2 June 1997
Source: ftp://ftp.fedworld.gov/pub/tel/index.htm

As cited in the Federal Register, June 2, 1997.

Environmental Assessment

Implementation of White House Security Review
Vehicular Traffic Restriction Recommendations

Foreword

Lead Agency:
Department of the Treasury
Cooperating Agency:
Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration

The Department of the Treasury has prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) to address the environmental impacts associated with its action to restrict vehicular access to certain streets in the vicinity of the White House. The security action was one of several recommendations developed by the "White House Security Review" (the Review). As a part of its mandate, the Review examined and evaluated "the dangers posed to the White House Complex and the protectees therein, by air or ground assaults." In making its recommendation regarding restricted vehicular access, the Review found that it was "not able to identify any alternative to prohibiting vehicular traffic on Pennsylvania Avenue that would ensure the protection of the President and others in the White House Complex from explosive devices carried by vehicles near the perimeter." For the same reason the Review recommended prohibiting vehicular traffic on certain portions of streets contiguous to the security perimeter of the White House Complex.

Based on the Review’s recommendation, on May 19, 1995, Secretary of the Treasury Robert E. Rubin issued an order directing the Director of the United States Secret Service to restrict vehicular traffic on streets surrounding the White House. The Director implemented the order on May 20, 1995.

Because of the emergency nature of the action, this EA was prepared following the action pursuant to the emergency provision (40 CFR 1506.11) of the Council on Environmental Quality’s National Environmental Policy Act implementing regulations. The emergency provision allows for the preparation of the environmental documentation after the action when emergency circumstances make it necessary to take an action without preparing a pre-action environmental document. No alternatives to the security action are analyzed in this EA.

The goal of the EA is to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the security action. Primary focus areas of this EA include the effects of the changes in traffic patterns on transportation, air quality, noise, vibration, and impacts to historic places.

The emergency nature of the security action made it impossible to collect complete pre-action traffic data for use in analyzing the environmental impacts of the action. Available pre-action data was collected from local and Federal agencies and supplemented by traffic counts and travel time analysis conducted for the EA. With the exception of traffic counts at certain intersections, the available pre-action data was not directly comparable to the post-action measurements and did not allow for accurate comparison of pre- and post-action conditions. The analysis in the EA describes the conditions after the action and several traffic modifications which the District of Columbia’s Department of Public Works (DCDPW) implemented to alleviate congestion.

A number of recommendations are discussed which could further improve traffic conditions in the area around the White House. These recommendations are provided for consideration by the relevant District of Columbia offices which have the legal authority to implement them.

The public review period for the EA will be for 30 days. Comments should be sent to: Mr. Bill McGovern, Environment and Energy Programs Officer, Department of the Treasury, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Room 6140 Treasury Annex, Washington, DC 20220. Comments must be postmarked no later than July 2, 1997.

Executive Summary

This environmental assessment is prepared in accordance with the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Department of the Treasury Environmental Quality Program, Department of the Treasury Directive Number 75-02, Paragraph 8- Environmental Assessments. This document presents an assessment of the environmental impacts of the vehicular traffic restriction security action implemented by the Director of the United States Secret Service on May 20, 1995, following an order by the Secretary of the Treasury on May 19, 1995. The resulting security action and immediate traffic management response included the following vehicular restrictions on streets contiguous to the security perimeter of the White House Complex:

1) Pennsylvania Avenue between 15th and 17th Streets,

2) State Place,

3) The segment of South Executive Avenue that connects to State Place,

4) Madison Place, and

5) E Street (westbound) between 15th Street and South Executive Avenue.

After this action the Secret Service also tightened security on Jackson Place and Alexander Hamilton Place, both of which had already been restricted to authorized vehicles. Pedestrian and bicycle traffic was not restricted on any of these streets. The purpose of the security action is to provide necessary and appropriate protection for the President of the United States, the first family, and those working in or visiting the White House Complex.

Due to the emergency nature of the vehicular traffic restriction and for security reasons, the Department was unable to initiate an environmental assessment prior to completing the vehicular traffic restriction. The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) expressed its concurrence with the Department's judgement that the situation was an emergency as described in 40 CFR 1506.11, and that the Department lawfully delayed the environmental assessment until after implementation of the security action and immediate traffic management response. It was determined that the Department of the Treasury would be the lead agency for the preparation of the Environmental Assessment. The Federal Highway Administration, as a cooperating agency, was to support the Department of the Treasury in this effort because of its expertise and experience in the areas of traffic analysis and planning. No alternatives to the security action are analyzed.

The May 20, 1995, vehicular restriction security action and immediate traffic management response was followed on June 24 and 25, 1995, by a set of follow-up traffic management response actions implemented by the District of Columbia Department of Public Works (DCDPW), Bureau of Traffic Services, as a means to compensate for the reduction in east-west street capacity. At the same time the National Park Service (NPS) was assigned responsibility to develop design alternatives for the permanent design for Pennsylvania Avenue at the White House. Discussion of design alternatives and actions is not appropriate in this document; it was covered by the NPS EA for the Long-Term Design, Pennsylvania Avenue at the White House, President's Park.

Due to the emergency nature of the security action, the data used for this environmental assessment reflect the fact that the assessment was initiated after the action. Data available on conditions after the security action traffic management responses reflect the effects of the security action (the vehicular traffic restriction)and traffic management responses performed by the DCDPW, and may reflect unrelated conditions and problems that existed previously. Because problems existed previously and because the data collection and analysis was initiated after the security action and traffic management responses, it is difficult to assess the actual effects of this security action.

Extended Study Area and Land Use

The site of the security action is the area surrounding the White House, bounded to the north by H Street, to the south by E Street, to the west by 17th Street, and to the east by 15th Street. The extended study area, bounded to the north by M Street, to the south by Constitution Avenue, to the east by 12th Street, and to the west by 23rd Street, comprises governmental, institutional, and commercial office buildings as well as public parkland, wide avenues, and open spaces associated with the Monumental Core. The security action, which resulted primarily in changes to the transportation system, has not changed the character of the surrounding land areas, nor will it affect the designated uses of the land.

Transportation

The security action caused shifts of east-west traffic from restricted streets to other east-west streets in the area. Traffic on the primary north-south streets also shifted because of the security action.

Based on observation and available pre-action data, there were traffic operations problems on streets in the extended study area before the security action. The shift in traffic caused by the security action worsened those problems, especially on the east-west streets that gained traffic. The change in traffic volumes can be estimated from available data, but the effect on operations problems cannot, because the performance of an urban street system where intersections are close together is a complex function of more than traffic volumes alone. The degree to which the security action and the traffic management responses contributed to traffic operations problems cannot be determined.

The security action and traffic management responses resulted in a number of effects on the public transportation system: the need to move bus routes to different streets, the need to change stop locations because of route relocations and changes in street direction, the changes in terminal locations and operations, and the effects of changed traffic patterns and congestion levels upon running times and bus turning movements.

A number of actions within the control of the DCDPW were identified during the course of the transportation study that will further improve the traffic flow in the extended study area. Recommendations include making signs consistent, removing parking in specific areas, new lane configurations, signal changes, signal timing changes, etc. A number of locations have been identified where parking meters could be installed to offset the loss in revenue to the District of Columbia resulting from the 49 meters removed on these streets.

Air Quality

Washington, D.C. has been designated as a serious non-attainment area for ozone, an attainment area for carbon monoxide (CO), and an attainment area for particulate matter (PM10). CO is the only pollutant of potential concern in relation to the security action. The air quality study focused on the security action's effects on ambient CO concentrations. The air quality analysis modeled maximum potential CO concentrations. Analysis locations were selected to include the worst-case locations affected by the security action. The National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) would not be exceeded at any analyzed location in either peak travel period. Thus, the security action conforms to both the Washington, D.C. Implementation Plan and the General Conformity requirements of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA90).

Noise

Noise levels in the area of the security action are typical of an urban location. Changes in traffic volumes and speeds or in the mix of vehicles can alter the levels of noise along existing roadways and streets. Previous studies completed on other projects in central Washington give an indication of what the range of noise levels would have been in the area prior to the action. The FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model was used to estimate both past noise levels and current noise levels generated by traffic at selected exterior sensitive receptors sites.

A substantial noise decrease of 8 decibels (dBA) is estimated to have occurred at the sidewalk along Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House as a result of the removal of vehicular traffic from Pennsylvania Avenue. The analysis also indicates that traffic noise levels at two locations on I Street would increase slightly, by 1 to 2 dBA, as a result of the shift in traffic to this roadway. These increases should not be perceptible.

Vibration

Changes in levels of ground-borne vibration may result from modifications to the transportation network. An assessment of vibration and its potential for human annoyance and building damage was performed in response to the changes in traffic flow patterns in the extended study area. Vibration and noise measurements were conducted at four sites along H Street, including the Ashburton House, the Decatur House, the Dolley Madison House, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Because the rubber tires and suspension systems of trucks and buses provide vibration isolation, it is unusual for these vehicles to cause excessive ground-borne noise or vibration when operating over smooth pavement. Where this vibration exists, it can be directly linked to uneven pavement due to potholes, bumps, expansion joints, manholes, or other road surface irregularities.

Changes in traffic patterns and the mix of vehicles in traffic due to the restrictions of vehicular traffic on Pennsylvania Avenue do not appear to have substantially changed the level of ground-borne vibration caused by traffic on roadways adjacent to historic structures as compared to pre-action conditions. For receptors located along the south side of H Street, the maximum post-action vibration levels are similar to those of the pre-action condition. For receptors along the north side of H Street, the maximum post-action vibration levels have increased by approximately 5 dB over pre-action conditions because of the removal of a parking lane along the north curb. The maximum vibration levels generated by traffic on H Street range from 70 to 81 dB. These levels are typical of buses and heavy trucks operating over rough pavement. The measured vibration levels were well below the lowest limit of 95 dB for damage to extremely fragile historic buildings. The vibration levels measured inside the sensitive receptors are above the threshold of perception and exceed the human annoyance threshold. However, occupants in the sensitive receptors would have been exposed to vibration levels exceeding the human annoyance criterion prior to the action.

Visual/Aesthetic Resources

The visual intrusion of high-density urban automobile and truck traffic and tour-bus parking has been removed from Madison Place and Pennsylvania Avenue, resulting in a more pleasing visual environment and in improved reciprocal lines of sight to the White House and the historic properties along Madison and Jackson Place from the Lafayette Square area.

The placing of barriers near the intersections of Pennsylvania Avenue with 17th and 15th Streets and at other locations at the site of the action, provides an adverse visual impact in those areas. The existing barriers are temporary and will be replaced by permanent security barriers as part of the NPS EA for the Long-Term Design, Pennsylvania Avenue at the White House, President's Park.

Cultural Resources

The historic development within the extended study area has been overwhelmingly dominated by the L'Enfant Plan elements and the federal presence. There are 99 historic sites and 8 historic districts in the extended study area.

Each site was evaluated based on the criteria of effect and adverse effect established by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. Of the 107 sites and districts, 77 are not affected by the security action. There are adverse effects at 27 sites due to the placement of the concrete security barriers associated with the vehicular traffic restrictions. At 19 sites, the removal of vehicular traffic from Pennsylvania Avenue, Madison Place, State Place, and South Executive Avenue, as well as the decreased noise levels in the core study area constitute no adverse effect under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966.

Pedestrian Access

Pedestrian facilities in the extended study area include sidewalks along streets, crosswalks at intersections, and walkways through the parks and squares. The security action increased pedestrian access by creating a traffic-free zone on Pennsylvania Avenue between Madison Place and 17th Street.

Socioeconomic Impacts

Because the extended study area almost entirely comprises governmental/institutional and commercial/retail uses, discussion of the socioeconomic environment includes a review of public service facilities and a discussion of economic conditions related to parking and public transportation issues. Because the security action did not generate or effect any change in the resident or working population, the security action will not affect the capacity of the public service facilities to provide services. The D.C. Fire Department has determined that the security action had minimal effect upon response times and so has no plans to alter any of the response zones as a result of the security action.

The security action and the traffic management responses reduced the amount of on-street parking by 49 spaces on 12 blocks within the extended study area. The potential effects of lost parking spaces on retail activity are generally spread over the area. The net loss of 49 parking spaces will result in 1,203 fewer space hours per week, resulting in an annual revenue loss for the District of Columbia of approximately $98,000. The security action also required changes in Metrobus routes and schedules that result in an estimated increased cost to the District of Columbia of $314,000 per year. Estimated capital costs to the District of Columbia were approximately $115,000, comprising relocation of bus shelters and intersection modifications.

Natural Resources

No federally listed or proposed threatened or endangered species is known to exist in the area of the security action. Because the security action did not involve any ground disturbance, it did not negatively impact any vegetation or any wildlife or their habitat in the area of the security action.

Cumulative Effects

The major developments that would have potential cumulative environmental effects when combined with the action to restrict vehicular traffic in the vicinity of the White House include: (1) the construction of the Ronald Reagan Building on 14th Street between Pennsylvania Avenue and Constitution Avenue and (2) the Permanent Design Plan for Pennsylvania Avenue at the White House.

The effects of the traffic generated by the Ronald Reagan Building combined with the diversion of traffic resulting from the security action would be limited to potential effects on air quality at nearby congested intersections. An analysis of CO concentrations found that there would be no exceedences of NAAQS standards.

The potential cumulative effects of the EA for the Long-Term Design, Pennsylvania Avenue at the White House, President's Park include elimination of parking on Jackson Place and impacts on cultural resources resulting from the placement of the permanent security barriers.

Contents

> Download entire document (WP6.x Format / PDF Format)

Chapter 1.0 Introduction (WP6.x Format / PDF Format)

> 1.1 Purpose and Need for the Security Action (WP6.x Format / PDF Format)

> 1.2 History of Security Concerns at the White House Complex (WP6.x Format / PDF Format)

> 1.3 Description of Security Action (WP6.x Format / PDF Format)

> > 1.3.1 Introduction

> > 1.3.2 Description of Restrictions and Security Action

Chapter 2.0 Environmental Context and Consequences (WP6.x Format / PDF Format)

> 2.1 Physical Setting and Land Use (WP6.x Format / PDF Format)

> > 2.1.1 Affected Environment

> > > 2.1.1.1 Physical Setting

> > > 2.1.1.2 Land Use

> > 2.1.2 Impacts Analysis

> 2.2 Traffic and Transportation Issues (WP6.x Format / PDF Format)

> > 2.2.1 Affected Environment

> > > 2.2.1.1 Before the Security Action

> > > 2.2.1.2 After the Security Action

> > 2.2.2 Impacts Analysis

> > > 2.2.2.1 Analysis of Impacts on Traffic Patterns

> > > 2.2.2.2 Analysis of Impacts on Traffic

> > > 2.2.2.3 Analysis of Impacts on Tour Buses

> > > 2.2.2.4 Analysis of Impacts on Public Transportation

> > > 2.2.2.5 Analysis of Impacts on Parking

> 2.3 Air Quality (WP6.x Format / PDF Format)

> > 2.3.1 Affected Environment

> > > 2.3.1.1 National Ambient Air Quality Standards

> > > 2.3.1.2 Pollutants of Concern

> > > 2.3.1.3 Attainment Status of the Extended Study Area

> > > 2.3.1.4 Conformance of the Security Action with Regulatory Requirements

> > 2.3.2 Impacts Analysis

> > > 2.3.2.1 Analysis Methodology

> > > 2.3.2.2 Model Inputs

> > > 2.3.2.3 Selection of Analysis Locations

> > > 2.3.2.4 Results

> 2.4 Noise (WP6.x Format / PDF Format)

> > 2.4.1 Affected Environment

> > 2.4.2 Impacts Analysis Methodology

> > 2.4.3 Impacts Analysis

> 2.5 Vibration (WP6.x Format / PDF Format)

> > 2.5.1 Affected Environment

> > 2.5.2 Concepts and Impact Criteria

> > 2.5.3 Measurements

> > 2.5.4 Impacts Analysis

> > > 2.5.4.1 Measurement Results

> > > 2.5.4.2 Analysis

> > 2.5.5 Vibration Reduction Recommendations

> 2.6 Visual/Aesthetic Resources (WP6.x Format / PDF Format)

> > 2.6.1 Affected Environment

> > 2.6.2 Impacts Analysis

> 2.7 Cultural Resources (WP6.x Format / PDF Format)

> > 2.7.1 Affected Environment

> > > 2.7.1.1 Site History

> > > 2.7.1.2 Historic Sites/Districts

> > > 2.7.1.3 National Historic Preservation Act Requirements

> > 2.7.2 Impacts Analysis

> > > 2.7.2.1 Historic Site Impacts Methodology

> > > 2.7.2.2 Analysis of Impacts to Historic Sites

> 2.8 Pedestrian Access (WP6.x Format / PDF Format)

> > 2.8.1 Affected Environment

> > 2.8.2 Impacts Analysis

> 2.9 Socioeconomic Impacts (WP6.x Format / PDF Format)

> > 2.9.1 Affected Environment

> > > 2.9.1.1 Public Service Facilities

> > > 2.9.1.2 Economic Characteristics

> > 2.9.2 Impacts Analysis

> > > 2.9.2.1 Public Facilities

> > > 2.9.2.2 Economic Impacts Analysis

> 2.10 Natural Resources (WP6.x Format / PDF Format)

> > 2.10.1 Affected Environment

> > > 2.10.1.1 Geology and Soils

> > > 2.10.1.2 Vegetation

> > > 2.10.1.3 Wildlife

> > > 2.10.1.4 Threatened or Endangered Species

> > 2.10.2 Impacts Analysis

> 2.11 Cumulative Effects (WP6.x Format / PDF Format)

> > 2.11.1 Extended Study Area Projects

> > 2.11.2 Projects Outside the Extended Study Area

Chapter 3.0 Traffic Improvement Recommendations (WP6.x Format / PDF Format)

> 3.1 Transportation (WP6.x Format / PDF Format)

> 3.2 Parking (WP6.x Format / PDF Format)

Chapter 4.0 Contacts and Coordination (WP6.x Format / PDF Format)

Chapter 5.0 References (WP6.x Format / PDF Format)

Chapter 6.0 List of Preparers (WP6.x Format / PDF Format)

Appendix A Historic Sites List (WP6.x Format / PDF Format)

Appendix B Historic Sites Impacts Analysis (WP6.x Format / PDF Format)

List of Figures

Figure 1-1: Security action and Immediate Traffic Management Response (PDF Format)

Figure 2-1: Study Area (PDF Format)

Figure 2-2: General Land Use (PDF Format)

Figure 2-3: Street Levels of Service After Security Action and the Traffic Management Responses - AM Peak Period (PDF Format)

Figure 2-4: Street Levels of Service After Security Action and the Traffic Management Responses - Midday Period (PDF Format)

Figure 2-5: Street Levels of Service After Security Action and the Traffic Management Responses - PM Peak Period (PDF Format)

Figure 2-6: Air Quality Analysis Locations (PDF Format)

Figure 2-7: Noise Monitoring Locations (PDF Format)

Figure 2.8: Typical Levels of Ground-borne Vibration (figure can be found with chapter 2 text file)

Figure 2-9: Central Portion of Ellicott Plan (figure can be found with chapter 2 text file)

Figure 2-10: Historic Sites and Districts in the Extended Study Area (PDF Format)

    [Federal Register: June 2, 1997 (Volume 62, Number 105)]
    [Notices]
    [Page 29779]
    From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
    [DOCID:fr02jn97-133]

    =======================================================================
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------

    DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

    Environmental Assessment for Implementation of White House
    Security Review Vehicular Traffic Restriction Recommendations

    AGENCY: Department of the Treasury.

    ACTION: Notice.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------

    SUMMARY: The Department of the Treasury is issuing this notice to
    inform the public of the availability of the Environmental Assessment
    for Implementation of White House Security Review Vehicular Traffic
    Restriction Recommendations. The Environmental Assessment (EA) has been
    prepared to address the environmental impacts of the restriction of
    vehicular access to certain streets in the vicinity of the White House.
    This EA was prepared following the security action pursuant to the
    emergency provision (40 CFR 1506.11) of the Council on Environmental
    Quality's National Environmental Policy Act implementing regulations.

    DATES: Comments must be postmarked no later than July 2, 1997. Comments
    should be sent to the address given under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
    CONTACT.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For a copy of the EA or for further
    information contact Mr. Bill McGovern, Environment and Energy Programs
    Officer, Department of the Treasury, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Room
    6140 Treasury Annex, Washington, DC 20220; telephone (202) 622-0043;
    fax (202) 622-1468. The EA is also available on the Department of the
    Treasury's home page at http://www.treas.gov. Additionally, copies of
    the EA have been mailed to Federal, State, and local agencies; public
    interest groups; interested individuals; and District of Columbia
    public libraries.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 19, 1995 the Secretary of the
    Treasury ordered the Director of the United States Secret Service to
    restrict vehicular traffic on streets surrounding the White House. The
    Director implemented the action on May 20, 1995. The action was taken
    to provide necessary and appropriate protection for the President of
    the United States, the first family, and those working in or visiting
    the White House complex.
        This action was one of several recommendations resulting from the
    ``White House Security Review'' (the Review). The Review was ordered by
    then-Secretary of the Treasury Lloyd Bentsen after a small plane
    crashed on the South Lawn of the White House. The Review was expanded
    after a shooting incident outside the White House in October of 1994.
    In addition to these two incidents, the review had a broad mandate;
    indeed the Secretary directed the Review to examine ``the dangers posed
    to the White House complex and protectees therein, by air or ground
    assaults.'' The final report of the Review is classified; however a
    ``Public Report of the White House Security Review'' was made public in
    May 1995. The Review's recommendation states that it was ``not able to
    identify any alternative to prohibiting vehicular traffic on
    Pennsylvania Avenue that would ensure the protection of the President
    and others in the White House Complex from explosive devices carried in
    vehicles near the perimeter.''
        The goal of the EA was to analyze the environmental impacts
    associated with the security action. Primary focus areas of this EA
    include the effects of changes in traffic patterns on transportation,
    air quality, noise, vibration, and impacts to historic places.
        Available pre-action data was collected from local agencies and
    Federal agencies and supplemented by traffic counts and travel time
    analysis conducted for the EA. With the exception of traffic counts for
    certain intersections, the available pre-action data was not directly
    comparable to the post action measurements and did not allow for
    accurate comparison of before and after action conditions. The analysis
    in the EA describes the conditions after the action and several traffic
    modifications which the District of Columbia's Department of Public
    Works (DCDPW) implemented to alleviate congestion.
        A number of recommendations are discussed which could further
    improve traffic conditions in the area around the White House. These
    recommendations are presented in the EA; however, they are meant for
    consideration by the relevant District of Columbia offices which have
    the legal authority to implement them.
    George Munoz,
    Assistant Secretary (Management) and Chief Financial Officer.
    [FR Doc. 97-14212 Filed 5-30-97; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 4810-25-P