NATIONAL PARK SERVICE 

CHAPTER 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES AND 

MANAGEMENT ZONES 

A discussion of alternatives is a critical component of a GMP/EIS (the plan) and is necessary to 

provide decision-makers with sufficient information to evaluate various management options. 

Section 1505.1 (e) of NEPA requires that a “range of alternatives” be discussed in an EIS. The 

range of alternatives includes those reasonable alternatives that are evaluated throughout the 

document, as well as all considered alternatives that were eliminated from detailed study. The 

NPS Director’s Order on Park Planning (DO-2) provides further guidance that a GMP/EIS 

should first define what kind of resource conditions and visitor experiences should be 

maintained in the park and then apply those definitions to all actions that are subsequently 

taken in the park. DO-2 also recommends that alternative concepts be fundamentally distinct 

among competing sets of resource conditions and visitor experiences. 

The park investigated ten preliminary alternative scenarios during the development of the 

GMP/EIS. In a newsletter that was published in November 2003 (Newsletter 2), three of the 

GMP alternatives were carried forward and presented for public evaluation. Subsequent to 

public and agency comments that were received, as well as additional review by the internal 

planning team, these alternatives were revised to two consolidated alternatives that were 

presented and evaluated in the June 2005 Draft GMP/EIS. 

The Draft GMP/EIS was released for public comments in Fall/Winter 2005. Following more 

than 190 public and agency comments that were received, NPS revised the two alternatives. The 

following is a summary of the two revised alternatives that are described in greater detail later in 

this chapter: 

y Alternative A (Continuation of Current Conditions) maintains the status quo in the park, 

and describes resource conditions where existing practices continue to guide park 

management. 

y Alternative B (Preferred Alternative) would balance the protection of natural and 

cultural resources with the provision of a variety of recreational opportunities for 

visitors. 

The alternatives present a reasonable array of management options, fulfill the park’s purpose 

and needs, and address the management concerns identified in Section 1.3.3, Issues and 

Concerns, of this document. To further describe the desired visitor experiences and resource 

conditions for various portions of the park, NPS developed Management Prescriptions under 

the preferred alternative (Alternative B).1

 The prescriptions help to establish the kinds of 

activities or facilities that the NPS considers suitable to achieve the visitor experiences and 

resource conditions that are sought under the preferred alternative. The Management 

Prescriptions are described in Section 2.3 of this document and mapped to specific areas 

of the park. 

 

1

A management prescription is an approach for administering or treating the resources or uses of a specified area that is based 

on desired outcomes. Management prescriptions include target goals or objectives for one or more resources and/or visitor 

experiences that are present within the prescription area. 
CHAPTER 2 

GREAT FALLS PARK, VIRGINIA y FINAL GMP/EIS 2.2

While developing the two alternatives, several others were also considered, as described in 

Section 2.4 of this document. However, these were eliminated from further consideration due 

to one or more of the following reasons: public or agency feedback; significant potential impact 

on the park’s resources; or operational concerns. 

Mitigation is another key element used in the development of the two alternatives. In the 

legislation that created the NPS, Congress charged it with managing lands under the 

stewardship “in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the 

enjoyment of future generations”.2

 NPS routinely evaluates and implements mitigation 

measures if conditions occur that could adversely affect the sustainability of park resources. 

Mitigation and best management practices (BMPs) were included throughout the formulation 

of the alternatives identified in this plan. 

 

2

NPS Organic Act
DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES 

2.3 NATIONAL PARK SERVICE 

2.1 DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES FOR EVALUATION 

 

The two alternatives considered for Great Falls Park are conceptual and offer possibilities of 

how the park could be managed in the future. Under Alternative A, the NPS would continue 

current practices to manage the park, whereas, under Alternative B, the NPS would modify 

existing practices to pursue an overall goal of balancing opportunities for recreation while 

protecting sensitive natural and cultural resources. These alternatives are described below and 

summarized in Table 2.1, Description of Alternatives. 

 

2.1.1 Alternative A – Status Quo/Continue Current Management Practices 

The goals of Alternative A would be to preserve traditional visitor experiences and activities and 

maintain the park’s natural, cultural, and scenic values in conformance with the provisions 

outlined in Section 1.4 of this document. Under this alternative, Great Falls Park would be 

managed as it is currently. There would be no major changes in resources management, visitor 

programs, or facilities, beyond regular maintenance (see Figure 2.1: Alternative A). 

Cultural and Natural Resources

NPS would develop an Integrated Resource Management Plan (IRMP) to protect sensitive 

cultural resources from potential vegetation damage. Also, NPS would adopt best management 

practices (BMPs) to protect cultural resources, especially those that are either listed, or eligible 

for listing, in the National Register of Historic Places. Further, the park would provide 

additional protection to natural and cultural resources by implementing practices such as 

installing fences to offer greater protection to resources in high visitor use areas. 

NPS would preserve existing scenic views from vantage points within the park, and from 

adjacent areas including the Potomac River and the C&O Canal NHP. Currently, the park 

evaluates potential impacts on scenic views as part of its project environmental review process. 

This policy would continue under Alternative A. 

Recreation Management

Under Alternative A, the types and levels of recreational opportunities in the park would 

continue similar to current management practices, as described below. 

• Climbing: Climbing activities within the park would continue. The NPS would continue 

to issue annual permits to businesses that organize rock climbing activities in the park 

and would continue to encourage climbers to register at the visitor center or the lower 

parking lot. The routes currently available for climbing would remain available on a firstcome first-served basis. 

• Trails: Under Alternative A, the NPS would evaluate existing undesignated trails and 

eliminate those that adversely impact natural or cultural resources. The current pattern 

of trail use would continue, including access to pedestrians, bikers, and horseback riders 

from adjacent trails and properties. The park would improve signage to identify 

allowable uses on trails. The park would also allow the proposed CCT, PHNST, and 

GPT to connect to existing trails within Great Falls Park. 
CHAPTER 2 

GREAT FALLS PARK, VIRGINIA y FINAL GMP/EIS 2.4

• Whitewater Kayaking: Under Alternative A, access to the Potomac River for whitewater 

kayaking would remain available from Fisherman’s Eddy (located between Overlooks 2 

and 3) and AA Gorge (located to the south of Overlook 3, along River Trail).

• Fishing: Access to the Potomac River for fishing would remain available at Fisherman’s 

Eddy and other locations, such as near the Aqueduct Dam and AA Gorge, to visitors with 

a Virginia or Maryland fishing license.

Visitor and Administrative Services

Under Alternative A, the levels of interpretation and educational programs, as well as park 

facilities would remain similar to existing conditions. 

• Interpretation: The existing 70-seat auditorium and the 2,000 square foot exhibit area on 

the second floor of the visitor center would remain the primary spaces where the park 

would provide interpretative and educational programs. Also, ranger-led programs that 

provide visitors with opportunities to learn about the park’s resources would continue. 

• Facilities: Minor improvements would be made to the visitor center where its 

appearance (including the courtyard) would be enhanced, the interior spaces would be 

configured more efficiently, and one of the entrance ramps would be modified to meet 

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. No changes are proposed to the 

existing food concession stand. NPS would also rehabilitate the existing restroom 

facilities at the visitor center and the existing comfort facility to the south of the picnic 

area. The offices for the park’s management and ranger staff would remain at the lower 

level of the visitor center. 

Similarly, offices and storage areas related to park maintenance would remain in the 

existing facility near the entrance station. The United States Park Police (USPP) would 

retain a trailer adjacent to the maintenance facility which would continue to serve as an 

office. Also, the USPP would continue to rent space for their horses in an existing facility 

outside the park. 

The park would continue its use of the existing well water system, including the holding 

tank on Jackson Lane, for potable water supply. 
DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES 

2.5 NATIONAL PARK SERVICE 

 

 

Figure 2.1: Alternative A (Continue Current Management Practices) 
CHAPTER 2 

GREAT FALLS PARK, VIRGINIA y FINAL GMP/EIS 2.6

Traffic Management

Under Alternative A, the NPS would consider introducing technology that expedites payment 

and other operational functions at the entrance station to provide more efficient visitor entry 

into the park. During busy periods (currently several weekends per year) park staff would 

periodically check parking lots and inform visitors, waiting in line along Old Dominion Drive, to 

expect delays. When the parking lots are fully occupied, entry into the park would be 

suspended. During these periods, only emergency vehicles would be allowed access into the 

park. Other vehicles would be allowed access only when there are vehicles exiting the park, and 

would be managed based on parking availability. The park would continue to provide a manual 

message board, at the intersection of Georgetown Pike and Old Dominion Drive, which would 

inform visitors of entrance conditions to the park. 

The park would maintain current public vehicular access points and would not develop new 

vehicular access points into the park. Also, the park would continue to provide emergency 

access at Sandy Landing. 

Partnerships

To continue engaging the public in its decision-making process, the NPS would routinely 

conduct meetings, publish newsletters, and post updates on its website. These meetings, 

newsletters, and web postings would provide an update on actions recommended in the Final 

GMP/EIS and would be utilized to solicit individual opinions on specific issues. 

Boundary Changes

NPS would encourage boundary changes where there is an interested property owner and land 

can be added to the park through acquisition, donation, or other mechanisms (such as 

conservation easements). The land addition would be based on the following criteria: 

• The land parcel is contiguous to the park; 

• It helps to reduce fragmentation by connecting separate portions of the park; 

• It is the site of sensitive cultural resources that may not be identified currently; or 

• It benefits the preservation of a sensitive natural resource such as Mine Run or 

Difficult Run. 
DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES 

2.7 NATIONAL PARK SERVICE 

2.1.2 Alternative B – Preferred Alternative (Modified) 

The preferred alternative is based on an overall goal for the park of balancing opportunities for 

recreation at the park while protecting sensitive natural and cultural resources. The preferred 

alternative described in the Draft GMP/EIS has been modified based on public and agency 

comments that were received, as well as additional review by the internal planning team. The 

revised preferred alternative is described as follows, and illustrated in Figure 2.2: Alternative B. 

Cultural Resource Management

As discussed in Chapter 1 of this document, NPS management policies require that the park 

preserve and foster appreciation of the cultural resources in its custody. Further, one of the 

park’s mission goals is to protect, preserve, and maintain cultural resources in a good condition, 

and manage them within their broader cultural context. 

Under Alternative B, cultural resource management would include preparing a plan to stabilize 

Matildaville, as well as managing visitor access in areas where sensitive cultural resources are 

present. During the preparation of the Trails Management Plan (TMP), existing designated and 

undesignated trails would be assessed for their impacts on cultural resources. It is anticipated 

that in some cases, the undesignated trails would be eliminated. Designated trails to resources 

for interpretative purposes would be redesigned to minimize the potential for visitor-related 

impacts. 

Also, in most cases, NPS would not disturb existing ruins and other potential cultural sites that 

are buried in order to protect these sensitive sites. In a few locations, the park may uncover the 

resource for the primary purpose of interpretation provided such measures do not damage the 

resource. 

NPS would develop an IRMP to protect sensitive cultural resources from potential vegetation 

damage. Also, NPS would adopt BMPs which may include maintenance and removal of 

vegetation that endangers the integrity of cultural resources, especially those listed, or eligible 

for listing, in the National Register of Historic Places. 

The park would also prepare a Viewshed Management Plan that would identify important 

scenic views from vantage points within the park, from adjacent areas (including the Potomac 

River and the C&O Canal NHP) and of adjacent areas from the park. The plan would develop 

policies for the preservation and, if necessary, restoration of these scenic views. 

Natural Resource Management

As discussed in Chapter 1 of this document, NPS management policies require that the park 

preserve its natural resources, processes, systems, and values in an unimpaired condition, to 

perpetuate their inherent integrity and to provide present and future generations with the 

opportunity to enjoy and learn about them. 

Under Alternative B, natural resource management would include improved interpretation of 

the natural systems present within the park and their linkages to resources outside the park’s 

boundary. The park would develop a technical assistance program where it would demonstrate 
CHAPTER 2 

GREAT FALLS PARK, VIRGINIA y FINAL GMP/EIS 2.8

best practices in water resource management within the park, and convey this information to 

visitors and park neighbors. Such demonstrations would include the use of storm water 

management techniques to reduce run-off and improve water quality during the construction of 

the replacement operations facility (at the existing maintenance facility site), as well as other 

projects that the park may undertake. 

Between the southern end of Overlook #3 and the Sand Box climbing area, the park is 

concerned with potential impacts from foot traffic on the globally rare Central Appalachian/ 

Piedmont riverside prairie. This area contains State listed rare plant species. To avoid potential 

damage to this resource, the park would designate an access trail through this area. On a trial 

basis, until the park prepares a Climbing Management Plan (CMP), as discussed later in this 

section under Recreation Management, visitors seeking to engage in climbing, fishing, or 

scientific research would be allowed into this area with an access pass. The purpose of the pass 

would be to discourage casual visitors from entering this area, as well as for the park staff to 

provide visitors with educational information about appropriate recreational practices in the 

area. NPS anticipates that this access pass would be issued seasonally, in unlimited quantities, 

and free-of-charge. 

The park would also prepare a TMP, as discussed later in this section under Recreation 

Management, where existing designated and undesignated trails would be assessed for their 

impacts on sensitive resources. It is anticipated that in some cases, the undesignated trails would 

be eliminated. Designated trails to resources for interpretation purposes would be redesigned 

to minimize the potential for visitor related impacts. 

Recreation Management

As discussed in Chapter 1 of this document, NPS management policies require that NPS 

promote and regulate appropriate use of the parks, and provide the services necessary to meet 

the basic needs of park visitors and to achieve each park’s mission. Further, management 

policies require NPS managers to “protect park resources and values, and a responsibility to 

actively manage all park uses and, when necessary, to regulate their amount, kind, time, and 

place.” 

Under Alternative B, the NPS would continue to provide recreational opportunities in the park 

with an emphasis on reducing potential conflicts with sensitive natural and cultural resources. 

Various recreational activities would be managed as follows: 

• Climbing: The NPS would continue to provide climbing opportunities in Great Falls 

Park and would prepare a CMP to manage climbing activities in the future, as well as 

adopt temporary measures (as described below) on a trial basis until the CMP is 

prepared. 

o Climbing Management Plan –The park will prepare the CMP in partnership with 

the public and the climbing community, to ensure that climbing as a traditional 

visitor use continues in the park in a manner that is consistent with NPS’s 

responsibility of protecting park resources. NPS has recently initiated a study to 
DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES 

2.9 NATIONAL PARK SERVICE 

assess the impacts that climbing may have on cliff habitat and rare plant species. 3

This study would provide an assessment of impacts related to climbing. The CMP 

would be based on the information gathered for this study and would determine 

appropriate strategies to manage climbing activities. In general, the CMP is 

anticipated to address the following: 

⎯ Examine climbing routes on a case-by-case basis and recommend whether the 

climbing areas should be expanded, kept the same, or reduced.

⎯ Examine access to the climbing areas from adjacent trails. In areas where access is 

provided on undesignated trails, the park would explore designating the trail, or 

developing alternative access routes in situations where the trail adversely 

impacts sensitive resources. 

⎯ Recommend best practices, especially in areas within or adjacent to sensitive 

resources. These practices could include the limited use of fixed anchors or an 

access pass for specific areas if necessary to avoid sensitive resources. 

⎯ Potentially close specific areas on a temporary, periodic, or permanent basis, if 

necessary for resource protection, along with describing the process that would 

be undertaken if such closure is recommended. 

o Temporary Measures – Prior to preparing the CMP, the park would implement 

the following measures on a trial basis. These measures would be reexamined 

during the preparation of the CMP: 

⎯ As discussed above under Natural Resource Management, the park is concerned 

with potential impacts from foot traffic on the globally rare Central Appalachian/ 

Piedmont riverside prairie located between the southern end of Overlook #3 and 

the Sand Box climbing area. To avoid potential damage to this resource, the park 

would designate a trail to access three climbing routes (Gorky Park, Microdome, 

and Flat Iron) located in this area. Climbers would be allowed to access this area 

with an access pass as described above (under Natural Resource Management). 

⎯ Also, as a temporary measure, the park would formalize an existing undesignated 

trail used commonly by climbers as the only access route to the Sand Box 

climbing area. Visitors seeking to access the Sand Box area would be required to 

enter and exit using the designated route. 

⎯ The park would install a fence along the River Trail to preclude visitors from 

entering the area other than at the designated trail head. In addition, the park 

would use signage to inform visitors that an ‘access pass’ is required to use the 

trail, as well as identify the level of difficulty of the trail, and whether it is open or 

closed for access due to river conditions. 

 

3 "Assessment of Climbing Impacts on Cliff Habitat and Rare Plant Species at Great Falls Park, Virginia and C&O Canal 

National Historical Park, Maryland"; The principal research investigator is Dr. Jeffrey L. Marion, Research Biologist, U.S. 

Geological Survey, Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Virginia Tech Field Station, and co-investigators are Mr. Charlie 

Davis, Ecologist/Botanist, located in Lutherville, MD; Dr. Steve Lawson, Assistant Professor, Virginia Tech Department of 

Forestry; and Dr. Lynn Resler, Assistant Professor, Virginia Tech Department of Geography. Study scheduled to be 

completed by 2009. 
CHAPTER 2 

GREAT FALLS PARK, VIRGINIA y FINAL GMP/EIS 2.10

• Trails: Under this alternative, the park would prepare a Trails Management Plan (TMP), 

in conjunction with the public including the local horseback riding, hiking, mountain 

biking, and rock climbing communities, as well as park neighbors. The purpose of the 

TMP would be to ensure that horseback riding, hiking, and mountain biking activities, as 

well as access to key areas for other activities such as climbing or interpretation, continue 

on designated trails in the park in a manner that is consistent with NPS’s responsibility of 

protecting park resources. As part of the TMP, the park would conduct a study to 

evaluate impacts of trail activities on sensitive natural and cultural resources. 

o Trails Management Plan – In general, the TMP is anticipated to address the 

following: 

⎯ Examine the existing system of designated and undesignated trails on a case-bycase basis. 

⎯ Recommend whether the designated trail system should be expanded, realigned, 

kept the same, or closed in segments where resource impacts are identified. 

⎯ Potentially close specific trails on a temporary, periodic, or permanent basis, if 

necessary for resource protection. 

⎯ Focus on reducing the number of undesignated trails in the park, and adopting 

practices to avoid the creation of new undesignated trails. Also, designate those 

existing undesignated trails, that are found appropriate, to provide access to key 

areas such as climbing or for interpretation without impacting sensitive 

resources. 

⎯ Recommend best practices, especially in areas where trails are located within or 

adjacent to sensitive resources. Such practices could include requiring an access 

pass for specific areas or uses if necessary, or fencing off areas to avoid sensitive 

resources. 

⎯ Discuss the reasons why the management strategies are necessary, including 

evidence of impacts if appropriate. 

 Specific use of trails for various user groups would be managed as follows: 

o Horseback Riding: Opportunities for horseback riding on designated trails 

would remain available. Portions or entire trails may be redesigned, realigned, or 

closed to riding in areas where the TMP identifies adverse impacts to a sensitive 

resource. For example, Mine Run Trail could either be realigned in the vicinity of 

Clay Pond and Mine Run, or closed, depending on the impact on these water 

resources from horseback riding. 

o Mountain Biking: Opportunities for mountain biking on designated trails would 

also remain available. Portions or entire trails may be realigned or closed to 

biking in areas where the TMP identifies impacts to a sensitive resource. 
DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES 

2.11 NATIONAL PARK SERVICE 

o Hiking: Opportunities for hiking on designated trails would remain available 

with adjustments where the TMP identifies adverse impacts to the resources. 

o Regional Trail Connections: The proposed CCT, PHNST, and the GPT would 

be connected to existing trails within the park. These existing trails within the 

park would be identified by their original names, as well as the name(s) of the 

regional trails that would connect to them. For example, the existing Difficult 

Run Trail within the park would also be named the Cross County Trail to 

indicate that the trail functions both as the Difficult Run Trail and as a route for 

the CCT. Potential routes for the regional trails through the park are illustrated 

in Figure 2.2: Alternative B. 

• Whitewater Boating and Kayaking: Access to the Potomac River for whitewater boating 

and kayaking would remain available from Fisherman’s Eddy (located between 

Overlooks 2 and 3) and AA Gorge (located to the south of Overlook 3, along River Trail). 

• Fishing: Access to the Potomac River for fishing would remain available to visitors with 

a Virginia or Maryland fishing license, from Fisherman’s Eddy and other locations 

including near the Aqueduct Dam and AA Gorge. Visitors seeking to access the river 

between Overlook 3 and the Sand Box area would be required to obtain an access pass 

(as described above under Natural Resource Management). 

• Nature Study: Access to the park for nature study would remain available similar to 

existing conditions. Visitors seeking to access the shoreline between Overlook 3 and the 

Sand Box area would either be required to accompany a park ranger or obtain an access 

pass (as described above under Natural Resource Management). 

Visitor and Administrative Services

As discussed in Chapter 1 of this document, NPS management policy for Interpretation and 

Education requires that NPS “instill in park visitors an understanding, appreciation, and 

enjoyment of the significance of parks and their resources.” Further, NPS management policies 

for Park Facilities requires that amongst others, visitor and administrative facilities be 

harmonious with park resources, aesthetically pleasing, universally designed, and as welcoming 

as possible to all segments of the population. One of the park’s mission goals is to ensure that, 

“visitors safely enjoy and are satisfied with the availability, accessibility, diversity, and quality of 

park facilities, services, and appropriate recreational opportunities” (Service Mission Goal IIa). 

The following actions are aimed to support these policies. 

• Interpretation: Management under Alternative B would focus on efforts to improve 

visitor understanding of the park’s sensitive resources and how to safely and responsibly 

enjoy the park. The interpretive programs would be expanded and designed to enhance 

visitor experience and understanding of the cultural and natural features that contribute 

to the park’s significance. These features include the Patowmack Canal, Matildaville, the 

Potomac Gorge, presence within the Potomac River watershed and the linkage to the 

area’s American Indian heritage. The programs would also focus on promoting safety 

and providing guidance on how to recreate in a manner that minimizes impacts on the 

park’s resources. The existing interpretation programs would be enhanced with 
CHAPTER 2 

GREAT FALLS PARK, VIRGINIA y FINAL GMP/EIS 2.12

additional educational materials and exhibits that would be located at the visitor center 

and on-site at some of the resources. 

• Facilities: The current maintenance facility and adjoining USPP trailer would be 

replaced with a new facility that would accommodate operations and maintenance 

functions. Park staff offices would be relocated from the visitor center to the new 

replacement facility, although park staff would continue to be present in the visitor 

center. The space currently occupied by the park staff would be converted for visitor use 

and may include new exhibits and classrooms. Also, the appearance of the visitor center 

(including the courtyard) would be enhanced, the interior spaces would be configured 

more efficiently, and one of the entrance ramps would be modified to meet ADA 

requirements. NPS would also rehabilitate existing restroom facilities, both at the visitor 

center, and the remote comfort facility to the south of the picnic area. 

The new replacement facility would accommodate most park staff, including 

maintenance staff, as well as USPP staff. The new facility would also accommodate 

maintenance equipment. Since the site is already disturbed, the potential to impact 

sensitive resources is least at this location. However, since the existing maintenance 

facility borders the western edge of the Potomac River’s 100-year floodplain, the park 

would undertake a detailed study of this site to identify the extent of the floodplain. If 

possible, the new facility would be located outside the floodplain. If the floodplain 

covers most of this site such that portions of the new facility would be within the 100-

year floodplain, the facility would be designed in a sustainable manner such that 

habitable space would be located above the flood zone, and mitigation measures would 

be identified to minimize potential loss of property during a flood event. The new facility 

would also be designed in an aesthetically sensitive manner to enhance a visitor’s 

entrance experience into the park. 

NPS would consider accommodating USPP horses within the park, at a site off Jackson 

Lane. This site consists of approximately 7.2 acres, including approximately two acres of 

cleared area where NPS may construct stables and a paddock area to accommodate up to 

three horses. Before finalizing such a decision, NPS would undertake further studies of 

the site including additional environmental documentation and a survey for potential 

archaeological resources. 

The park would also continue its use of the current well-based water system. An existing 

holding tank that stores water from an on-site well near Jackson Lane would be 

expanded. The additional capacity that would be added to the tank would be determined 

on further study. Also, if necessary in the future, NPS would explore extending public 

water to the park’s facilities. 

Traffic Management

NPS would maintain current public vehicular access points and would not develop new 

vehicular access points into the park. In addition, the NPS would consider introducing 

technology that expedites payment and other operational functions at the entrance station to 

provide more efficient visitor entry into the park. Also, NPS would provide traffic and parking 

message boards at satellite locations along transportation routes leading to the park, as needed. 
DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES 

2.13 NATIONAL PARK SERVICE 

Signs along Georgetown Pike would be sensitively designed in recognition of the road’s scenic 

byway designation. 

Further, NPS would provide a periodic radio announcement to inform visitors about traffic 

conditions at the entrance station. During severe crowding, the park would initiate a one vehicle 

in, one vehicle out policy. 

Partnerships

To continue engaging the public in its decision-making process, the NPS would routinely 

conduct meetings, publish newsletters, and post updates on its website. These meetings, 

newsletters and web postings would provide an update on actions recommended in the Final 

GMP/EIS and would be utilized to solicit individual opinions on specific issues. 

Boundary Changes

NPS would encourage boundary changes where there is an interested property owner and land 

can be added to the park through acquisition, donation, or other mechanisms (such as 

conservation easements). The land addition would be based on the following criteria: 

• The land parcel is contiguous to the park; 

• It helps to reduce fragmentation by connecting separate portions of the park; 

• It is the site of sensitive cultural resources that may not be identified currently; or 

• It benefits the preservation of a sensitive natural resource such as Mine Run or 

Difficult Run. 
CHAPTER 2 

GREAT FALLS PARK, VIRGINIA y FINAL GMP/EIS 2.14

 

Figure 2.2: Alternative B (Preferred Alternative) 
DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES 

2.15 NATIONAL PARK SERVICE 

Table 2.1: Description of Alternatives 

 

 Alternative Concept A: 

Continuation of Current Conditions 

Alternative Concept B: 

Preferred Alternative 

Description 

Continue current management practices. Balance the protection of natural and cultural resources with 

the provision of a variety of recreational opportunities for 

visitors. 

Preserve unexposed cultural resources by leaving 

them in place, below the surface. 

Preserve unexposed cultural resources by leaving them in place, below 

the surface except in a few locations where uncovering them would 

significantly benefit interpretation at the park and not damage the 

resource. Improve interpretation related signage at the visitor center 

(VC) and at resources. 

Develop an Integrated Resource Management 

Plan (IRMP) to protect sensitive cultural 

resources from potential vegetation damage. 

Also, adopt best management practices (BMPs) to 

protect cultural resources, especially those that 

are either listed, or eligible for listing, in the 

National Register of Historic Places. 

Same as Alternative A. 

Continue existing policies to manage Matildaville. Develop a plan to stabilize Matildaville. 

Continue current policies regarding maintaining 

existing viewsheds. 

Prepare a Viewshed Management Plan to preserve, maintain or restore 

sensitive viewsheds. 

Natural/Cultural Resource Management 

Continue existing water resource management 

policies. 

Provide technical assistance to neighbors on water resource 

management, including stormwater management techniques aimed to 

reduce run-off from impervious surfaces and improve water quality. 

Demonstrate the use of these techniques within the park when 

enhancing the VC or constructing the new operations facility (at the 

existing maintenance facility site). 

Evaluate existing undesignated trails and 

eliminate any that adversely impact resources. 

Maintain existing multi-use trails. Allow access to 

pedestrians, bikers, and horse-riders into the park 

from adjacent trails/properties. 

Prepare a Trail Management Plan (TMP), in partnership with the 

public, to ensure that horseback riding, hiking and mountain biking 

activities, as well as access to key areas for other activities such as 

climbing or interpretation continue on designated trails in the park in 

a manner that is consistent with NPS’s responsibility of protecting 

park resources. In general, the TMP is anticipated to address the 

following: 

o Examine the existing system of designated and undesignated trails 

and recommend whether the designated trail system should be 

expanded, realigned, kept the same, or closed in segments where 

resource impacts are identified. 

o Potentially close specific trails on a temporary, periodic, or 

permanent basis, if necessary for protection of cultural and natural 

resources. 

o Focus on reducing the number of undesignated trails in the park, 

and adopting practices to avoid the creation of new undesignated 

trails. Designate those undesignated trails that are found 

appropriate to provide access to key areas. 

o Recommend best practices, especially in areas where trails are 

located within or adjacent to sensitive resources. Such practices 

could include requiring an access pass for specific areas or uses if 

necessary, or fencing off areas to avoid sensitive resources. 

o Discuss the reasons why the management strategies are necessary, 

including evidence of impacts if appropriate. 

Recreation Management 

Connect park trails to the Cross County Trail 

(CCT), Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail 

(PHNST), and Georgetown Pike Trail (GPT). 

Same as Alternative A. 
CHAPTER 2 

GREAT FALLS PARK, VIRGINIA y FINAL GMP/EIS 2.16

 Alternative Concept A: 

Continuation of Current Conditions 

Alternative Concept B: 

Preferred Alternative 

Continue to allow climbing activities on a firstcome first-serve basis. Prepare a Climbing Management Plan (CMP) in partnership with the 

public and the climbing community, to ensure that climbing as a 

traditional visitor use continues in the park in a manner that is 

consistent with NPS’s responsibility of protecting park resources. In 

general, the CMP is anticipated to address the following: 

o Examine climbing routes on a case-by-case basis and recommend 

whether they should be expanded, kept the same, or reduced. 

o Examine access to the climbing areas from adjacent trails. In areas 

where access is provided on undesignated trails, the park would 

explore designating the trail, or developing alternative access 

routes in situations where the trail adversely impacts sensitive 

resources. 

o Recommend best practices, especially in areas within or adjacent 

to sensitive resources. These practices could include the limited 

use of fixed anchors or an access pass for specific areas if 

necessary to avoid sensitive resources. 

o Potentially close specific areas on a temporary, periodic, or 

permanent basis, if necessary for resource protection, along with 

describing the process that would be undertaken if such closure is 

recommended. 

On a trial basis, prior to the preparation of the CMP, designate an 

access trail to three climbing routes (Gorky Park, Microdome and Flat 

Iron) to minimize potential for damage to globally rare Central 

Appalachian/ Piedmont riverside prairie located between the southern 

end of Overlook #3 and the Sand Box climbing area. An ‘access pass’ 

will be issued on a trial basis requiring all visitors to use this access 

trail. During issuance of the access pass, visitors would be provided 

with educational information regarding particular resource concerns, 

as well as safety information. This pass would be provided seasonally, 

in unlimited quantities, and free of charge. 

Recreation Management (cont.) 

Continue access to Fisherman’s Eddy/AA Gorge 

for non-motorized boats, while protecting the 

Forge site. 

Same as Alternative A. 

The VC would function similar to existing 

conditions, with educational and food facilities. 

Rehabilitate VC to improve exhibits and establish an educational 

component that would focus on resource interpretation, as well as 

providing information on safe and responsible use of park resources 

for recreation. 

Rehabilitate restroom facilities. Rehabilitate and expand existing restroom facilities at current 

locations. 

Visitor Services 

Maintain seasonal food service concession at 

current levels. 

Evaluate existing services provided by the concessionaire to determine 

whether to expand or reduce services. 
DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES 

2.17 NATIONAL PARK SERVICE 

 

Alternative Concept A: 

Continuation of Current Conditions 

Alternative Concept B: 

Preferred Alternative 

Check parking lots and inform visitors waiting in 

line to expect delays when Old Dominion Drive 

experiences back up because the park is full. 

When parking lots are full, suspend entry into the 

park and allow only emergency vehicles to enter. 

Same as Alternative A. 

Introduce technology that expedites payment and 

other operational functions at the entrance station 

to provide more efficient visitor entry into the 

park. 

Same as Alternative A. 

Traffic Management 

Continue to provide manual message board at the 

intersection of Georgetown Pike and Old 

Dominion Drive. 

Provide traffic and parking message boards at satellite locations along 

transportation routes leading to the park, as needed. Ensure that signs 

located along Georgetown Pike are sensitively designed in recognition 

of the road’s scenic byway designation. Provide a radio 

announcement that informs visitors about traffic conditions at the 

entrance station. 

Maintain staff offices at the visitor center. Retain 

USPP facilities at the current trailer. 

Demolish existing maintenance/US Park Police (USPP) facility and 

construct a replacement facility at the same location. Locate 

maintenance personnel/equipment and law enforcement staff offices 

at this replacement facility. Relocate staff offices from the VC to this 

replacement facility. 

Continue renting stables for USPP horses outside 

the park. 

Explore constructing USPP stables within the park, off Jackson Lane. 

Administration 

Maintain existing use of well-based water system 

with existing holding tank on Jackson Lane. 

Maintain existing use of well-based water system with an expanded 

holding tank on Jackson Lane. If necessary in the future, explore 

bringing public water to the park’s facilities. 

 
CHAPTER 2 

GREAT FALLS PARK, VIRGINIA y FINAL GMP/EIS 2.18

2.2 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS 

The following table provides a summary of impacts of the two alternatives on various resources. 

Chapter 4 (Environmental Consequences) of this document provides a more detailed discussion 

of these impacts.

Table 2.2: Summary of Impacts

Impacts of Alternative A: 

Continuation of Current Conditions 

Impacts of Alternative B : 

Preferred Alternative 

No impacts on surrounding land uses. Potential minor, short-term adverse impacts on 

surrounding uses from potential simultaneous construction 

activities within the park and construction of proposed 

regional trails outside the park. 

Land uses within the park function similar to existing 

conditions. 

Land uses within the park function similar to existing 

conditions. 

Minimal visitation change anticipated in the short term. 

Over the long term, potential adverse impact from increase 

in visitation due to regional increase in population. 

Minimal visitation change anticipated in the short term. 

Over the long term, potential adverse impact from increase 

in visitation due to regional increase in population. 

Land Use and Socio-Economic Conditions 

Minor, short-term impacts on visitors due to renovation of 

VC and restrooms. However, the long-term impacts would 

be positive. 

Minor positive impact on visitor experience due to 

improved orientation and reduction of user conflicts 

resulting from improved trail signage. 

No impacts on neighboring population and neighboring 

socio-economic conditions. 

No cumulative impacts on land use and socio-economic 

resources are anticipated. 

Minor, short-term adverse impacts on visitors due to 

renovation of VC and restrooms, as well as 

demolition/construction activities at the maintenance 

facility. 

Positive impact on visitor experience due to: expansion of 

interpretive programs at the VC; and increased 

interpretation of Matildaville and other resources. 

Potential impacts on trail users would be determined 

during the preparation of the Trails Management Plan 

(TMP). In accordance with NPS Management Polices, the 

park may have to close specific areas on a temporary or 

permanent basis to prevent adverse impacts on natural and 

cultural resources. The TMP will provide guidance in 

determining unacceptable levels of impacts to park 

resources or values, and will identify which designated or 

undesignated trails will be modified. The park will work 

with the public to prepare the TMP and to develop 

measures that minimize any adverse impacts on trail use. 

Potential impacts on climbers would be determined during 

the preparation of the Climbing Management Plan (CMP). 

The park will work with the public to prepare the CMP and 

to develop measures that minimize any adverse impacts. 

Potential positive impact on emergency access due to 

reduced back-ups along Old Dominion Drive resulting 

from technological improvements at the entrance station, 

message boards and radio announcement. 
DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES 

2.19 NATIONAL PARK SERVICE 

Potential positive impact on cultural resources from 

development of an Integrated Resource Management Plan 

and Best Management Practices. 

Additional protection from practices such as adding fences 

along trails adjacent to sensitive resources are anticipated 

to result in a positive impact. 

Positive impact due to elimination of undesignated trails in 

conflict areas. 

Potential adverse impact due to continued trail use for 

horseback riding in the vicinity of sensitive resources.

Potential positive impacts due to: 

• Preparation of a TMP that would eliminate 

undesignated trails in conflict areas, restrict new 

undesignated trails and explore recommend best 

practices such as adding fences along trails adjacent to 

sensitive resources; 

• Creation of an education component at the visitor center 

focused on responsible use of park resources for 

recreation; 

• Continued preservation of buried ruins; 

• Plan to stabilize/protect Matildaville; and, 

• Preparation of an Integrated Resource Management 

Cultural Resources

Plan and Best Management Practices. 

 

No change to existing viewsheds. 

No cumulative impacts on cultural resources are 

anticipated. 

A positive impact due to preparation of a Viewshed 

Management Plan that would identify policies for 

preserving/restoring important scenic views. 

Potential positive impact at the park entrance due to new 

facility at location of maintenance building. 

No cumulative impacts on cultural resources are 

anticipated. 

Natural Environment 

No impacts on geophysical resources. 

The VC and two northern parking lots would continue to 

function in the 100-year floodplain. 

Existing trails would continue to experience erosionrelated impacts from current uses. 

Potential positive impact on natural resources from 

development of an Integrated Resource Management Plan 

and Best Management Practices. 

Additional protection from practices such as adding fences 

along trails adjacent to sensitive resources are anticipated 

to result in a positive impact. 

Positive impact due to elimination of undesignated trails in 

conflict areas. 

Potential adverse impact due to continued trail use for 

horseback riding in the vicinity of sensitive resources. 

Potential minor adverse impact on vegetation if stables and 

paddock area for USPP horses are located near Jackson 

Lane. 

Potential minor adverse if portions of the new operations 

facility are located within the 100-year floodplain. In 

accordance with the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act, the 

amount of impervious surface within the floodplain would 

be kept the same as current conditions. 

Potential positive impact due to: 

• Creation of an education component at the VC focused 

to provide classes/ information about responsible use of 

park resources for recreation. 

• Enhanced resource interpretation. 

• Designating a trail to access area between Overlook #3 

and the Sand Box climbing area, and issuance of an 

access pass on a trial basis. 

• Preparation of a CMP that would recommend 

recreational practices in areas where climbing occurs 

adjacent to sensitive resources. 

• Preparation of a TMP that would recommend 

elimination of undesignated trails, as well as redesign 

designated trails, in areas where these adversely impact 

sensitive resources. 

• Use of BMPs in the construction of the new replacement 

facility to reduce stormwater run-off and improve water 

quality. 

Impacts of Alternative A: 

Continuation of Current Conditions 

Impacts of Alternative B : 

Preferred Alternative 
CHAPTER 2 

GREAT FALLS PARK, VIRGINIA y FINAL GMP/EIS 2.20

Potential minor positive impact on localized air quality due 

to reduction in vehicular back-ups resulting from 

technological improvements at the entrance station. 

Minor short-term adverse impacts on air quality due to 

demolition of maintenance facility and construction of 

new replacement facility. 

Potential minor positive impact on localized air quality due 

to reduction in vehicular back-ups resulting from 

technological improvements at the entrance station. 

Temporary, minor short-term adverse impact from noise 

due to renovation of the visitor center. 

Minor short-term adverse impact from noise due to 

demolition of maintenance facility and construction of new 

replacement facility. 

Natural Environment (cont.) 

Potential adverse cumulative impacts from additional 

traffic or usage due to population growth in the region. 

Potential temporary cumulative impacts due to 

construction activities within the park and construction of 

trails segments outside the park for the CCT, PHNST, & 

Georgetown Pike Trail. 

Transportation System 

Continued minor adverse impact on visitor access when 

parking lots are full and entry into the park is suspended. 

Continued adverse impact on properties along Old 

Dominion Drive when traffic to park is backed up. 

Positive impact on visitor access to the park due to 

technological improvements at the entrance station. 

Potential adverse cumulative impacts from additional 

traffic due to population growth in the region. 

Continued minor adverse impact on visitor access when 

parking lots are full and entry into the park is suspended. 

Continued adverse impact on properties along Old 

Dominion Drive when traffic to park is backed up. 

Positive impact on visitor access to the park due to 

technological improvements at the entrance station. 

Potential positive impact on vehicular access due to 

proposed dynamic message boards/radio announcement. 

Potential temporary cumulative impacts due to 

construction-related vehicles on area roadways and from 

additional traffic due to population growth in the region. 

Site Utilities 

Negligible impacts on water and sanitary sewer systems due 

to improvements to existing restrooms.

Negligible impacts on water and sanitary sewer systems due 

to improvements to existing restrooms. 

Positive impact on water supply from expanded water tank 

off Jackson Lane. 

Impacts of Alternative A: 

Continuation of Current Conditions 

Impacts of Alternative B : 

Preferred Alternative 
DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES 

2.21 NATIONAL PARK SERVICE 

2.3 POTENTIAL MANAGEMENT PRESCRIPTIONS 

This section defines all of the Management Prescriptions that would be applied to Great Falls 

Park under Alternative B (Preferred Alternative). The Management Prescriptions define the 

desired resource conditions and visitor experiences, including the appropriate kinds and levels 

of management, use, and development. Under Alternative B (Preferred Alternative), Great Falls 

Park would contain four Management Prescription Zones - Canal, Cultural and Natural, Mather 

Gorge, and Developed Zones. These are described below and illustrated on Figure 2.3: 

Alternative B (Application of Management Prescriptions). 

 

2.3.1 Canal Zone 

The Canal Zone would include those areas of Great Falls Park that contain remnants of the 

historic Patowmack Canal, Matildaville, and related structural features listed on the NPS’s List 

of Classified Structures (LCS). This zone would be managed with the principal focus being the 

preservation of historic canal resources. Visitor use would be limited to staying on maintained 

trails and learning about canal features and ruins from brochures, printed materials, exhibit 

panels and ranger led tours. 

 

Visitor Experience

Visitors would be offered opportunities to observe and learn about the park’s significant 

cultural resources through wayside exhibits, formal interpretive walks, and informal interaction 

with regularly roving rangers. The probability of encountering other visitors, both individuals 

and groups, would be high. 

Resource Condition or Character

Areas would be managed with an emphasis on preserving cultural resources and settings, 

including significant viewsheds. Management actions would focus on trail management, 

stabilization, and restoration of cultural resources, visitor/interpretation waysides, and public 

safety efforts. 

Appropriate Kinds of Activities or Facilities

This zone would include significant cultural resources present in the park associated with the 

Patowmack Canal. An unpaved pedestrian trail system would allow visitors to observe the 

cultural resources. No administration or operational facilities would be constructed in these 

areas. Vehicular access for operations and emergency purposes would be provided such that 

the impact on cultural resources would be minimal. Bike trails and horse-riding trails would not 

be permitted and there would be no areas designated for picnicking and incidental sports. 

 

2.3.2 Cultural and Natural Zone 

The Cultural and Natural Zone would be those areas of the park that have any archeological, 

cultural, or ethnographic resources related to the park’s prehistoric and historic periods, as well 

as those areas of the park that have any natural resources related to the diversity of fauna and 

flora in the Great Falls of the Potomac region. This zone would be managed with the primary 
CHAPTER 2 

GREAT FALLS PARK, VIRGINIA y FINAL GMP/EIS 2.22

goal of preserving a variety of cultural and natural resources, some of which include 

unexcavated archeological sites, the Old Graveyard, the Native American Indian Stout site, 

wetland areas, wildlife habitats, and areas containing rare plant communities. Visitor access and 

use would be regulated and mainly dependent upon cultural and natural resource preservation 

needs. 

Matildaville Ruins (Springhouse) - part of the proposed Canal Zone 

Northern portion of the park – part of the Cultural and Natural Zone 
DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES 

2.23 NATIONAL PARK SERVICE 

Visitor Experience

Visitors would be offered an opportunity to pursue recreation activities such as hiking, 

horseback riding, and biking on designated trails. There could be limited opportunities for 

visitors to experience the sensitive cultural and natural resources due to their fragile condition 

and the need to protect them. There would be some interpretation of the cultural and natural 

resources through addition of wayside exhibits. Additional interpretation opportunities would 

primarily focus on orienting the visitor to the historic roads and trails, their length, difficulty and 

location in the park. The probability of encountering other visitors would be moderate to low. 

Resource Condition or Character

Areas would be managed with an emphasis on preserving both the cultural and natural 

resources and settings, including significant viewsheds. Management actions would focus on 

trail management, stabilization, and restoration of cultural resources, visitor/interpretation 

waysides, and public safety efforts. 

Appropriate Kinds of Activities or Facilities

Visitors would be required to stay on designated trails to protect cultural and natural resources. 

The park environment could be modified for essential visitor and park operation needs, such as 

the provision of comfort stations and boardwalks provided these are located in areas where 

there are no impacts on cultural or sensitive natural resources. All changes would be designed 

to fit within the natural environment. Access to the Potomac River could include areas 

designated for activities such as fishing and boating. 

2.3.3 Mather Gorge Zone

This zone would be located within Mather Gorge of the Potomac River, including the adjacent 

cliffs and shoreline. The zone would be managed to mainly preserve important cultural and 

natural resources and to promote safe recreational practices. The cliffs, Gorge, and river have 

inherent natural dangers and are popular areas for recreational users who must have special 

skills (i.e., white water kayaking, rafting, and technical rock climbing). Visitors would be 

restricted to designated special use areas and alerted to potentially hazardous conditions and 

dangerous locations. 

Visitor Experience

The Mather Gorge Zone would provide visitors with opportunities to view the Potomac River, 

as well as to pursue recreational activities such as rock climbing, hiking, boating, and fishing in 

designated areas. Visitors would also experience the diverse natural resources located within 

this zone through wayside exhibits and ranger-led programs. The probability of encountering 

other visitors would be high. 

 

Resource Condition or Character

Areas within this zone would be managed with an emphasis on protecting natural and cultural 

resources while providing visitor access along trails to designated activity areas. Management 
CHAPTER 2 

GREAT FALLS PARK, VIRGINIA y FINAL GMP/EIS 2.24

actions would include natural and cultural resource management, public safety efforts, and 

maintenance of trails and viewing areas. 

Appropriate Kinds of Activities or Facilities

This zone would include pedestrian trails, designated areas for rock climbing and fishing, and 

could have location(s) for putting non-motorized boats such as kayaks, canoes, and rafts into 

the river. Emergency access to the river would be maintained. 

2.3.4 Developed Zone

This zone is where administrative, maintenance, parking, and visitor facilities for Great Falls 

Park would be located. The developments in this zone would serve the needs of park 

management and park visitors (i.e., administrative facilities, maintenance facility, park water 

system, and visitor center). These developments would be located to minimize impacts on 

cultural, ethnographic, and natural resources in the park and provide basic visitor services. The 

public use areas of this zone would receive high visitation on a seasonal basis while other areas 

within this zone would be restricted to official use only. 

Visitor Experience

The Developed Zone would provide a high degree of orientation and interpretation of the 

park’s primary resources. Facilities would be conveniently located and accessible, and would 

preserve and enhance existing viewsheds. The probability of encountering other visitors or NPS 

staff would be very high as this area would be seasonally crowded. 

Resource Condition or Character

Resources would be modified for visitor and park operational needs, while providing protection 

for natural and cultural resources. Visitors and facilities would be highly managed for resource 

protection and visitor safety. Buildings, structures, and other improvements may be constructed 

to enhance the visitor experience, and protect resources. 

Appropriate Kinds of Activities or Facilities

This zone would include visitor facilities and park administrative and maintenance facilities 

such as a visitor center, restroom facilities, food concession operations, entrance station, access 

roads, paved trails, visitor parking areas, constructed overlooks, picnic/incidental play areas, 

NPS staff offices, USPP offices and horse stables, storage areas for maintenance equipment and 

materials, storage facilities for administration needs, volunteers and education materials and 

exhibits, utility facilities, communication facilities, and parking for NPS staff and maintenance 

vehicles. There would be a high degree of pedestrian access to visitor services with pedestrian 

trails that would meet ADA accessibility guidelines. Limited access may be provided to 

bicyclists and horseback riders. 

 

 
DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES 

2.25 NATIONAL PARK SERVICE 

Mather Gorge – part of the Mather Gorge Zone 

 

 

Maintenance Facility – part of the Developed Zone 

 

 
CHAPTER 2 

GREAT FALLS PARK, VIRGINIA y FINAL GMP/EIS 2.26

2.3.5 Application of Management Prescriptions 

 

In accordance with this plan, the 800-acre park would be managed as four separate zones under 

Alternative B (Preferred Alternative). The locations of these zones are summarized below and 

illustrated in Figure 2.3: Alternative B (Application of Management Prescriptions). 

 

• Canal Zone: This zone would occupy approximately 71 acres (8.9 percent) of the park. It 

would encompass the Patowmack Canal, along with structures listed on the NPS’s List of 

Classified Structures (LCS). The zone would extend from the Wing Dam to the north, to the 

AA Gorge and Canal Cut area to the south. 

 

• Cultural and Natural Zone: This zone would occupy approximately 656 acres (82 percent) 

of the park. It would be the largest zone in the park and would encompass most of the area 

to the north and west of the upper parking lot, the area to the west of Old Dominion Drive, 

and most of the southern portion of the park. This zone would include culturally sensitive 

sites and natural areas. 

 

• Mather Gorge Zone: This zone would occupy approximately 36 acres (4.5 percent) of the 

park. It would extend along the Potomac River, from approximately the third (southern) 

overlook to Cow Hoof Rock, and would include portions of the River Trail, Sandy Landing, 

and rock climbing areas. 

 

• Developed Zone: This zone would occupy approximately 37 acres (4.6 percent) of the park. 

It would include the visitor center, entrance station, parking areas, maintenance facility, 

existing well water system and the overlooks. 
DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES 

2.27 NATIONAL PARK SERVICE 

 

Figure 2.3: Alternative B (Application of Management Prescriptions)
CHAPTER 2 

GREAT FALLS PARK, VIRGINIA y FINAL GMP/EIS 2.28

2.4 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT ELIMINATED 

Several additional management alternatives were developed for the park. These alternatives 

were eliminated from further consideration due to either public feedback, significant potential 

impact on the park’s resources, or operational concerns. These alternatives are briefly discussed 

below. 

2.4.1 Establish Additional Visitor Nodes 

 

This alternative examined establishing an additional visitor node with parking and visitor 

service facilities within the smaller parcel to the northwest of the intersection of Old Dominion 

Drive and Georgetown Pike. The purpose of this alternative was to distribute visitors to 

additional parts of the park by providing parking and visitor services closer to Georgetown Pike, 

while reducing traffic along Old Dominion Drive. 

The alternative was eliminated from further consideration due to potential impacts on natural 

resources. The park is predominantly wooded towards the west, and creating a new visitor 

node would require clearing some of the wooded area. Also, providing a new node adjacent to 

the intersection of Old Dominion Drive and Georgetown Pike, would greatly reduce waiting 

space for vehicles wanting to access the new parking and would result in vehicle back-ups along 

Georgetown Pike. 

 

2.4.2 Establish an Additional Access Road to the Park 

This alternative examined establishing a vehicular access road to the park off Georgetown Pike 

by improving Old Carriage Road Trail. The purpose of this alternative was to provide a second 

vehicular access to the park. The alternative was eliminated from further consideration due to 

its potential impacts on Old Carriage Road Trail, a culturally important park resource, as well as 

the lack of sufficient sight distance along Georgetown Pike to establish a safe access road. 

 

2.4.3 Provide a Shuttle to the Park 

 

This alternative examined adding a shuttle service from satellite locations to the park during 

peak visitation periods. The purpose of this alternative was to provide visitors with an 

alternative mode of transportation. There were two potential scenarios discussed: 

1. Establish satellite parking off-site, and provide a shuttle that would connect the park to 

the satellite parking. As part of this concept, existing parking at the park would be 

reduced. 

This scenario was eliminated from further consideration at this time due to its 

operational burden on the park, and potential impact on visitation. For this scenario to 

be effective, shuttle buses would have to operate regularly and at fairly frequent intervals. 

It would add considerable travel time for visitors, and given the presence of other parks 

in the area, may dissuade visitors from coming to the park. If the demand for visiting this 

park increases significantly in the future, or if a regional strategy is developed to connect 

parks with a shuttle system, similar to the Tourmobile (a shuttle service on the National 

Mall), the alternative may be re-examined. 
DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES 

2.29 NATIONAL PARK SERVICE 

2. Eliminate the existing visitor center and establish another center outside the park with 

smaller visitor nodes within the park. As part of this concept, existing parking at the park 

would be eliminated. 

This scenario was eliminated from further consideration due to its operational difficulty 

and potential impact on visitation. An alternative location for a visitor center and 

parking would require splitting staff between the visitor center and the park, adding to 

operational costs. Also, similar to the previous scenario, it would add considerable travel 

time for visitors who would park at a satellite location and then use shuttles from the 

parking location to the park. Given the presence of alternative parks in the area, the 

added travel time might dissuade visitors from coming to the park. 

2.4.4 Eliminate Bicycles and Horses from the Park’s Trail System 

This alternative examined limiting the existing trails in the park to pedestrians, and eliminating 

horse and bike access. The purpose of this alternative was to minimize potential for damage to 

sensitive natural and cultural resources within the park. This alternative was eliminated from 

further consideration as it would have reduced some of the recreational opportunities identified 

as important by the public. 

2.4.5 Provide Car-Top Boat Access at Sandy Landing and Parking at the Quarry 

This alternative examined providing car-top boat access at Sandy Landing for non-motorized 

boats and adding a parking area, controlled by concessions, at the Quarry for boaters and horse 

trailers. The purpose of this alternative was to provide additional recreational opportunities 

including increased access to the river for boating. The alternative was eliminated from further 

consideration due to its potential for damage to the Old Carriage Road Trail, a culturally 

important park resource, and the Quarry site. 

2.4.6 Construct a Second New Facility for Maintenance Staff, Materials, and Equipment 

This alternative examined constructing two new facilities: one for park staff and USPP; and, the 

second for maintenance staff, materials and equipment. The first would be located at the site of 

the existing maintenance facility. The second facility was proposed north of the lower parking 

lot. The alternative was eliminated from further consideration since the second facility would 

have required disturbing an area that is currently undisturbed. In addition, locating a 

maintenance facility adjacent to the lower parking lot could potentially result in conflicts 

between maintenance vehicles and visitors in a heavily used portion of the park. 

2.4.7 Construct a New Trail parallel to Old Dominion Drive and Georgetown Pike 

This alternative examined constructing a new trail segment adjacent to Old Dominion Drive and 

another adjacent to Georgetown Pike for the purpose of extending the proposed CCT and the 

PHNST to the main entrance of the park. 

Preliminary analysis conducted indicated that a proposed trail along Old Dominion Drive 

(between Georgetown Pike and the entrance station) would be approximately 4,700 feet long, of 

which approximately 600 feet would be in the form of a boardwalk. Assuming that this trail 
CHAPTER 2 

GREAT FALLS PARK, VIRGINIA y FINAL GMP/EIS 2.30

would be eight feet wide, parallel on the east side of Old Dominion Drive, and built for the use 

of bikes and pedestrians (since horses would not use the boardwalk portion), it has the potential 

to result in the following impacts: 

• Require the removal of 37,600 square feet of vegetation (4,700 feet by 8 feet). A 

considerable amount of trees along Old Dominion Drive would need to be removed to 

establish this trail. 

• Approximately 75 percent of this trail would be on land with more than 12 percent slope. 

Similarly, preliminary analysis conducted for the segment along Old Georgetown Pike 

between Old Dominion Drive and the southeastern boundary of Great Falls Park (excluding 

the triangular portion that does not belong to NPS) indicated that this trail would be 

approximately 5,400 feet long, of which approximately 550 feet would be in the form of a 

boardwalk. Assuming that this trail would be eight feet wide, parallel on the north side of 

Georgetown Pike, and built for the use of bikes and pedestrians, it has the potential to result in 

the following impacts: 

• Require the removal of 43,200 SF of vegetation (5,400 feet x 8 feet). A considerable 

amount of trees along Old Georgetown Pike would need to be removed to establish this 

trail. 

• Impact approximately 4,400 SF of area identified as ‘Plant Species of Concern.’ 

• Approximately 2,800 SF of the trail would be constructed in the 100-year floodplain. 

• Approximately 75 percent of this trail would be on land with more than 12 percent slope. 

 

Therefore, this alternative was eliminated from further consideration due to potential impacts 

on the park’s natural resources. 
DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES 

2.31 NATIONAL PARK SERVICE 

2.5 ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

The environmentally preferred alternative is determined by applying the criteria suggested in 

the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, which is guided by the Council on 

Environmental Quality (CEQ). The CEQ provides direction that, the environmentally 

preferable alternative is the alternative that will promote the national environmental policy as 

expressed in Section 101 of National Environmental Policy Act, which considers: 

1. Fulfilling the responsibilities of each generation as trustee of the environment for 

succeeding generations; 

2. Assuring for all generations safe, healthful, productive, and aesthetically and culturally 

pleasing surroundings; 

3. Attaining the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment without degradation, 

risk of health or safety, or other undesirable and unintended consequences; 

4. Preserving important historic, cultural and natural aspects of our national heritage and 

maintaining, wherever possible, an environment that supports diversity and variety of 

individual choice; 

5. Achieving a balance between population and resource use that will permit high standards 

of living and a wide sharing of life’s amenities; and 

6. Enhancing the quality of renewable resources and approaching the maximum attainable 

recycling of depletable resources (National Environmental Policy Act, section 101). 

Alternative B (the Preferred Alternative) is identified as the environmentally preferred 

alternative. By protecting the sensitive natural and cultural resources while also providing 

opportunities to recreate, the park would meet its responsibility as a “trustee of the environment 

for succeeding generations;” assure “for all generations safe, healthful, productive, and 

aesthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings;” attain “the widest range of beneficial uses of 

the environment without degradation, risk of health or safety;” and preserve “important 

historic, cultural and natural aspects of our national heritage.”