees or tree roots on federal land, there must be no alternative for the construction of the road. In 1990, DC's emergency services thought that they would need Klingle, but since there has been no call for Klingle based on emergency services. In that case, there are abundant transportation alternatives to a paved road in Klingle. 

There is also the matter of the Army Corps of Engineers, who have jurisdiction over the waters of the United States - they must issue a fill and dredge permit for Klingle.

Finally, and perhaps most significantly, there is the District's own environmental laws. DC's EPA law calls for the "fullest possible preservation and protection of the environment through a requirement that the environmental impact of proposed District government ... actions be examined before implementation and to require the Mayor, board, commission, or authority to substitute or require an applicant to substitute an alternative action or mitigating measures for a proposed action, if the alternative action or mitigating measures will accomplish the same purposes as the proposed action with minimized or no adverse environmental effects." Again, the threshold here is that there would be no alternative, and with Klingle, the transportation need is just not significant enough.

Klingle Creek is also a SWDC designated segment (SPECIAL WATERS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA), and anything which might affect the water quality must meet it's provisions:

Financial

There are currently no actual estimates for the reconstruction project. All of the figures currently circulating are from the 1990 rebuilding proposal. Current AASHTO, NEPA and US DOT 4f standards would probably mean a road that is VERY expensive. 

It appears pretty clear that any proposal is going to need federal parkland, or will impact federal parkland substantially. It is equally clear that the Park Service will not support this, which means NO FEDERAL FUNDING. 

This means that funds for Klingle will come out of DC's pockets. The other thing that DC's DOT spends money on is improving residential side streets. Whatever gets spent on Klingle will not get spent on side streets that need repaving or other improvements.  

Just because federal funding won't be used, doesn't mean that the environmental standards can be undermined. In many ways, the DC EPA process could be more restrictive than the federal law. 

This means a lot of money that won't get spent on roads that really need it, which is probably not politically feasible. 

Social

Over the years, the park has developed a strong following of people who use it regularly and feel that making it a road again would be a tragic loss of important greenspace.